Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2009-05-18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, May 18, 2009 ® 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 Monday, May 18 , 2009, in Town Hall , 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, NY, COMMENCING AT 7 :00 P.M. , on the following matters : GRANTED APPEAL of Mikel Carey, Owner /Appellant, requesting an area variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article VI, Section 270-29 (D) of the Town of Ithaca Code permitting an additional accessory building, which would exceed the aggregate square footage allowed. Accessory building would be located at 218 Bundy Road, Tax Parcel #24 . - 5 - 10 . 31 Agricultural Zone (AG) . GRANTED APPEAL of David Melski , Owner/Appellant, requesting a height variances from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article XXVIII, Section 270-223 to allow an existing 7 . 5 ' fence to remain at 122 Terraceview Dr. , Tax Parcel #58 . -2 - 39 . 361 , Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zone . GRANTED APPEAL of Pamela Johnston, Owner/Appellant, 901 Taughannock Blvd. , Tax Parcel #25 . -2 -41 . 1 , requesting-an interpretation and possible modification of a variance granted on December 15 , 1993 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals permitting the alteration of existing decks and moving of exterior walls to form more habitable space . House is located in a Lakefront Residential (LR) Zone . f� Said Zoning Board of Appeals will hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Assistance will be provided for individuals with special needs, upon request. Such requests should be made not less than 48 hours prior to the public hearings. Bruce W. Bates Director of Code Enforcement 607-273 - 1783 Dated : May 8 , 2009 Published: May 11 , 2009 Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals 215 North Tioga Street May 18 , 2009 7 : 00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN - IN Please Print Clearly , Thank You Name Address )� v ►n � v 12d 11' me � ski I ,ZZ Dr- GG ci le rGgle IZZ Iyra <e U ;ew (�✓ /f � �� C, i � � cN vim' � � 2 V 1 � -�rctC� �� r�✓ `�✓ � � � �_c�o� AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF NEW YORK) SS . : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) I , Paulette Terwilliger , being duly sworn , deposes and says , that deponent is not a party to the actions , is over 21 years of age and resides at 90 Liberty Street , Spencer, NY . That the 13th day. of May , 2009 , deponent served the within Notice upon : See Attached By depositing same enclosed in a post-paid addressed wrapper, in a post office under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Post Office Department within the State of New York. Paulette Terwilliger Sworn to before me this 15th day of May 2009 , Notary Public CARRIE WHITMORE Notary Public , state of New York No . 01 WH6052877 Tioga County Commission Expires December 26, Gov TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, May 18, 2009 ® 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 Monday, May 18 , 2009, in Town Hall , 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, NY, COMMENCING AT 7 :00 P.M. on the following matters : APPEAL of Mikel Carey, Owner /Appellant, requesting an area variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article VI, Section 270- 29 (D) of the Town of Ithaca Code permitting an additional accessory building, which would exceed the aggregate square footage allowed. Accessory building would be located at 218 Bundy Road, Tax Parcel #24 . -5 - 10 . 31 Agricultural Zone (AG) . APPEAL of David Melski, Owner/Appellant, requesting a height variances from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article XXVIII, Section 270-233 to allow an existing 7 . 5 ' fence to remain at 122 Terraceview Dr. , Tax Parcel #58 . -2- 39 . 361 , Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zone. APPEAL of Pamela Johnston, Owner/Appellant, 901 Taughannock Blvd. , Tax Parcel #25 . -2-41 . 1 , requesting an interpretation and possible modification of a variance granted on December 15 , 1993 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals permitting the alteration of existing decks and moving of exterior walls to form more habitable space . House is located in a Lakefront Residential (LR) Zone. Said Zoning Board of Appeals will hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Assistance will be provided for individuals with special needs, upon request. Such requests should be made not less than 48 hours prior to the public hearings. Bruce W . Bates Director of Code Enforcement 607-273 - 1783 Dated: May 8 , 2009 Published: May 11 , 2009 901 Taughannock Blvd Berggren , Richard Cayuga Medical Center Accounts 9 Maplewood Pt 119 Williams Glen Rd Payable thaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 101 Harris B Dates Dr 0 Ithaca, NY 14850 Chaloemtiarana,Thak & Siu Ling Corbitt , Bradley G & Nancy S Dekar, Patricia A 881 Taughannock Blvd 907 Taughannock Blvd 879 Taughannock Blvd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Dwyer, Thomas Gates , Robert E Gillespie , Shawn M 1935 Plugas Ave 885 Taughannock Blvd 881 1 /2 Taughannock Blvd Palo Alto, CA 94303 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Holochuck Homes LLC Howell, Bonnie Linda J Waymire 7 Brightside Ave 883 Taughannock Blvd 34439 Iris Cir East Northport, NY 11731 Ithaca, NY 14850 Philomath , OR 97370 Mathers , Bonnie J & Patterson , Marilyn N Y S Electric & Gas Corp Attn : Utility Schaye , Adam R Greenwald , Carolyn 909 Taughannock Blvd Shared Services B Ithaca, NY 14850 70 Farm View Dr Freeport 59 Wedgewood Dr is New Gloucester, ME 04260 Ithaca, NY 14850 Terry, Robert E Ufford , Curtis J & Amanda Wentzel , Richard C 107 Worth St 147 Honness Ln 11 Greenridge Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Clifton Park, NY 12065 Wien , Hans Christian 913 Taughannock Blvd Ithaca, NY 14850 Anderson , Susan Blankinship , Carmen Cary, Mikel & Susan 220 Bundy Rd 222 Bundy Rd 218 Bundy Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 George & Adrienne Posner Trust Palmer, Miriam L Poole, Robert J & Julie A George&Adrienne Posner , Trustee 100 Graham Rd Apt 9H 226 Bundy Rd *212 Bundy Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Slaght, Charles & Kristine K 216 Bundy Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Becker, Alexis Francis Bennett , Linda H Chacona, Maria O Box 25 305 Sunnyview Ln 321 Sunnyview Ln uilderland , NY 12084 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Cuddy, Michael J Jr Deborah Allen Revoc Trust Deborah Dhas , Vijaypaul 116 Terraceview Dr Allen , Trustee 315 Sunnyview Ln Ithaca, NY 14850 201 Westview Ln Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Engelmore , Anthony & Susan Galik , Richard & Candace Gruman , Charles & Cynthia 128 Westview Ln 126 Westview Ln 119 Terraceview Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Jayne, Diana Kessler, Andre Klee , Robert L 206 Westview Ln 203 Westview Ln 204 Westview Ln Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Larin , Helene M Lee, Kyusoon & Oh , Hyesook Lewis, Ian Van Dyke 317 Sunnyview Ln 307 Sunnyview Ln 115 Terraceview Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Light, Laverne Melski, David G Molnar, Andrew & Skweir, Marie 205 Westview Ln 122 Terraceview Dr 309 Sunnyview Ln Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Monroe, Jonathan B Olson , Todd & Lesky, Iva Omanovic , Vildan & Rada 114 Terraceview Dr 127 Westview Ln 124 Terraceview Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Sampson , Randy Learman , April Schuepbach , Sam Delay, Julie Sox, Erica M 125 Terraceview Dr 121 Terraceview Dr 120 Terraceview Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 The M& D Queen Revoc Trust M & D Thomas , Monica C Thompson , Steven R & Miriam A Queen , Trustees 202 Westview Ln 313 Sunnyview Ln 117 Terraceview Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 G Tompkins County IDA Attn : Ithacare Center Sery Co 1 Bella Vista Dr Ithaca, NY 14850 TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I , Paulette Terwilliger , being duly sworn , say that I a Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official newspaper, Ithaca Journal: ADVERTISEMENT : PUBLIC HEARING TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY , May 18 , 2009 7 : 00 P . M . Dated : May 8 , 2009 Published : May 11 , 2009 Location of Sign Board Used for Posting : Town Clerk' s Office 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca , NY 14850 Date of Posting : Monday, May 11 , 2009 Date of Publication : Monday , May 11 , 2009 Paulette Terwilliger Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA) Sworn to and subscribed before me this t day ofh4priT' 009 . I rukufj Notary Public CARRIE Notary Public, State of ew York No . 01 WH6052877 Commission Expires December 26, b IL Legals y oso' .j Section 270-29 D( of the Town of Ithaca Pode per. f milting an additional ac-' i cessory building, which I would exceed the aggre- I f gate square , footage al- f lowed. Accessory building JI I would be located at 218 Bundy Road, Tax Parcel f #24:5-10. 31 Agricultural j Zone (AG) . APPEAL of ' David 1 Melski, Owner/Appellant, requesting a height varian- ces from the . requirements j I of. Chapter 270 Article t XXVIII; Section 270-233 to • ' allow, an existing 7.5' i fencet to remain at 122 Te rraceview Dr:, Tax Par- ccel #58 :2-39. 361 , Medi- um Density Residential i( (MDR) Zone. i APPEAL of Pamela John- ,I ston, Owner/Apppellant, 901 Taughonnock Blvd., tt Tax Parcel #25:12-41 ` 1 , j requesting on interprets- t---- tion and possible modifica- j TOWN OF ITHACA tion of a variance granted i I ZONING BOARD 'on December 15, 1993 OF APPEALS ' by the Town of Ithaca Zon- I NOTICE OF ng Board of Appeals per- PUBLIC HEARINGS milting the alteration of ex- 'E MONDAY, isting decks and moving of .I j May 18, 2009 exterior walls to form more 7:00 P.M. habitable space. House is located in a Lakefront Resi- 1 By direction of the Chair- dential (LR) Zone. Plain of the Zoning Board / of Appeals NOTICE IS Said Zoning Board of HEREBY GIVEN that Public Appeals will hear all per- j Hearings will be held by sons in support of • such the Zoning Board of Ap- .matters or objections there- peals of the Town of Ithaca to. Assistance will be pro- on Monda May 18, vided for individuals with 2009, in Town Hall, 215 special needs, upon re- North Tioga Street, Tioga quest. Such requests Street Entrance, Ithaca, should be made not less NY, COMMENCING AT than 48 hours prior to the 7:00 P.M., on the follow- public hearings: in g matters: Bruce W. Bates ' APPEAL of Mikel Carey, Director of Owner /Appellant, re- .Code Enforcement restingeon area variance . - 607-273 1783 fm the requirements of, Dated: May 8, 2009 f `Chapter 270, Article VI, Published: May 11 , 2009 „ i f FILE Wq DATE ` ® Town of Ithaca ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 18, 2009 7 : 00 p . m . Board Members Present : Kirk Sigel , Chair; Ron Krantz , Jim Niefer , David Mountin and Susan Mann , Members ; Harry Ellsworth , excused Staff Present : Bruce W . Bates , Director of Code Enforcement , Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town , Paulette Terwilliger , Deputy Town Clerk Chairman Sigel opened the meeting at 7 : 03 p . m . and stated the appeals would be taken in the order listed on the public hearing notice . As Alternate , Susan Mann will vote in Harry Ellsworth ' s absence . APPEAL of Mikel Cary, Owner /Appellant, requesting an area variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article VI , Section 270=29 ( D) of the Town of Ithaca Code permitting an additional accessory building , which would exceed the aggregate square footage allowed . Accessory building would be located at 218 Bundy Road , Tax Parcel #24.=5-10 .31 Agricultural Zone (AG ) . ® Mikel Cary, Owner and Mary Russell , Attorney/Agent Mr. Cary gave a brief description of his plan for the accessory building and his uses for it. Questions from the Board regarding its height , uses and setting were answered with no issues revealed . The Board was concerned about business uses or rental uses and Mr . Cary assured the Board the building is strictly for his use . He plans on storing his Harley Davidson collection there and his lawn maintenance equipment there . The other buildings on his lot which cause him to exceed the limit include a peacock pen and a small shed . The Board noted that during a site visit , the property is very well kept , and the structure would be well screened from the road due to the layout and size of the property . They also noted that there were no concerns expressed by any neighbors and in fact there were many letters of support submitted by the applicant . There was some discussion on the 1 , 500 sqft restriction imposed by the Code . Chairman Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 13 . There was no one wishing to address the Board and the public hearing was closed . ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 - 014 Area Variance Mikel Cary 218 Bundy Rd Tax Parcel No. 24. -5-10. 31 ® May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by James Niefer. ZBA 5 - 18-2009 Pg 2 dah RESOLVED , that this Board grant the appeal of Mikel Carey , requesting an area variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article VI , Section 270-29 ( D ) of the Town of Ithaca Code permitting an additional accessory building , which would exceed the aggregate square footage allowed . Accessory building will be located at 218 Bundy Road , Tax Parcel #24 . -5- 10 . 31 Agricultural Zone (AG ) . CONDITIONS : 1 . That the building be built as indicated on the plans submitted by the Applicant to this Board , and 2 . That no additional accessory buildings be built on this property without approval by this Board , and 3 . That the building be no closer to the side lot line than 85 feet and no closer to the front lot line than 110 feet , and 4 . That there be no rental of any of the space in the building FINDINGS : The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community , specifically ; 1 . . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve can not be met by any other means feasible given that the applicant has a large number of motorcycles and other vehicles which he wishes to store inside , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that this is a largely agricultural district and that the property is very well screened from the road and from neighbors , and 3 . That while the request is substantial , approximately doubling the allowed square footage of accessory buildings in this district; that nevertheless the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That this will be the fourth accessory building allowed on the property . 6 . Again , that while the alleged difficulty is self-created , that the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . ZBA 5- 18-2009 Pg 3 ® APPEAL of David Melski , Owner/Appellant, requesting a height variances from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article XXVIII , Section 270=223 to allow an existing 7 . 5 ' fence to remain at 122 Terraceview Dr. , Tax Parcel #58 .-2-39. 361 , Medium Density Residential ( MDR) Zone. David Melski , Owner and Amy Gale, immediate neighbor in duplex Mr . Melski gave a brief explanation stating that the fence has been in existence for many years . Ms . Gale stated that she loves the fence and wants it to stay . The Board had no questions or issues to discuss . Chairman Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 13 . There was no one wishing to address the Board and the public hearing was closed . ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 = 015 Area Variance David Melski 218 Bundy Rd Tax Parcel No. 24.=5-10. 31 May 185 2009 ® MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz . RESOLVED , that this Board grant the appeal of David Melski , requesting a height variances from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article XXVIII , Section 270-223 to allow an existing 7 . 5 ' fence to remain at 122 Terraceview Dr. , Tax Parcel #58 . -2-39 . 361 , Medium Density Residential ( MDR) Zone . CONDITIONS : 1 . That the fence remain at its current height, length , and location without any further approval from this Board FINDINGS : The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community , specifically; 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve can not be met by any other means feasible given that the fence provides privacy from the adjacent duplex and other approaches to creating privacy , such as shrubs , would encroach on the yard and not provide the same privacy , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the fence has existed in its current form for over 10 years and many other properties in the subdivision have fences of similar design and height , and ZBA 5 - 18-2009 Pg 4 ® 3 . The request is not substantial , given that many neighboring houses seem to have fences of similar height , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That the alleged difficulty was not self-created as it has been at its current height since the property was built in 1987 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer , Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . APPEAL of Pamela Johnston , Owner/Appellant, 901 Taughannock Blvd . , Tax Parcel #25 .-241 . 1 , requesting an interpretation and possible modification of a variance granted on December 15 , 1993 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals permitting the alteration of existing decks and moving of exterior walls to form more habitable space. House is located in a Lakefront Residential ( LR) Zone. Pamela Johnston , Owner ; Ray Schlather, Attorney ; Peter Novelli , Structural Engineer and Richard Artemini , Architect Mr. Schlather gave an overview stating that Susan Brock and he had not been able to agree whether a variance was needed at all so they agreed to come before the Board to ask for an interpretation . A detailed packet was provided at submission of the appearance application . A variance was granted in 1993 based on a model which they brought for display . The variance was for a height variance of 52 feet due to the slope of the topography . Mr . Schlather quoted the variance terminology and conditions . His argument is that the variance refers to the height variance only . He passed out a memo quoting case law that speak to his position that once a Board grants a variance , if there is any further activity , another variance is not needed unless you are extending or enlarging the non -conformity . He felt an additional variance would only be needed if they were going to increase the height of the building . He noted that the footprint was not going to change at all . The only change is to fill in existing decks on the middle level and to make the bottom level flush and closed in by glass . No alteration of the footprint of the building . He discussed his case law notes . He is asking for an interpretation that a variance is not needed because the non -conformity is not being extended . But, if a variance is needed , he is asking for a variance that would allow the changes requested , those being the enclosure of the decks . He also noted that the objection stated in an email sent to the Board is from a neighbor who does not live there and only visits once a year for a week or two . He stated that Ms . Johnston is well aware that this is a single family residential area and has no intention of using it as anything but. ZBA 5 - 18-2009 Pg 5 ® Chairman Sigel asked if the cases cited were based on cases where a variance was granted prior or just legally non -conforming . Mr. Schlather did not know the answer , he thought they were unclear but the principle was the same . Chairman Sigel thought the difference in this case is the previous Board specifically saying "this variance is permitted as presented in the appellants' plans and in the scale model . " Putting in that condition is something that the present Board does all the time . The condition is there so that instead of trying to figure out all of the possibilities that could change , the condition means and states that the variance is granted if you do what you say you are doing as presented and if you want to change it , then you need a further variance . If that condition had not been there , then a variance would not be needed . The Board uses that condition as a "catchall " . Mr . Schlather went on to argue the semantics of "this variance" . He went on to note that the rest of the conditions refer to plantings which are now all mature and he had submitted pictures to illustrate it . Chairman Sigel stated that he understood his argument but believed the Board ' s intent was not to limit the conditions to strictly the height , given his experience on the Board and how variances are granted . Mr. Schlather thought imposing those conditions on a height variance would be exceeding the Board ' s jurisdiction . Ms . Brock disagreed , saying a Board can set reasonable conditions and stating that a project must be built as presented is very reasonable . Chairman Sigel added the example that if you wanted a ® variance for 51 feet , you couldn ' t come to the Board and say " I want to build something that is 51 feet high and the Board asks what does it look like ? And you say , well I don 't know yet, I just want 51 feet. " The variance is for a particular plan , a portion of which is 51 feet taking into consideration the design of the house and other factors . That is what the Board does and did . A specific project was or is presented and that is the basis for a variance . Mr. Schlather argued that a lot of the reason for the variance being granted is due to topography and the placement of the house is what mattered , not the details . He went back to the "this" meaning the height variance and also reminded the Board that the previous owner would not have even needed a variance to build the house except for the height because of the topography . The changes being made now make no change to the aesthetics of the house and the minutes show that they were concerned about the height and landscaping not being tied back to this plan . Chairman Sigel completely disagreed . He thought the reasoning Mr. Schlather was giving went toward the granting of a modification but not the need for a modification . Susan Brock explained the action in front of the Board . The appellant is appealing the decision of the Interpretation Officer who made the determination that a variance was needed , then , if a variance is determined to be needed , that appeal for a variance is also in front of the Board . The Board decided that a variance modifying the existing variance was needed and made the following interpretation . ZBA 5 - 18-2009 Pg 6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 = 016 Interpretation 901 Taughannock Blvd Tax Parcel No . 25 .=2-41 A May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Susan Mann , seconded by David Mountin . RESOLVED that this Board ' s interpretation in regard to the appeal of Pamela Johnston , that the variance was approved based on the plans as submitted ; the plans are now changing , therefore a modification to the previously granted 1993 variance is necessary . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . The Board now discussed the request of a modification of an existing variance . ® Chairman Sigel asked the appellants what exactly they were planning on doing . Mr. Novelli , Ms . Johnston and Mr. Schlather described the renovations using the model . There are two decks , one at mid - level and one at lower- level . They propose to extend the lower deck out to match the mid - level and enclose all or portions of the decks with glass . This would not extend the footprint as the upper level establishes the footprint. Discussion followed with more explanations using the model . Ms . Johnston stated that basically she wants to enclose the lower level to look very similar to the mid - level and extend the mid - level to the supports and enclose portions of that mid - level also , all with glass . Bruce Bates asked if they were expanding the square footage of the deck. Ms . Johnston responded that yes , they were extending the deck to the exterior posts/pillars . Currently they are not enclosed and the plan is to enclose them . There was some discussion about "dropping" the floor. Mr . Schlather directed the Board ' s attention to Photograph #7 and explained that the bumping out of the decks will mirror this section , the footprints will mirror each other but not all of the mid - level deck will be enclosed . The bottom of the lower- level deck will be brought down to ground level with interior steps to get from the interior to the low- level deck with entry available from ground level . Ms . Mann asked about the request received to adjourn the appeal to allow neighbors to comment on it . Chairman Sigel refereed to the letter received by the Board in which a neighbor was upset he was not notified in a timely manner. He thought that the notification was done as a courtesy , not as a legality. Bruce Bates explained that the 5 day notice in the newspaper and the orange signage were the only two things required by law . Chairman Sigel stated that the sign was posted when he went to the site Friday and he could see it very clearly . Chairman Sigel noted that there was no assurance that ZBA 5 - 18-2009 Pg 7 they would attend if the Board did wait, given that they live out of town . He thought it would not be fair to delay . A letter was sent out the Wednesday prior to the meeting , as a courtesy . Ms . Mann asked if Susan Brock had any comments . Ms . Brock responded that the Board had settled the matter of whether a variance was needed in a way she was comfortable with . Ms . Mann asked about the cited case law and Ms . Brock stated that it was her opinion that the case law dealt with previously non -conforming structures or uses , meaning they were allowed and at some point a zoning ordinance was enacted or amended and made that structure or use non -conforming and Town laws have specific rules for when you can or cannot expand legally prior non -conforming uses or structures . This case is a prior variance not a prior non -conforming use . Chairman Sigel stated that in his opinion , given that the house is there and the vegetative screening has been effective , particularly in screening the lower and mid - level portions of the house where the modifications are proposed , that it is a minor impact. Ms . Mann agreed that enclosing the porches is not changing the plans too much and the other Board members agreed . Chairman Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 13 . There was no one wishing to address the Board and the public hearing was closed . The resolution was crafted with Bruce Bates requesting that the modifications be built as submitted and with final approval by his department . Some discussion followed with the agreement that any updates must meet the requirements of the Building Department . Mr. Schlather interjected that some structural changes have already been started and he wanted to make sure there would be no issues with semantics . Chairman Sigel considered that to be part of the " updating and clarifying of the plans as per building department requirements . " 3 ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 = 017 Area Variance Modification 901 Taughannock Blvd Tax Parcel No . 25.=2-41 . 1 May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by David Mountin . Resolved that this Board grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston , 901 Taughannock Blvd . , Tax Parcel #25 . -2 -41 . 1 , requesting a modification of a variance granted on December 15 , 1993 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals permitting the alteration of existing decks and moving of exterior walls to form more habitable space . The house is located in a Lakefront Residential ( LR) Zone . ZBA 5 - 18-2009 Pg 8 CONDITIONS : 1 . Modifications to be built as indicated on the plans submitted to this Board , dated July 21 , 2008 , as may be updated to conform to Building Department requirements , and 2 . All other conditions in the December 15 , 1993 variance remain in force . FINDINGS : The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community , specifically ; 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve , which is to create more interior usable space , can not be met by any other means feasible , and 2 . That an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties will not occur given that this is a relatively minor change to the house and the house itself has been there since 1993 , and the house is well screened towards property both to the north and the south by substantial mature vegetation and this screening also provides significant screening from the east or lakeside , and the building footprint will not increase , and 3 . The request is not substantial , given that it is essentially enclosing what is now open space , but still part of the house footprint , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That while the alleged difficulty is self-created , nevertheless , the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 8 : 33 p . m . Kirk Sigel , Chairman FILE M & DATE �- ® ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 - 014 Area Variance Mikel Cary 218 Bundy Rd Tax Parcel No. 24 .-5-10. 31 May 18, 2009 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by James Niefer. RESOLVED , that this Board grant the appeal of Mikel Carey , requesting an area variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article VI , Section 270-29 ( D) of the Town of Ithaca Code permitting an additional accessory building , which would exceed the aggregate square footage allowed . Accessory building will be located at 218 Bundy Road , Tax Parcel #24 . -5 - 10 . 31 Agricultural Zone (AG ) . CONDITIONS : 1 . That the building be built as indicated on the plans submitted by the Applicant to this Board , and 2 . That no additional accessory buildings be built on this property without approval by this Board , and 3 . That the building be no closer to the side lot line than 85 feet and no closer to the ® front lot line than 110 feet , and 4 . That there be no rental of any of the space in the building FINDINGS The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community , specifically ; 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve can not be met by any other means feasible given that the applicant has a large number of motorcycles and other vehicles which he wishes to store inside , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that this is a largely agricultural district and that the property is very well screened from the road and from neighbors , and 3 . That while the request is substantial , approximately doubling the allowed square footage of accessory buildings in this district ; that nevertheless the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community, and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That this will be the fourth accessory building allowed on the property . 9 _= � = J �r� 6 . Again , that while the alleged difficulty is self-created , that the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously, STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regul meeting on the 18th day of May, 2009 . Deputy Town Clerk • p Town of Ithaca FILE f�WI DATE =�La bW I . ® ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 - 015 Area Variance David Melski 218 Bundy Rd Tax Parcel No. 24 . =5- 10 . 31 May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz . RESOLVED , that this Board grant the appeal of David Melski , requesting a height variances from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article XXVIII , Section 270-223 to allow an existing 7 . 5 ' fence to remain at 122 Terraceview Dr. , Tax Parcel #58 . -2 -39 . 361 , Medium Density Residential ( MDR) Zone . CONDITIONS : 1 . That the fence remain at its current height , length , and location without any further approval from this Board FINDINGS : The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community , specifically ; 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve can not be met by any other means feasible given that the fence provides privacy from the adjacent duplex and other approaches to creating privacy , such as shrubs , would encroach on the yard and not provide the same privacy , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the fence has existed in its current form for over 10 years and many other properties in the subdivision have fences of similar design and height , and 3 . The request is not substantial , given that many neighboring houses seem to have fences of similar height , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That the alleged difficulty was not self-created as it has been at its current height since the property was built in 1987 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA : I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York , do hereby certify that the resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithac t a regular meeting on the 18th day of May , 2009 . lei Z AAJ k I Depu y Town Clerk Town of Ithaca qP FILE DATE ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 - 015 Area Variance David Melski 218 Bundy Rd Tax Parcel No. 24.-5-10 . 31 May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz . e VED , that this Board grant the appeal of David Melski , requesting a ht varia ces from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article XXVIII , Section -0 to allow an existing 7 . 5 ' fence to remain at 122 Terraceview Dr. , Tax pel #58-2-39. 361 , Medium Density Residential ( MDR ) Zone . CONDITIONS : Plot r, 1 . That the fence remain at its current height, length , and location without any further approval from this Board FINDINGS : ® The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community, specifically ; 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve can not be met by any other means feasible given that the fence provides privacy from the adjacent duplex and other approaches to creating privacy , such as shrubs , would encroach on the yard and not provide the same privacy , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the fence has existed in its current form for over 10 years and many other properties in the subdivision have fences of similar design and height , and 3 . The request is not substantial , given that many neighboring houses seem to have fences of similar height , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That the alleged difficulty was not self-created as it has been at its current height since the property was built in 1987 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA: I , , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting on the 18tH day of May, 2009 . "7T Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca FILE DATE ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 = 016 Interpretation 901 Taughannock Blvd Tax Parcel No. 25 .=2-41 A May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Susan Mann , seconded by David Mountin . RESOLVED that this Board ' s interpretation in regard to the appeal of Pamela Johnston , that the variance was approved based on the plans as submitted ; the plans are now changing , therefore a modification to the previously granted 1993 variance is necessary . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York , do hereby certify that the resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regula meeting on the 18th day of May , 2009 . Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca FILE 1 �_� DATE 61"'V24. ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2009 - 017 Area Variance Modification 901 Taughannock Blvd Tax Parcel No . 25. -2-41 . 1 May 18 , 2009 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by David Mountin . Resolved that this Board grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston , 901 Taughannock Blvd . , Tax Parcel #25 . -2 -41 . 1 , requesting a modification of a variance granted on December 15 , 1993 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals permitting the alteration of existing decks and moving of exterior walls to form more habitable space . The house is located in a Lakefront Residential ( LR ) Zone . CONDITIONS : 1 . Modifications to be built as indicated on the plans submitted to this Board , dated July 21 , 2008 , as may be updated to conform to Building Department requirements , and 2 . All other conditions in the December 15 , 1993 variance remain in force . FINDINGS : The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety and welfare of the community , specifically ; 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve , which is to create more interior usable space , can not be met by any other means feasible , and 2 . That an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties will . not occur given that this is a relatively minor change to the house and the house itself has been there since 1993 , and the house is well screened towards property both to the north and the south by substantial mature vegetation and this screening also provides significant screening from the east or lakeside , and the building footprint will not increase , and 3 . The request is not substantial , given that it is essentially enclosing what is now open space , but still part of the house footprint , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical and environmental effects , and 5 . That while the alleged difficulty is self-created , nevertheless , the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Mountin and Mann NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithac t a regular meeting on the 18th day of May, 2009 . Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca I