HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1994-06-15 FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
WEDNESDAY , JUNE 15 , 1994 Dat T
• CIR �a �; Nnl �oc�
FINAL
The following appeals were heard by the Board on June 15 , 1994 :
APPEAL of the Country Club of Ithaca , Owner /Appellant , Neal Ryan , Agent , requesting a
variance from the requirements of Article V , Section 20 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance , to be permitted to construct an accessory building with a building height
of 24 ± feet ( 15 feet maximum height permitted ) at 189 Pleasant Grove Road , Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68 - 1 - 1 . 2 , Residence District R - 30 .
GRANTED .
APPEAL of Daniel Yanarella , Owner /Appellant , David Kingsbury , Agent , requesting a
variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 12 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance , to be permitted to modify a previously approved variance ( granted on
September 20 , 1984 ) with the addition of a 4 foot x 14 foot storage area to an
• existing pottery workshop and to allow for a non resident , part - time employee at 137
Pine Tree Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 29 , Residence District R - 15 . The
previously approved variance allowed for a pottery workshop with a floor area of 308
square feet ( 200 square feet maximum area allowed ) and did not allow for a non -
resident employee .
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS .
•
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHA, CA 1
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS pat "�`
WEDNESDAY , JUNE 15 , 1994 1ClirkLaop Hn I
•
PRESENT : Chairman Edward Austen , Vice - Chairman Robert J . Hines , Harry Ellsworth ,
Edward King , Pete Scala , Town Attorney John C . Barney , Zoning Enforcement
Officer / Building Inspector Andrew Frost .
OTHERS : Neal Ryan , David Kingsbury , Harry DiGiacomo , Arlene DiGiacomo , Shirley
Raffensperger .
Chairman Edward Austen called the meeting to order at 7 : 10 PM and stated that
all posting , publication , and notification of the public hearings had been completed
and the same were in order .
The first appeal to be heard by the Board was as follows :
APPEAL of the Country Club of Ithaca , Owner /Appellant , Neal Ryan , Agent ,
requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 20 of the
Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct an accessory
building with a building height of 24 ± feet ( 15 feet maximum height permitted )
at 189 Pleasant Grove Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68 - 1 - 1 . 2 , Residence
District R- 30 .
Mr . Ryan stated he had taken some pictures that the Board might want to look at
so they could see how far away the residences involved were in relation to the
Country Club . He stated the reason they would like to do this is they have an exist -
ing building that , for all intents and purposes , is underground . It ' s like a garage ,
• and they have to drive around the side of it to store their golf carts and some
equipment like mowers and so forth . Mr . Ryan said they have purchased ( to the tune
of some $ 45 , 000 ) additional carts and they would like to put a structure on top of
the existing one and , as you can see from the photos , you can drive into the struc -
ture as it sits right now without any excavation or whatever . The purpose of the
structure would be to store the new carts because they are expensive and they do not
have the space available .
Mr . Ryan has polled some thirty - eight golfers within the last couple of days to
see if the people , in fact , knew where the existing building is . Of the thirty - eight
that were polled , he thought there were three or four that knew where the building
was . It ' s in a stand of trees , almost completely surrounded by trees , and it ' s going
to be a metal building with a shingled roof to the height at the peak of just under
13 feet . It will be colored a dark green to blend with the trees , shrubbery , and so
forth .
Mr . Scala asked if the building was just below the first green and Mr . Ryan
said no , just below the ninth green . Mr . Ryan asked if Mr . Scala was familiar with
the area and Mr . Scala said yes . Mr . Ryan then said , if you take the ninth fairway ;
just at the dog leg , take the left where the little swamp area is and it ' s back up in
those trees . Mr . King asked Mr . Ryan to locate it for the board on the sketch that
was submitted with his materials and Mr . Frost pointed out that what Mr . King was
referring to was the tax map , but there was another sketch that was submitted . Mr .
King said that sketch was too close , but Mr . Ryan did point out some of the homes
that were nearby and showed the board approximately where the DiGiacomo ' s live . Mr .
• Ryan pointed out Hanshaw Road on the sketch and showed where their property ( and the
clubhouse on their property ) was located on the sketch . Mr . King asked if the prop -
erty line came down at an angle and Mr . Ryan showed on the sketch approximately where
the angle came through . He said their swimming pool is actually in Cayuga Heights
and the clubhouse is in the Town of Ithaca , Mr . Frost agreed that was correct , then
Mr . Ryan pointed out where the municipal line ran on the sketch .
. 2
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
Mr . Ryan then pointed out on the sketch where the ninth fairway came up on the
green , the practice area , and an area of flagstone . He said from the corner of the
clubhouse to the corner of the existing ( and addition to the existing ) building , is
348 feet . Mr . King pointed to a building on the sketch and asked if that was the
building they were speaking of now . Mr . Ryan said no , the building they were speak -
ing of now was not shown on the sketch and then pointed out the approximate location .
Additional discussion by Mr . Ryan and the board members followed with regard to the
approximate location of the swimming pool , clubhouse , and proposed building on the
sketch . Mr . King asked Mr . Ryan if he thought the clubhouse was in the Town of
Ithaca , and Mr . Ryan again confirmed that the swimming pool is in Cayuga Heights and
the clubhouse building is in the Town of Ithaca .
Mr . Frost stated that Mr . King , by looking at the tax maps that were part of
the mailings , was trying to orientate the clubhouse . He said the problem with the
tax map the board members have that shows Map 68 which is the tax parcel where the
clubhouse and the proposed building is located . Mr . Scala said all you need is this
one sketch they have and Mr . Frost said yes , that one sketch essentially does it .
Mr . Frost said , but the tax maps the board members have are mailed out just to give
you an idea without another map and don ' t give exact locations . Mr . Ellsworth noted
that , in most cases which come before the board , this type of thing is all laid out
and it seemed they were into a drawing lesson . Mr . King said this is just poorly
laid out , and Mr . Ellsworth suggested they have Mr . Ryan come back .
• Mr . Ryan said they had done this drawing ( the 5 / 18 / 94 sketch ) that shows what
they ' re doing on Pleasant Grove Road and , as far as the tax map is concerned , they
have not seen it nor do they know what it contains . Mr . Frost said the tax map , by
itself , they had done traditionally just to provide information based on the map and ,
without copying multiple tax maps which they don ' t do , it doesn ' t give you the proper
perspective you may want to see . Mr . Scala stated that it doesn ' t show the property
and Mr . Ellsworth asked if they wanted to make some copies of another map .
Mr . Ryan said this drawing will show you basically the same thing . Mr . Frost
said the code problem is the municipal line splits the property and so Cayuga Heights
is also part of the property . Mr . Ellsworth said , if it ' s more understandable on
Al ' s map , then they need a copy of that . Mr . Ryan said the only thing it shows is
they did measure and these pictures he took give an approximate distance from one
point to another point from this group of trees ( he pointed them out ) to the end of
their property and from the clubhouse to the building .
Mr . Scala pointed to a portion of the picture and asked if that was where the
new proposed building was , then Mr . Ryan pointed out where the addition was . Mr .
Scala asked if there were two roads or only one road from the clubhouse . Mr . Ryan
said no , there is only a cart path that moves up like this ( and pointed it out ) and
that ' s all there is to it . Mr . Scala asked if that was all it was going to be and
Mr . Ryan said yes , because all they want to do is take the carts from here to here
. . . period ( and pointed it out ) . Mr . King said he thought the record should show
that the building in question is located 348 feet southeast of the southeast corner
of the Country Club clubhouse . By stating this , you don ' t even have to know where
Fairway 9 is ( as Mr . King said he didn ' t ) .
3
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
Mr . Ellsworth said , if people who lived nearby were going to speak , he would
like to know where their houses are in relationship to the building that shows on
Al ' s sketch . Mr . King said probably the houses are up along Hanshaw Road and they ' re
the people that collect golf balls from the range and Mr . Ryan said that ' s true . Mr .
Ryan said he measured approximately from the Agard ' s home ( which is right next to the
DiGiacomo ' s ) to approximately where the existing building is and it ' s a little addi -
tional over 350 feet . Mr . King said , if the sketch submitted is correct that the
building is 350 feet southeast of the southeast corner of the clubhouse , then it ' s
further than 350 feet . Mr . Ryan said this is not to scale , of course . Mr . King then
asked if Mr . Ryan was saying that 350 feet is accurate and Mr . Ryan said approx -
imately , yes . Mr . King said that ' s about 100 yards and Mr . Ryan said , a touch more .
Mr . Scala asked if the houses that are along this line are along Hanshaw Road
and Mr . Ryan said that ' s correct . Mr . Ellsworth said he would like to get a copy of
Al ' s sketch because it seems to him that it shows more clearly the residences that
people want to speak about . There was further discussion between the board members
and Mr . Ryan to point out various items on the sketch , then Mr . Ellsworth said that
it ' s 350 feet to one of these houses . Mr . Ryan said it ' s 350 feet plus ( 348 feet
exactly ) and it ' s over 350 feet from there to the Country Club property line .
Mr . Scala asked if those were all electric carts and Mr . Ryan said , no they ' re
all gas carts . Mr . Scala asked if they had propane storage down there and Mr . Ryan
said they have one now over in their maintenance building and that ' s where the gas
• is . Mr . Scala asked where the maintenance building was and Mr . Ryan said over next
to Cornell University . Mr . Scala said that ' s the building off the 10th green , and
Mr . Ryan stated it was off the 12th tee . Mr . Scala said , when you hit off the 10th
tee , what are the buildings down on the right and Mr . Ryan asked if he meant at the
Country Club . Mr . Scala said yes , and Mr . Ryan said there ' s only one building and
that ' s on the pond . Mr . Scala asked if it was off the 12th tee and Mr . Ryan said
yes , off the 12th and the building is on the right . Mr . Scala asked if that was
where the propane is and Mr . Ryan said it ' s not propane , it ' s gasoline . Mr . Scala
asked if the carts were gas engines and Mr . Ryan said yes .
Chairman Austen said he noted that the Country Club had Raymond DiPasquale do a
structural assessment on the building and Mr . Ryan said yes , that was correct . Mr .
Ryan said they wanted to make doubly sure that , whatever they wanted to do there , the
structure as it exists would support it ; and , if not , they were going to have to put
some beams , posts , or whatever underneath . However , according to Ray DiPasquale ( and
Mr . Ryan thought they had McGuire & Bennett come up and do the cutting ) they took a
section out and anybody is free to take a look at it . Mr . Ryan stated that Ray
DiPasquale said bridges should be built this well and evidently , when that was put
up , someone must have had some materials left over and decided it would be a good
place to use it .
Mr . Ellsworth asked which way they were going because Mr . DiPasquale made a
recommendation for two types of buildings and Mr . Ryan said Mr . DiPasquale made the
recommendation that the structure , as it exists , would certainly more than support
what they want to use it for . Mr . Ellsworth said Mr . DiPasquale made a recommenda -
tion as to what type of building should be put up , and Mr . Ryan stated Mr . DiPasquale
said they are being penny wise and pound foolish and suggested they put up a block
building . Mr . Ryan said all they want to do with the building they ' re going to put
up ( and there will be no electricity in there , they ' re going to have opaque panels
4
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
around under the roof area that will give it light ) is store their carts in there and
keep them away from the weather . Mr . Ryan said Mr . DiPasquale stated that perhaps
they are being penny wise and pound foolish , they should put a block building up .
Mr . Ryan said they got a price on the block building , too , and that would be approx -
imately $ 16 , 000 ; this building is going to cost them $ 9 , 750 .
Mr . Scala asked who it would be built by and Mr . Ryan said Ed Smith
Contractors , and his address is Hanshaw Road . Mr . Ellsworth asked if all the trees
that are sheltering the building this time of year were types that shed their leaves
during the fall . Mr . Ryan said , if you look at one of the other pictures he took ,
there are an awful lot of pine trees there . Mr . Ellsworth said there are also ever -
greens and Mr . Ryan agreed . Mr . Ellsworth asked if they were on all sides and Mr .
Ryan said all the way around . Mr . Ryan said there is only one area that you will be
able to see this from , and that will most likely be only one home maybe . . . he said
maybe because there ' s an open area from the main fairway that comes up like so and
the building is going to be right here ( pointed it out to the board ) . The only way
you can see that is probably from the Shaw residence over on Roat Street that borders
on the Country Club property and Mr . Ryan was saying maybe because it ' s around where
the clear shot is and you can see it on one of those pictures he took .
Mr . Scala asked Mr . Frost if he gets a drawing with the building permit appli -
cation that shows all the specs and Mr . Frost said , correct . Chairman Austen asked
if there were standard 8 ' high walls on this building and Mr . Ryan said yes , it ' s
• just a couple of inches short at the peak of the roof of 13 feet . Mr . Frost said the
application for the permit was for a building 13 foot which is added to the existing
structure which is ± 8 , so he actually wrote up the notice as 24 feet just to give a
margin of error assuming that either they build too high or they don ' t predict what
the thing proposed to be exactly correct . Mr . Ellsworth said Mr . Frost had control
of that when he gets the drawings and Mr . Frost said correct , but it ' s not a prefab
building .
Chairman Austen opened the public hearing to ask who wanted to speak regarding
this appeal . Alfred DiGiacomo , residing at 1025 Hanshaw Road , stated that he was one
of the neighbors of the Country Club . He said he and his wife came to the meeting to
see what the proposal was because they hadn ' t heard from anyone at the club as to
what was going on except for the notice in the newspaper . Mr . DiGiacomo said , in
listening to the proposal , he really didn ' t have too many objections and the real
problem he had with the club is what the board approved back ten years ago and that
is the fence that was put up along his back line ( which he believed Mr . King and
Chairman Austen would recall quite well ) .
Mr . DiGiacomo said , at that time in 1981 when they made their proposal , they
indicated it was only going to be a temporary fence . He said he recalled , even back
in 1984 ( and by that time they had a new manager who didn ' t recall any of the previ -
ous statements ever made by the previous manager ) , that it was going to be a tempo -
rary fence . At the present moment , that fence ( and it ' s been this way for several
years ) is either installed improperly and , at the present moment , is torn and tat -
tered and it is certainly not protecting them from the golf balls . He said it ' s not
protecting them that well from the golf balls anyway , because they get from 10 to 15
balls in their yard every day ( except when they have amateurs out there like this
past weekend and now they only had about 40 or 50 balls come in the yard ) . So the
5
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
fence is really not doing its work but , to mitigate the circumstances , the fence is
full of holes , it ' s torn loose , and Mr . DiGiacomo asked the board ' s indulgence to
show them some photographs of what it looks like at the present moment ( Chairman
Austen granted approval for him to go ahead ) .
Mr . Ryan then asked to interject a comment and said he believed Mr . DiGiacomo
was referring to a net ; not the fence , but a net they had put up and he then asked
Mr . DiGiacomo if that was correct . Mr . DiGiacomo then said it was called a fence
initially and Mr . Ryan agreed . Mr . Ellsworth said the snow this past winter did not
help the net any , and Mr . Ryan said they take it down but that ' s the second one
they ' ve had in the last twelve years . Mr . DiGiacomo said they do take the fence down
in the winter time at some predetermined date ( usually when it ' s been caught on trees
and slightly ripped ) and then they re - install the same fence in the summer time . Mr .
DiGiacomo said the other problem they had lately is that they don ' t cut the grass
between their property and his property but , in spite of all those things , he had no
objection to that building . However , Mr . DiGiacomo said he did wish the board would
consider the approval they had given to the Country Club .
Mr . Ryan asked , as far as cutting the grass , did Mr . DiGiacomo mean between his
wooden fence and the netting in that area - - that they don ' t get behind the net and
cut the grass ? Mr . DiGiacomo said that was correct and Mr . Ryan said , because he is
on the board , he can state that will be taken care of ; there is certainly no argument
and he is not picking bones or anything else but - - whether that building goes up or
does not go up - - is not going to change the fact that people are still going to be
hitting balls on the practice area . Mr . Ryan said , if you look at the net , there is
a gap , also , because of the tears and so forth and they are already looking into a
new net and getting prices as they speak ( this was back a month ago ) . They plan to
either purchase a new net and / or have their people close the gap between sections of
the existing net ; with regard to cutting the grass , it ' s a done deal and they ' ll take
care of that .
Mr . DiGiacomo again said the net is torn . Mr . Ryan said the net goes all the
way to the ground and he didn ' t know how high it is . Mr . Ryan stated most are good ,
considerate golfers but he couldn ' t say that he hadn ' t put a couple of balls over on
their property , too . Mr . Scala stated he had seen one golfer using his wood club and
Mr . Ryan said he ' d like to know who that was because it ' s strictly forbidden and no
woods are supposed to be used . Mr . Ryan asked Mr . DiGiacomo if he had copies of the
photographs he had brought , then asked if he could take the photo showing the net
with holes in it and Mr . DiGiacomo said yes .
Chairman Austen asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak and ,
with no response , closed the public hearing .
Chairman Austen then reviewed the letter dated May 26 , 1994 from James Hanson ,
Jr . , Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning . He also read the memo dated May 23 ,
1994 from Candace E . Cornell , Town of Ithaca Conservation Board , Chair . Mr . Ryan
asked for clarification on the first part of the memo , and Chairman Austen stated the
Country Club was not disturbing the soil there but was building on top of an existing
building . Mr . Ryan agreed , then said there are a few limbs that are overhanging the
0 present structure and those limbs will have to come down ( he wanted to make sure the
Board realized that ) . Chairman Austen said he believed the Environmental Review
Committee had assumed the Country Club would be digging there .
6
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Chairman Austen read Parts II and III of the Environmental Assessment Form
dated June 9 , 1994 and done by Louise Raimondo , Planner I . With reference to Part
II C3 . , Mr . King said he would like to know whether any trees are going to be removed
with this construction . Mr . Ryan said there is one limb of a big tree that is
overhanging the existing structure and that one limb is probably 10 ' above the struc -
ture and will be removed . He said that ' s the only thing that ' s going to be touched .
Mr . King asked if that would be a mature oak tree , and Mr . Ryan stated he couldn ' t
say what kind of a tree it is but that it certainly is a mature tree and is probably
80 to 90 feet high . Mr . Ryan again repeated that there is one limb that would have
to be removed in order for them to construct the addition to this building .
Mr . Ellsworth said they would have to build the soil up there so they could get
the carts in and Mr . Ryan said it ' s already there . Chairman Austen stated that ,
actually , removing the entire tree is not in the realm of the work and Mr . Ryan
agreed .
With no other questions , Chairman Austen asked for a motion on the Environmen -
tal Assessment .
MOTION
• By Mr . Robert Hines , seconded by Mr . Edward King .
RESOLVED , that the Board adopt the recommendations of Louise Raimondo , Planner
I and find a negative determination of environmental significance for the
appeal by the Country Club of Ithaca , Neal Ryan , Agent , for the property at 189
Pleasant Grove Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68 - 1 - 1 . 2 , Residence District
R - 30 . It should be noted that , by testimony of Mr . Ryan , the Environmental
Assessment is amended to show that a mature oak tree in excess of 40 feet in
height and currently overhanging the existing storage building will not be
removed ( Reference : Part II C3 , of the Environmental Assessment Form dated
June 9 , 1994 and done by Louise Raimondo , Planner 1 ) .
With no other discussion , Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion which
resulted as follows :
AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , Hines , King .
ABSTAIN - Scala .
The motion was carried .
Mr . Hines then stated to Chairman Austen that they had a land terrain problem ,
whether man -made or not he didn ' t know , because he had not been privy to the history
of this particular area . He said the only reason we ' re here is that the structure
which itself is not in excess of required limitations is being placed on an existing
structure which , from the highest point of grade , is well in excess of the permitted
limit . But from the testimony of Mr . Ryan and the comments made by Mr . DiGiacomo and
the photographs which have been submitted in connection with the application ( two or
three of which were made by Mr . Frost and the rest submitted by the applicant ) , it
would appear that there isn ' t any particular aesthetic impact on the surrounding
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
properties as a result of this particular construction . It does make sense to use ,
to the extent possible , the existing structure and that does present a practical dif -
ficulty of construction which far outweighs any disadvantages to the surrounding
properties .
MOTION
By Mr . Robert Hines , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth .
RESOLVED , that the Board grant the applicant , the Country Club of Ithaca , Neal
Ryan , Agent , a variance from the requirements of Article V , Section 20 of the
Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct an accessory
building with a building height of 24 + feet ( 15 feet maximum height permitted )
at 189 Pleasant Grove Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68 - 1 - 1 . 2 , Residence
District R - 30 , with the following findings :
1 . The applicant could otherwise sustain practical difficulties and unrea -
sonable unnecessary hardship , expressly referenced to the inconvenience
of the neighbors .
2 . This variance is based on the findings which were referred to earlier in
the report dated May 26 , 1994 from the Tompkins County Department of
Planning , James Hanson , Jr . and the application and , to the extent it
• comments on these items , the report of Raymond A . DePasquale dated May
14 , 1994 ,
Attorney Barney said it seems that it might be wise to point out the location
or include it in the findings . The location of the building is some 300 to 400 feet
in a property that is used as a golf course and Country Club and has been so used for
many years . Mr . Hines said the location of the structure that is contemplated is
well within the boundary of the applicant ' s title and sheltered from view and sur -
rounded by trees and other flora and fauna . He said that was incorporated in his
findings and he doesn ' t think it has any visual impact as far as anybody but Bob
Shaw . Mr . DiGiacomo , one neighbor , did appear and had some pertinent comments with
respect to other aesthetic considerations but they didn ' t dwell particularly on this
issue .
With no further discussion , Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion
which resulted as follows :
AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , Hines , King .
ABSTAIN - Scala .
The motion was carried .
I O
Town of Ithaca 8
Zoning Board of Appeals
June 15 , 1994
• The second appeal to be heard by the Board was the following :
APPEAL of Daniel Yanarella , Owner /Appellant , David Kingsbury , Agent , requesting
a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 12 of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to modify a previously approved
variance ( granted on September 20 , 1984 ) with the addition of a 4 foot x 16
foot storage area to an existing pottery workshop and to allow for a non
resident , part - time employee at 137 Pine Tree Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No . 57 - 1 - 29 , Residence District R- 15 . The previously approved variance allowed
for a pottery workshop with a floor area of 308 square feet ( 200 square feet
maximum area allowed ) and did not allow for a non- resident employee .
Mr . Hines asked if the Board could get some explanation of the relationship
between the owner of the property and the agent , and Mr . Kingsbury stated Mr .
Yanarella is his father - in - law . Chairman Austen said the applicant was looking for a
4 ' by 16 ' storage area and asked Mr . Kingsbury to tell the Board why it was needed .
Mr . Kingsbury said he makes his living by making pottery and , in his present struc -
ture which is 16 X 22 feet ( smaller than the boardroom where the meeting is being
held ) , he has a number of pieces in process and many of them are wet . He makes
pieces of pottery on the wheel and they have to dry in a very controlled fashion so
that they don ' t warp or crack . In this one open room with one heat source ( which is
propane ) , Mr . Kingsbury said it is often difficult for him to dry things slow enough
and in a controlled enough fashion . Basically , the addition would be filled with
shelves so that pots can be put in there and the temperature and air flow around them
• can be controlled ( Mr . Kingsbury said , in college , they called it a wet room or a
damp room ) . On the floor , he would store all of his clay which he gets in 50 pound
boxes . As it is now , they have to be stored under tables and under counters and it
would just facilitate moving around in his studio a little bit better if he could
store the clay and pots in process in the addition .
Chairman Austen asked Mr . Kingsbury if he would control the environment in that
room differently than in the work area and Mr . Kingsbury said yes , because it
wouldn ' t be exposed directly to the one heat source he has and he would be able to
either close it off or open it and regulate the temperature as he needs to . Mr .
Scala asked if these were electric or gas fired or something else and Mr . Kingsbury
said the first firing is electric ( he has a small electric kiln ) - - that ' s called the
visc fire , and then the second firing is gas .
Mr . Frost said access to the stairs is actually through the existing space now
and it ' s not like you would go outside through the back and Mr . Kingsbury said that
was right .
Mr . Ellsworth wanted to make sure he was reading the 1984 history of this site
properly ( from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals meeting minutes dated
September 20 , 1984 ) . Mr . Ellsworth said on September 20 , 1984 , there was an appeal
by Mr . Kingsbury for a building permit for the construction of a pottery workshop and
kiln which was denied and asked if that was correct , then Mr . Frost said it was
actually granted an approval . Mr . Ellsworth asked if it was granted later on as what
he was reading from stated it was denied , and Attorney Barney said what he was look -
ing at was the notice of the Zoning Officer . Mr . Frost said the minutes noted above
should indicate approval ( Reference : Page 15 of the above meeting minutes dated
September 20 , 1984 ) .
Mr . Scala asked if the small electric kiln was 220 volts and Mr . Kingsbury
replied yes . Mr . Scala said like a kitchen oven , and Mr . Kingsbury said yes .
9
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
Chairman Austen said , in his application , Mr . Kingsbury also talked about an
additional person he would like to have to work with and asked if this person would
also be making pottery . Mr . Kingsbury replied , she is experienced in making pottery
but she would do a mixture of things : she would help him clean in the studio and
help glaze , and she knows all the facets of it because she has worked for other
potteries . Mr . Kingsbury also said it would be a maximum of five hours per week .
Mr . King asked Mr . Kingsbury if he lived on this property and if it is a single
family home , and Mr . Kingsbury replied yes to both questions and said his wife and
( 1 ) 11 -year old girl live with him . Mr . Scala asked where the pottery is sold and
Mr . Kingsbury said mostly within a 50 -mile radius . Mr . Scala asked if it was sold
from the house or downtown or where and Mr . Kingsbury said people do stop at his
house , but he usually makes a point of saying he is not allowed to sell off the
property . Mr . Ellsworth told Mr . Kingsbury that he lives around the corner at 152
Honness Lane , Mr . Ellsworth said he walked up there but didn ' t go on the property
because they have a dog who acted as if he wasn ' t welcome ; however , he could see the
display area very clearly and there is a whole wall of shelves ( and maybe two walls ,
but he could see one wall very clearly ) in an open carport with a roof and open ends .
Mr . Ellsworth asked if this is Mr . Kingsbury ' s display area , and Mr . Kingsbury said
that is like his warehouse and he needs to know what stock he has and that is his
packing area and also where he ships from . Mr . Ellsworth asked Mr . Kingsbury if peo -
ple went there to view his goods so they could go somewhere else to buy them and Mr .
Kingsbury said , occasionally , people do come there but not at his invitation and he
• does not advertise . Mr . Ellsworth asked what he meant by occasionally and Mr .
Kingsbury replied that he might have someone show up once a week .
Mr . Scala asked if he sold the pottery downtown somewhere and Mr . Kingsbury
replied that he is at a cooperative called Handwork . Mr . King said he didn ' t under -
stand and asked Mr . Kingsbury where he sells and Mr . Kingsbury said mostly two
places ; the Ithaca Farmers Market , and a cooperative called Handwork ( it ' s a craft
cooperative and they have a store front downtown ) . Mr . King asked where that was
located and Mr . Kingsbury said it ' s right on the corner of State and Cayuga Streets ,
next to Ben & Jerry ' s Ice Cream .
Mr . Ellsworth asked , if one of the neighbors came and wanted to buy something
from his packing area , would he sell to them and Mr . Kingsbury replied yes , he would .
Unless ordered not to sell to neighbors , Mr . Kingsbury said ( to be honest ) he has in
the past . Mr . Ellsworth said to Mr . Kingsbury , these " few " that come to your packing
area , you would sell to them whoever they are ( whether neighbors or otherwise ) , and
Mr . Kingsbury said yes .
Mr . Scala asked if Mr . Kingsbury taught there , too , and Mr . Kingsbury replied
that he does teach one of the neighbors eleven year old girl . Mr . Scala then asked
if it was a regular school program to which Mr . Kingsbury replied no , but he was
actually also teaching a fifty - seven year old woman from across the street .
Chairman Austen read the letter from the Town Planner , Jonathan Kanter , dated
June 10 , 1994 ( prior to reading the letter , Mr . Frost had requested that Mr .
• Kingsbury be allowed to read the letter as he had not known of its contents prior to
the meeting ) . Chairman Austen then opened the public hearing and invited Shirley
Raffensperger to speak .
10
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
June 15 , 1994
Shirley Raffensperger stated that she is representing her husband , Ed , and her -
self at the meeting and that they resided at 139 Pine Tree Road , Ithaca , New York ,
next door to the Kingsbury ' s . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that she was really not
attending the meeting to speak either for or against the request to modify the spe -
cial permit given to Mr . Kingsbury in 1984 . She said her comments were not about
whether or not they liked the Kingsbury ' s , because they do ; or whether they are
pleasant neighbors , and they are ; but to request that the Zoning Board of Appeals
make their decision based on New York State and Town of Ithaca laws , ordinances ,
standards , criteria , and so forth and to apply them in an objective fashion consider -
ing the incremental impact of the buildings and their use in relation to the intent
of the zoning ordinance .
Mrs . Raffensperger said she believed whether they , or any other neighbor , sup -
port or object to the requested changes is far less pertinent than the standards the
Zoning Board is required to apply to any such request . She said none of those
involved will continue forever to own the affected parcels of land and their
buildings , but the land use regulations of the Town of Ithaca will . continue and will
affect our successors who have no way of being represented at ; the meeting tonight .
She said , rather , the Board represents our successors and - us . and all the residents of
the town .
Mrs . Raffensperger said the 1984 special permit was-=personal to David Kingsbury
and contained a number of provisions for the eventual use of the land and so forth
for the buildings . Additionally , the permit varied the regulations - - while 200
square feet of home occupation use is permitted within a residence in an R - 15 zone ,
this special permit permitted a home occupation in two buildings outside of the resi -
dence itself . Presently , one is 9 feet by 12 feet which is 108 square feet ; one is
16 feet by 22 feet ( and she had the wrong information on that from . the minutes ) but
Mrs . Raffensperger said she believed that all adds up to . 470 square .feet . Mrs .
Raffensperger said , in addition , she understands that the �.carport is . used " for pottery
display . The request is for an additional 64 square feet- _ wh ch is a:' t:otal 'of 500 and
something square feet ( she couldn ' t be exact since she had. to , revise =Her figures )
not including the carport . The request specifically --prohibited any non resident
employees ( and Mrs . Raffensperger said she understands there is one presently ) and
that there would not be any retail sales from the location .
Mrs . Raffensperger continued , saying she thinks neighbors are put in an
extremely difficult position to come to a Zoning Board of Appeals and to provide
information to the Board which may somehow or another seem derogatory to people they
like and respect and have gotten along with over the years . Mrs . Raffensperger
stated she heard Mr . Kingsbury say tonight that he does not advertise and she really
had not intended to do this , but was going to present an example of advertisement to
the Board ( a postcard was passed to members of the Board addressed to Edgar & Shirley
Raffensperger advertising a show and sale on Saturday , November 23 , at 137 Pine Tree
Road , Ithaca ) . Mrs . Raffensperger then stated they had received the postcard adver -
tisement some time ago , she did not know what there has been since , but she did know
there have been sales in which there have been a number of vehicles .
• Mrs . Raffensperger said she was in a position where she might have come and
complained about this ( she had never done that previously ) , but she really thought
the Board needs to know fully exactly what has been going on and to judge for them-
selves whether or not it ' s benign . She said that she had never come to complain
11
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
before the Board and that she doesn ' t complain about the dirt on her side porch
because she is respectful of Mr . Kingsbury ' s artistic expertise and she does not want
to be seen as being picky and unpleasant . However , considering the statements made
at the meeting tonight , she really feels that the Board needs to be fully aware of
all circumstances .
Mrs . Raffensperger said she requests first that the Board determine the present
status of the permit requirements - for example , the actual size of the present
buildings isn ' t even on the sketch map that was circulated during the meeting so she
had made an error in going back to old minutes to determine the size of the
buildings . Mrs . Raffensperger also said she does think that the history of compli -
ance should be checked along with the other requirements . Mrs . Raffensperger contin -
ued that she is very confused tonight with what this Board is actually doing . Her
understanding was that Mr . Kingsbury received a special permit or approval in 1984 ;
and , now , a variance is being discussed and she has forgotten the difference between
those two kinds of procedures . Mrs . Raffensperger said she would ask that the Board
review those differences tonight and the kinds of different considerations the Board
would give , looking at those two different kinds of permits .
Chairman Austen then read a letter dated June 13 , 1994 from Mary Margaret
Fischer and Richard B . Fischer residing at 135 Pine Tree Road ( Mr . Kingsbury ' s
neighbors ) , and addressed to the Board of Zoning Appeals . Chairman Austen also read
a memo dated May 23 , 1994 from Candace E . Cornell , Town of Ithaca Conservation
• Board , Chair .
With regard to the postcard advertisement which had been passed to members of
the Board , Mr . Frost stated that it was not postmarked but showed a date of November
23 , then asked Mr . Kingsbury what year that was from . Mrs . Raffensperger said it was
from a long time ago and Mr . Kingsbury said that he had to con_fess , . right after get -
ting the variance , he did have a couple of sales . Mr . Kingsbury •s'aid he either over -
looked it or it wasn ' t made clear to him that he couldn ' t have an - occasional one or
two - day sale as long as he didn ' t have a continual retail outlet . . : . Mr . Kingsbury said
he did get the sense that wasn ' t right , so he hasn ' t had any ' -in- ` the last seven to
nine years and he doesn ' t advertise and he does tell people that he is not supposed
to sell from the location , but he does on occasion make a sale .
Regarding the little building where he has the kilns in the front of the
studio , Mr . Scala asked Mr . Kingsbury if that was one he built and Mr . Kingsbury
replied that he had built them all . Mr . Frost said that was approved and the line
notice advertises that Mr . Kingsbury is adding to the approved tangible 308 square
feet a pottery shop within the approval ( it should be in the Zoning Board of Appeals
minutes dated September 20 , 1994 ) and they did grant the kiln shed , 9 feet by 12 feet
in size . Mr . Scala asked if they had allowed it to be located 7 feet from the prop -
erty line , and Mr . Frost replied that it was to be located at least 6 feet north of
the south property line . Mr . Scala then asked if it was supposed to be 10 feet from
the property line and Mr . Frost said no , an accessory building in fact can be 3 feet .
Mr . Frost then said the one clear point ( which Mrs . Raffensperger brings up ) is
that this was done by special permit and noted that the Town Attorney may want to
respond to that . Mr . Frost said ( to his knowledge ) the only thing you ' re limited , in
terms of this particular use , is what was done in 1984 in his mind was actually a
variance . If this application came before the Board today , Mr . Frost said we would
12
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
be looking at this as a variance because there ' s no division he ' s aware of that would
allow what used to be granted by special permit unless it was specified in the zoning
ordinance as being allowed by special approval or , in the case where we have R - 9 ' s ,
it has to be allowed by special permit occupancy to exceed what is allowed . In Mr .
Frost ' s mind , it really is a variance and not a special permit .
Mr . Scala asked why the applicant needs the variance and Attorney Barney said
you start with the limitations that are allowed in an R - 15 zone and in Subdivision
12 , Accessory Uses , Paragraph 5 , the customary home occupation . But the use of the
area is limited to 200 square feet , either dwelling or a garage area ; and , to get
beyond the 200 square feet , Attorney Barney said he assumed what happened in 1984 was
basically an application to permit the use of some larger space than 200 square feet
because , otherwise , the permit would not have been necessary .
Mr . Scala said that Mrs . Raffensperger had said something about 470 square
feet . Attorney Barney said he had a little trouble with her calculations , too , and
asked what the size was of the existing building . Mr . Frost replied that 308 square
feet is what was granted but then you have to add , in terms of the total use of the
property , the 9 feet by 12 feet shed . Attorney Barney then asked what the size of
the pottery studio itself was and Mr . Kingsbury replied that the studio itself is
presently 16 feet by 22 feet . Attorney Barney said the 9 feet by 12 feet shed would
equal 108 square feet , so he calculated a total of 460 square feet not including the
carport .
• Mr . Kingsbury said he didn ' t know who is calling the carport a sales area but
he has to be able to see his stock , he has the stock out on shelves . Attorney Barney
said there is none located in the pottery studio or the kiln shed and Mr . Kingsbury
said that is correct ; then Attorney Barney said it is located elsewhere , and Mr .
Kingsbury said that ' s right . Mr . Scala noted that it is part of the business , so
that square footage is part of the business . Mr . Kingsbury said that the space is
used for other things as well , and Mr . Scala replied that it ' s still part of the
business . Mr . Frost stated it was a little difficult for him having to speak fairly
but , when he went through that area , he was stepping over children ' s bicycles and
remembered that he had seen stuff being stored there ; he went back subsequently to
take the pictures for the zoning board and saw stuff stored there , but not for this
use . Mr . Ellsworth asked what the biggest area in the carport was used for and Mr .
Frost stated , from what he saw , he was stepping over bicycles and children ' s things
to move from the driveway up to the back of the building ( and noted that he was try-
ing to speak objectively without making a judgment ) and that he had been stepping
over personal belongings .
Attorney Barney then asked if there were prices on the merchandise in the car -
port and Mr . Kingsbury said there are on some items because he uses that area to
' unpack from a show and put them back on the shelves ( and sometimes they still have
price tags from the shows or from the store ) . Attorney Barney asked if it was fair
to say that some portion of the carport area was used in relation to his business and
Mr . Kingsbury replied , yes . Attorney Barney said Mr . Kingsbury was using 460 square
feet exclusively for his business and Mr . Ellsworth agreed that it was well over the
200 feet allowed already . Mr . Frost said what disturbs him , too , is that the
• approval was for the pottery workshop building to be 14 feet by 22 feet in size ( and
said he was looking at the site sketch in the 1984 files ) , then Mr . Kingsbury apolo -
gized and said the building is presently 14 feet by 22 feet and not 16 feet by 22
feet as he had stated earlier .
13
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
June 15 , 1994
Mr . Frost then said 14 feet by 22 feet ( 308 square feet ) is correct according
to the 1984 files and you then add the kiln , which is 108 square feet , for a total of
416 square feet . Mr . Ellsworth noted that it was still well over the 200 square feet
allowed and Mr . Frost agreed but said what Mr . Kingsbury got approval for was a 14
foot by 22 foot workshop and tonight he is appealing to enlarge that with the addi -
tion of a 4 foot by 16 foot ( 64 square feet ) storage area and , though separate , was
the granting of a 1984 appeal ( which he is not modifying ) for a 9 by 12 foot kiln
shed .
Mr . Hines asked if the issue wasn ' t what activity , aside from the normal growth
of business , brings the applicant in front of the board today . Mr . Frost said Mr .
Kingsbury made inquiry to his office to ask about adding on to the pottery workshop .
Mr . Hines said he understood that but , legally , Mr . Kingsbury has not displayed any
particular hardship that is provoked as a result of something extraneous to his own
activity and it ' s a happy circumstance that business is good , but it hardly serves as
a basis for expanding under the law when you ' re already 50 percent over the permitted
limit to begin with . Mr . Hines said , in any event , one would like to hear evidence
about why it ' s critical that this addition take place other than for convenience of
the operation of the business which may well be over what it was 10 years ago . Mr .
Hines said he felt it is good that Mr . Kingsbury ' s business is expanding but it
seemed to him unavailing in an application to further expand or obtain approval for
an additional expansion when , really , it isn ' t precipitated by something which the
applicant had no control over . Mr . Hines then asked Mr . Kingsbury if he wasn ' t pre -
cipitating the need to come before the board and Mr . Kingsbury said yes .
Mr . Scala stated that Mr . Kingsbury was not very far from needing to have some -
one help him in the shop and expanding his work and that ' s really what the board is
saying , that he is expanding his level of effort . Mr . Kingsbury said no , he was not
doing that and Mr . Scala asked if the additional help was just for housekeeping . Mr .
Kingsbury said he has had the discussion with his wife that he ' s been thinking of
cutting back the scale of his business ; she works full - time , he works full - time at
this , and family life is often left out . Mr . Kingsbury then declared that he was not
looking to expand his business , that he was looking to make it more comfortable in
his present level of activity .
Mrs . Raffensperger then asked if she could have the board enter into the record
a letter directed to Mr . Kingsbury dated December 3 , 1985 from Lewis D . Cartee ,
Building Inspector , Town of Ithaca . One portion of the letter read as follows :
. . .
is , no way shall this shop attract any traffic and there shall be no retail
selling at this location . "
Mrs . Raffensperger said she thought this letter should be entered into the
record considering the discussion regarding lack of understanding about retail
selling .
Mr . Kingsbury said he believed he had received the letter after one of those
sales that he had shortly after setting up . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that she was
not sure the facility was built at the time the letter was written and Mr . Kingsbury
replied that he had sales before the facility was built . Mr . Kingsbury stated that
he thought Mr . Oartee ( Town of Ithaca Building Inspector at that time ) had a hard
time doing it , but he finally made him aware that he couldn ' t have those types of
14
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
sales . Mr . Kingsbury also said to Mrs . Raffensperger that he hoped she could attest
to the fact that he hadn ' t been conducting sales since that time and she replied that
she honestly doesn ' t watch and hasn ' t complained , but she thought the Board should
know all the facts for the record ( Mr . Kingsbury agreed ) .
Mr . Hines then stated to Chairman Austen that , once again , wasn ' t what the
Board wanted to hear evidence of hardship and Chairman Austen agreed . Mr . Kingsbury
said , you want to hear evidence of hardship ? Mr . Hines said he believed that was
what is relevant and Mr . Scala said Mr . Kingsbury needs an argument as to why he has
to add another 4 feet and that one of the possible arguments is hardship . Mr . Scala
continued that Mr . Kingsbury had mentioned housekeeping , to get better storage , etc . ,
but it doesn ' t sound like Mr . Kingsbury is hurting . Mr . Kingsbury replied that no ,
he wasn ' t hurting and - - to be quite honest - - the happiness of all his neighbors is
very important to him ; so , if anyone objects to this , he will withdraw his appeal .
Mr . Hines stated it was the Board that Mr . Kingsbury had to worry about objecting .
Mr . Kingsbury said , when he thought of adding this 4 foot extension , he honestly
thought that it would be just a matter of getting a building permit ; and , had he
foreseen all of this procedure , he probably wouldn ' t have initiated the application .
He said , however , he would like the space and it would make his operation much more
comfortable ; he wouldn ' t have to step over his clay that he ' s storing , he wouldn ' t
lose as many pots because they ' re within direct siting of his heat source , and it
would just make his operation more comfortable .
• Mr . Frost said , when Mr . Kingsbury had called to inquire about the permit , his
desire was to go up and see what he was talking about since this kind of inquiry
resulted in his pulling the file which was the old zoning file . Mr . Frost said he
then went to the property and , having read the minutes ; within the minutes , Mr .
Kingsbury did represent that there were no employees at that 1984 hearing but Mr .
Frost did see a woman doing pottery . At that point , Mr . Frost said we then have two
issues : 1 ) Mr . Kingsbury ' s date to come back to the Board to seek a variance to
enlarge the area that was approved in 1984 ; and 2 ) at the same time , he encouraged
Mr . Kingsbury ( since Mr . Frost saw the employee ) to either terminate the employee or
seek a variance from the Board .
Mr . Scala asked what Mr . Kingsbury ' s option would be if the Board did not grant
the permit to add the 4 feet and wanted to know if he could use all of the carport or
what other option he had if he couldn ' t add the 4 feet by 16 feet addition . Mr .
Kingsbury replied the option would be to continue as he is as far as production . Mr .
Scala asked if this was primarily for storage and Mr . Kingsbury replied that he would
store clay low and drying pots up high .
Chairman Austen asked if there was a way Mr . Kingsbury ' s storage method could
be modified and possibly put a barrier between his curing pots and the heat source .
Mr . Kingsbury said that he does , he has mobile shelving units and he tries to wheel
them as far away as possible ; however , when you ' re in a 14 by 22 foot building , you
don ' t get very far away from your heat source . Mr . Kingsbury stated that he also
drapes with plastic and it works , it ' s just inconvenient and he often ruins some of
the pieces because the plastic kind of sticks to the sides of the wet pots and he
doesn ' t see it ; then , when he goes to uncover them , they ' re destroyed .
15
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
Mr . Scala asked what was stopping Mr . Kingsbury from just putting up a utility
shed somewhere else on the property . Mr . Frost said if it was just a personal util -
ity shed and nothing else , there was nothing stopping him as long as he put it in a
location that complied with the ordinance . Mr . Frost said he believed Mr . Kingsbury
was aware that he had an operation that called for a building permit and that ' s why
he is appearing before the Board .
. Mr . Ellsworth said it appeared to him that what ' s there already is way out of
control according to Article 4 for residential district R - 15 , Section 12 , Item 5 and
then proceeded to read same to the board members . Mr . Ellsworth said it reads a
customary home occupation " , then it goes on to describe several different trades
( pottery making was not listed ) and " that there be no outside storage " , then Mr .
Ellsworth stated it appeared to him that the carport was used for storage ( or part of
the carport ) . From what he saw from the road since he couldn ' t go on the property
because of the dog , Mr . Ellsworth said there was quite a large wall of storage ,
packing , and whatever . Mr . Ellsworth continued reading from Article 4 , " the home
trades ( and it doesn ' t specifically say pottery making , but it says other types of
home trades ) are to be conducted over an area not exceeding 200 square feet " . Mr .
Ellsworth said if something previously was approved that had a variance , etc . , then
that ' s ok ; but , it appears that it ' s expanding beyond what was approved before . It ' s
expanded to a carport and so on . Mr . Ellsworth stated that it appeared to him that
what ' s there already is well beyond the spirit of what was passed before by a vari -
ance or special appeal and now we have another situation where the owner is appearing
• before the Board to add on top of already existing problems .
Mr . King asked Mr . Ellsworth if the carport where Mr . Kingsbury ' s goods are
stored was visible right from the street and the response was yes . Mr . King asked if
you could see prices and Mr . Ellsworth said no , not from the street . Mr . King said ,
in other words , there are small stickers which you ' d have to be up close to see and
Mr . Ellsworth said , when you ' re standing 30 to 40 feet from the objects , the prices
were not visible . Mr . King then asked Mr . Ellsworth if the display looked to him as
though it ' s a storefront almost where people could come and buy something and Mr .
Ellsworth responded that a nice set of shelves had been made that extend for a long
way and also extend pretty high , and there ' s a pottery object in each slot up there .
Mr . King asked if Mr . Ellsworth had said to himself , here ' s an emporium for the pur -
chase of pottery and Mr . Ellsworth said he was just looking to see where the building
was , whether it ' s sheltered to the next door neighbor closest ( which is Dr . Fischer ,
7 feet to his property line ) , and then he even walked back once to look again at the
display .
Mr . Hines stated he felt all of the comments are interesting and germane but ,
along with what Mrs . Raffensperger has said , really relates to whether Mr . Kingsbury
is in violation of the existing situation ( which it sounds to Mr . Hines as if he
might very well be ) . Mr . Hines said , that is not necessarily before the Board and we
still have yet to hear evidence of any convincing nature as to the hardships which
would otherwise provoke us into favorable action . Mr . Hines said he did not chair
this meeting , but he would prefer not to hear alot more evidence about a violation
which may be standing until he heard whether or not there was any hardship indepen -
dent of it .
16
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
Mr . King said he thought they were talking about the operation , not the
violation . Mr . Hines said it sounded to him like most of what they were talking
about is whether Mr . Kingsbury does , in fact , exceed the previously granted permis -
sion and is the extent of the operation , either in issuing or by growth over a period
of time , beyond that which was contemplated and the answer seems to be ( from the tes -
timony and the observations ) , yes . Mr . Hines then continued that the question is how
does that have anything to do with the application tonight and it would have some
relevance in the fact that the Board is not supposed to grant permission to people
who are in violation , but he didn ' t see nor had he heard anything which would tilt
the scales in support of favorable action to the appellant because he had not heard
Mr . Kingsbury state anything about having a serious problem here which needs remedia -
tion other than his business seems to be better served if it were larger or had more
space , which hardly seems like hardship .
Mr . King said he thought Mr . Kingsbury was quite explicit about showing the
need for a drying or a wet room ( it ' s called a slow dry room ) further away from the
kiln and out from underfoot and he ' s talking about that expansion at the rear of the
property which doesn ' t impact any neighbor immediately other than Dr . Fischer who has
written favorably regarding the requested addition . Mr . King said he thought Mr .
Kingsbury had shown hardship in his operation and you have to remember that Section
12 , Subdivision 5 says our citizens have a right to conduct home occupations but it ' s
circumscribed . Mr . King said , ten years ago , we said - - if you want to build some -
thing way out in the back yard that ' s a little bit bigger to upgrade a pottery shop
• which seems to maybe require more than 200 square feet - - that would be ok within
limits . Mr . King said he thought what is distressing , if at all , about it now is in
view of the fact that the testimony is that any public invitation was made ten years
ago and has not been repeated and Mr . Kingsbury does not generally sell to people .
Mr . King said , in other words , it ' s not getting way out of hand here but the use of
the open storage in the carport is clearly violating Subdivision 5 .
Mr . King said he thought Mr . Kingsbury should be brought back into compliance
with Subdivision 5 and remove the storage from public view in the carport , however he
does that . Mr . King said he saw no harm in granting him the small addition which
would mean so much to him in order to have a little more freedom to operate but , as
far as the employee goes , that ' s clearly forbidden under the rule for home occupation
and we should not grant that .
Mr . Hines wanted to ask a question ( and said this is a very compelling
argument ) . He said this has been going on for ten years , what is it that has hap -
pened to provoke this need that wasn ' t true eight years ago . Mr . King said he was
not a historian and Mr . Hines gave the example that , if you limp , you don ' t wait
eight years to come in and say I need a different shoe - - here ' s a man who has oper -
ated a kiln , thrown pottery , or whatever for ten years and then comes before the
board and says , by the way , it ' s extremely inconvenient to do this in this way and ,
in fact , it elevates itself to the level of hardship and I would prefer to have some
other place to dry my pots so they don ' t get damaged . Then , of course , the response
is what were you doing four years ago ? It ' s changed in such a way that now it has
become a hardship . Mr . Hines said , in other words , Mr . Kingsbury is a good advocate
• but are the facts supporting his argument ?
17
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
Mr . Scala said , to get these items in perspective , you ' re looking at 25 , 000
square feet of property on which Mr . Kingsbury now has roughly 416 square feet in the
form of a couple of sheds . The applicant is asking for 56 more square feet which Mr .
Scala feels is trivial and , to improve his quality ( whatever the justification is ) ,
it ' s worth doing . Mr . Scala said this does not justify hanging his wares out the
carport and Mr . Kingsbury would have to clean his act up , but the rest of it should
be acceptable . Mr . Frost asked Mr . Scala if he was suggesting that consideration be
given to the external non resident employee , and Mr . Scala asked where that issue
came in . Mr . Ellsworth said Mr . Kingsbury has a non resident employee about five
hours per week and Mr . Scala asked if he was talking about Mr . Kingsbury ' s wife . Mr .
Ellsworth said no , she is a resident and Mr . King said we ' re not concerned with a
non - employee . Mr . Scala asked if there was a restriction against having employees ,
and Mr . Frost said the zoning board limits the home occupation to residents of the
premises only . Mr . Scala said then it should be fairly clear cut , Mr . Kingsbury
can ' t store his pottery items in the carport and have it visible for sale and he
can ' t have an employee .
Mr . King asked that the applicant address the question , how has the situation
changed recently such that what was good enough for him ten years ago is no longer
quite sufficient . Mr . Kingsbury said , basically , he ' s ten years older and the pro -
cess of making pots is hard enough when you ' re young ; when you ' re old ( he is 46 ) ,
it ' s more and more difficult for him to carry pots around , to try to get them in
strategic locations , covering , uncovering , wheeling things around , stepping over
• boxes of clay , etc . Mr . Kingsbury said he was of a mind to be more comfortable in
his procedures . Attorney Barney asked if any thought had ever been given to moving
his entire operation to some other location and Mr . Kingsbury said yes , he had
thought about it but he and his family liked the neighborhood and wanted to stay
there .
Mrs . Raffensperger then commented that she had not come to the meeting to
oppose or make any kind of statement , as she had mentioned before . However , she said
Mr . King seems to want to trivialize some of the elements that have gone into this .
She said she does not make any complaints about any violations of the previous permit
until she heard at the meeting statements that Mr . Kingsbury made such as , " I never
sold any pottery " . Mr . Kingsbury then stated to Mrs . Raffensperger that he had never
said that and asked her if he hadn ' t said earlier in the meeting that he had sold
pottery . Mrs . Raffensperger then continued that she tried to make the point to the
Zoning Board of Appeals ( which is an opinion that she has held for many years ) that
it really is not pertinent and neighbors should not be put in this position , making
comments for or against a particular variance . The Zoning Board of Appeals , as she
understands it , has very strict kinds of criteria for making decisions about vari -
ances and special permits and all she is asking tonight is that , not just in her own
interest or in the interest of the neighborhood - - but in the interest of the entire
Town of Ithaca and this Zoning Board - - that the Board apply those criteria and that
it not become the kind of personalized discussion which , unfortunately , it did dete -
riorate into .
Mr . Kingsbury asked permission to speak and then stated he really took excep -
tion to the notion that , from the street , you can look in his carport and it invites
isyou to buy pots ; you have to really be stretching to see the pottery from the road ,
and he has no signs and he never advertises for any kind of retail sales .
Chairman Austen then closed the public hearing .
Town of Ithaca 18
Zoning Board of Appeals
June 15 , 1994
• ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Chairman Austen read Parts II and III of the Environmental Assessment Form done
by Louise Raimondo , Planner I , dated June 10 , 1994 and asked that a motion be made .
MOTION
By Mr . Pete Scala , seconded by Mr . Edward King .
RESOLVED , that the Board adopt the recommendations of Louise Raimondo , Planner
I and find a negative determination of environmental significance for the
appeal by Daniel Yanarella , Owner / Appellant ( David Kingsbury , Agent ) for the
property at 137 Pine Tree Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 29 ,
Residence District R - 15 .
With no other discussion , Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion which
resulted as follows :
AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala .
ABSTAIN - Hines .
The motion was carried .
With no additional discussion required , Chairman Austen then asked for a motion
• on the appeal .
MOTION
By Mr . Pete Scala , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth .
RESOLVED , that the Board grant the applicant , Daniel Yanarella ,
Owner / Appellant , David Kingsbury , Agent , a variance from the requirements of
Article IV , Section 12 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted
to modify a previously approved variance ( granted on September 20 , 1984 ) with
the addition of a 4 foot x 14 foot storage area to an existing pottery workshop
( which would add 56 square feet to an existing workshop area of 416 square
feet ) and to deny the request for a non resident , part - time employee at 137
Pine Tree Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 29 , Residence District R - 15
subject to the following findings and conditions :
1 . By testimony of the applicant , it is confirmed that the existing building
is 14 feet by 22 feet in size and not 16 feet by 22 feet . Therefore , the
appeal has been modified to request the addition of a 4 foot by 14 foot
storage area , and the proposed addition would not extend beyond the
existing walls of the present building .
2 . The applicant has indicated the difficulty in managing the pottery
( particularly when " green " ) and in trying to handle , sort , and transport
the pottery .
3 . A better storage space is needed to improve quality and prevent damage .
This requirement is not viewed as being due to an increase in sales but ,
rather , due to quality control .
19
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
• June 15 , 1994
4 . With the condition that there will be no storage in the carport or any
other location that would extend the business as it now exists .
5 . With the condition that there will be no non resident , part - time employ-
ees allowed to work at this property . However , resident family members
are allowed .
6 . With the condition that there will be no advertising of the pottery items
for sale or priced items visible .
A vote on the motion resulted as follows :
AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala .
NAYS - Hines .
The motion was carried .
Before the vote on the motion , Mr . Kingsbury had asked to interject a statement
and was advised by Chairman Austen that he could not do so when a motion is on the
floor . After the vote , Chairman Austen restated the conditions under which the
motion was carried to Mr . Kingsbury who advised what he had wanted to say is that ,
without being able to store his pots somewhere once they ' re finished , he would suffer
a hardship and that he was going to sacrifice the addition in order to be able to
continue to store pots in his carport . Chairman Austen then stated , unfortunately ,
the code does not allow for the storage there period , and it was never granted
that Mr . Kingsbury be allowed to use the carport as a storage area . Therefore , it
wouldn ' t make any difference whether Mr . Kingsbury had the addition or not ; pottery
storage in the carport would still have to be eliminated .
Chairman Austen then asked Mr . Kingsbury if he had a place where he displayed
the pottery downtown to which Mr . Kingsbury replied yes , but he honestly does not use
his carport to sell and that it is more of a nuisance for him to deal with people
coming there and looking for pots . Mr . Scala said , as long as Mr . Kingsbury recog -
nizes that the code says you can only have 200 square feet ; as it is now , Mr .
Kingsbury is more than double that and the Board is allowing him to extend another
ten percent .
Chairman Austen adjourned the meeting at 9 : 15 PM .
U a .
Y landa M . McLaughlin
Recording Secretary
g94 A�
E 4
E ward Austen , C airman
FINAL,
• TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
WEDNESDAY , JUNE 15 , 1994
7 . 00 P . M .
By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca
on Wednesday , June 15 , 1994 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , ( FIRST Floor , REAR
Entrance , WEST Side ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P . M . , on the following matters :
Appeal of the Country Club of Ithaca , Owner /Appellant , Neal Ryan , Agent , requesting a
variance from the requirements of Article V . Section 20 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance , to be permitted to construct an accessory building with a building height of
24 + feet ( 15 feet maximum height permitted ) at 189 Pleasant Grove Road , Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No . 68- 1 - 1 . 2 , Residence District R- 30 .
Appeal of Daniel Yanarella , Owner/Appellant , David Kingsbury , Agent , requesting a
variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 12 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance , to be permitted to modify a previously approved variance ( granted on
September 20 , 1984 ) with the addition of a 4 foot x 16 foot storage area to an existing
pottery workshop and to allow for a non resident part-time employee at 137 Pine Tree
Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 29 , Residence District R- 15 . The previously
• approved variance allowed for a pottery workshop with a floor area of 308 square feet
( 200 square feet maximum area allowed ) and did not allow for a non- resident employee .
Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time , 7 : 00 p . m . , and said place , hear all
persons in support of such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent
or in person .
Andrew S . Frost
Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement
Officer
273- 1783
Dated : June 7 , 1994
Publish : June 10 , 1994