HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2020-01-14Town of Ithaca
Notice of Public Hearing
Zoning Board of Appeals
Tuesday, January 14, 2019 @ 6:00 p.m.
215 N. Tioga St.
0014-2019 Appeal of Peter Trowbridge & Nina Bassuk, owners of 1345 Mecklenburg Road, Tax
Parcel No. 28.-1-23.1, are requesting relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 270-54.B(3)
Permitted Principal Uses, and 270-219.6.13(1) Floor Area (for Accessory Dwelling Units). Town of
Ithaca Code section 270-54.B(3) allows a two-family dwelling consisting of a principal dwelling
unit and an attached accessory dwelling unit, provided the accessory dwelling unit complies with
the applicable requirements of Town of Ithaca Code section 270-219.6. Town of Ithaca Code
section 270-219.6.13(1) allows for an accessory dwelling unit not exceeding 800 square feet or 70%
of the floor area of the principle dwelling unit (whichever is less). The applicants are requesting to
have an accessory dwelling unit of 1600 square feet, which exceeds the specified limits of Town of
Ithaca Code section 270-219.6.13(1). The property is located in the Low -Density Residential Zone.
Contact Marry Moseley at mmoseley@town.ithaca.ny.us or 273-1721 ext. 2 with any questions
Marty Moseley
Director of Code Enforcement
Town of Ithaca
Zoning Board of Appeals
Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Minutes
Present
: Rob Rosen, Chair; Chris Jung, George Vignaux, David Squires, and Bill King Alternates
David Filiberto and David Williams
Staff
: Marty Moseley, Codes; Jasmin Cubero, Deputy Town Clerk; Susan Brock, Attorney for the
Town
Mr. Rosen called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
0014-2019 Appeal of Peter Trowbridge & Nina Bassuk,
owners of 1345 Mecklenburg Road,
Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-23.1, are requesting relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 270-54.B(3)
Permitted Principal Uses, and 270-219.6.B(l) Floor Area (for Accessory Dwelling Units). Town
of Ithaca Code section 270-54.B(3) allows a two-family dwelling consisting of a principal dwelling
unit and an attached accessory dwelling unit, provided the accessory dwelling unit complies with
the applicable requirements of Town of Ithaca Code section 270-219.6. Town of Ithaca Code
section 270-219.6.B(l) allows for an accessory dwelling unit not exceeding 800 square feet or 70%
of the floor area of the principle dwelling unit (whichever is less). The applicants are requesting to
have an accessory dwelling unit of 1600 square feet, which exceeds the specified limits of Town
of Ithaca Code section 270-219.6.B(l). The property is located in the Low-Density Residential
Zone.
Mr. Trowbridge gave an overview saying that their daughter and her family would like to live in
the accessory dwelling unit. The property is 10 acres in size in low density residential and they
built the house about 40 years ago and added a home office, which we outgrew and so the business
moved downtown and the detached accessory dwelling unit was used for family visitors.
Mr. Trowbridge said the house is 800 sqft and it is hard to see the building from the public roadway
even in the winter when the trees are bare and the neighboring properties are agriculture and dairy
so there would not be an undesirable change to the neighborhood.
Mr. Trowbridge did not think the addition to the accessory dwelling would go over the 50% larger
than the primary structure which had been allowed until recently.
Mr. Rosen gave a brief history of the legislation, saying up until 2017, an accessory dwelling unit
was allowed by right to be up to 50% of the size of the primary residence. The Code now says
that the maximum size is 800 sqft.
Mr. Rosen asked if the size of the existing one at 800 square feet was a coincidence?
Mr. Towbridge stated that the design of the primary structure and all other structures are 20 x 20
design module size when built, not arbitrary by any means, but a part of the overall character.
ZBA?2020‐01‐14?Filed?1/28/2020??Pg.?1?
?
Mr. Rosen began the discussion, saying that his first thought was that the property is a very big on
a large highway and it is a very large-scale area. He did not feel that this would be a very big
impact.
Mr. King said he was curious why the Town to put that particular size as the maximum.
Ms. Brock explained that Sue Ritter who is the Director of Planning was responsible for bringing
proposed language to the committee drafting the legislation and this was based on a number of
other municipal codes that used it, but she added that the focus was on smaller lots in the medium
density zone where the minimum lot size is 15,000 sqft. For example, Salem Drive, Muriel St.,
and similar in the Northeast area of town.
Ms. Brock explained that in the Northeast, there are a lot of very large principal buildings with
attached accessory units that are 50% or less. The developer made the principal building very
large in order to have pretty large secondary units. The houses also have two car garages and
separate driveways. (photo passed around and added to file and a tax map showing parcel size
with structures on them in the Northeast area)
Ms. Brock said that Ms. Ritter hadn’t really thought about a lower density or larger lot having this
issue.
Ms. Brock read from the SEQR form associated with the legislation that set the 800’ foot
maximum:
“Current regulations limit the size of an ADU to no more than 50% of the floor area
of the primary dwelling. This can be exceeded in cases where the second dwelling
unit is constructed entirely within the basement. The new provisions eliminate this
basement exception and establish a maximum size for an ADU of 800 sqft of floor
area. This is to ensure that the size of the ADU is clearly subordinate to the primary
dwelling unit and eliminates the unintended consequences of the current regulation
promoting the development of atypically large structures with primary unit sized
ADUs in neighborhoods. Controls on the size of ADUs along with the owner
occupancy requirements are intended to protect the character of traditional single-
family neighborhoods.”
Ms. Brock added that the she and Ms. Ritter could not recall the discussions at the committee but
did recall them saying an applicant could get a variance. The lot in question is in low density
residential and far exceeds the minimum lot size for that zone of 40,000 sqft – this is 430K sqft.
Mr. Squires asked if the addition to the ADU is going to be connected by another breezeway?
Mr. Trowbridge said the former Code required a home office to be connected to the primary
structure so it was built with the architectural bridge connection which will remain.
Mr. Squires said it seems like there will be three buildings then.
ZBA?2020‐01‐14?Filed?1/28/2020??Pg.?2?
?
Mr. Mosely said it will not, under NYS and Town Codes be a separate structure.
Mr. Trowbridge added that it is a two-story connection; an architectural feature similar to the one
on the primary residence connecting the garage.
Some discussion followed on the drawings to determine what the primary structure is and the
accessory structure.
Mr. Rosen opened the public hearing at 6:20 p.m.
Brent Katzman spoke saying that he is a neighbor and he also has 10 acres at his house and watched
with interest when the town was debating the second dwelling unit laws and Ms. Brock has it right;
the intent was to curtail and address some aggressive stretching of zoning, particularly on South
and East Hill.
He said he has no objections as a neighbor to this request at all. It is going to be in the front of the
property, not encroaching on the back open space and it is going to make space much more useful
to them and frankly better for the property value in the long term and is not an excessive request
in his mind.
Mr. Katzman added that he has an ADU attached to his house that is 720 sqft and there are days
he wishes it was larger. As an immediate neighbor, he had no issue with it. There is a flag lot
access in between me and them, but in essence, I am their immediate neighbor.
There was no one else wishing to address the board and the hearing was closed.
Ms. Brock stated that this is a Type 2 action not requiring SEQR because it is an expansion of a
two-family residence on an approved lot.
Mr. Vignaux stated that he thinks doubling the size of the guest house in conjunction with the size
of the primary house and the size of the lot is insignificant and will do nothing detrimental to the
neighborhood and will improve the property. There is plenty of room and existing utilities.
Mr. King agreed with Mr. Vignaux, but he was worried about precedent due to it being a substantial
request of doubling the allowed square footage but, that said, it is a very large lot and he didn’t see
it being any issue affecting the character of the neighborhood.
Ms. Jung said that she agrees, but we need to identify what makes it unique.
Mr. Vignaux stated that to him, the unique aspect is the size of the lot; 10 acres is very large and
if someone else came in requesting the same, it wouldn’t be an issue in that case either. The intent
of the law was to stop small lots from cramming as much as possible on them; that is not the case
here or in a similar request.
Mr. Squires stated his only issues was that based on the drawings, it could be construed as a
separate building, but Mr. Mosely has stated that it is not.
ZBA?2020‐01‐14?Filed?1/28/2020??Pg.?3?
?
Mr. Williams said he had no objection to it and since the board’s decision won’t affect the zoning
law, any similar situation would appeal to the board and we would weigh the same criteria and do
the balancing test on a case-to-case basis.
Mr. Filiberto stated that he lives just north of this property and although he didn’t agree with the
restriction imposed by the Town Board, as a Board member he will enforce it. If the reason is not
unique enough, everyone will want this variance.
Mr. Rosen said the board seems to be in agreement that this is a valid variance and we will
enumerate the reasons in the resolution.
ZBA Resolution 0014-2019 Area Variance
1345 Mecklenburg Rd
TP 28.-1-23.1
January 14, 2020
Resolved
that this Board grants the appeal ofPeter Trowbridge & Nina Bassuk, as stated in the
public hearing notice, requesting an relief from Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 270-219.6 B(1) to
be allowed to increase the size of their existing accessory dwelling unit from 800 sqft to 1,600 sqft.
with the following
Conditions
1.That the building be built substantially as shown and described in the application
And with the following
Findings
That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of
the community, specifically that:
1.The benefit the applicant wishes to achieve cannot be achieved by any other means feasible,
given that the applicants wish to have an accessory dwelling unit that exceeds the allowed
800 sqft to allow for his daughter, husband and future children to live in, and
2.That there will not be an undesirable change to the neighborhood character or to nearby
properties given that this is a 10 acre lot, roughly ten times larger than the minimum lot
size in the low density residential zone; the building exceeds the front yard setback by more
than double and the side yard setbacks by 600% percent and the rear yard setback by acres.
The change will not be undesirable in that the design of the addition is architecturally
consistent with the existing principle structure and accessory dwelling unit in color,
materials and style. Visibility from the public road is limited due to the vegetation, even in
the winter months. There will be no change in utilities or driveway access or curb cuts,
and
3.The request is substantial, given that 800 sqft is allowed and 1,600 sqft is being requested,
and
ZBA?2020‐01‐14?Filed?1/28/2020??Pg.?4?
?
You are receiving this notice because you live within 500 feet of a property requesting a
variance from the Town Code. Comments can be in person at the meeting, or in writing
via mail to 215 N. Tioga St., or via email to ctorres@town.ithaca.ny.us
All comments become part of the official record.
Town of Ithaca
Notice of Public Hearing
Zoning Board of Appeals
Tuesday, January 14, 2019 @ 6:00 p.m.
215 N. Tioga St.
0014-2019 Appeal of Peter Trowbridge Nina Bassuk,
& owners of 1345 Mecklenburg Road, Tax
Parcel No. 28.-1-23.1, are requesting relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 270-54.B(3)
Permitted Principal Uses, and 270-219.6.B(l) Floor Area (for Accessory Dwelling Units). Town of
Ithaca Code section 270-54.B(3) allows a two-family dwelling consisting of a principal dwelling
unit and an attached accessory dwelling unit, provided the accessory dwelling unit complies with
the applicable requirements of Town of Ithaca Code section 270-219.6. Town of Ithaca Code
section 270-219.6.B(l) allows for an accessory dwelling unit not exceeding 800 square feet or 70%
of the floor area of the principle dwelling unit (whichever is less). The applicants are requesting to
have an accessory dwelling unit of 1600 square feet, which exceeds the specified limits of Town of
Ithaca Code section 270-219.6.B(l). The property is located in the Low-Density Residential Zone.
Marty Moseley
Director of Code Enforcement