Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2010-07-19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, JULY 19 , 2010 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca 7 : 00 P . M . Appeal of Mark Brockway , owner, Town of Ithaca , Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Section 270-66 " Permitted Principal Uses" of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an existing garage on a lot without a principal dwelling unit located at 166 Ridgecrest Rd , Tax Parcel #45 . - 1 -21 . 2 , Medium Density Residential , MDR . Appeal of Ithaca College , owner, Integrated Acquisition & Development, Agent , requesting an interpretation to determine if a use variance is needed by Ithaca College to allow Circle Apartments to use an Ithaca College Parking lot located on a different tax parcel and to allow those parking spaces to be included in Circle Apartments' parking requirements . If so , then Ithaca College requests a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Section 270-68A . The Agent is also requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Section 270-227A( h ) "Off Lot Parking" , Section 270- 2276 (4) " Rear Yard Parking" , Section 270- 111 "Additional Special Requirements" for set back reductions , and modification of Zoning Board of Appeals Resolution No . 2002-014 to allow off site parking and to increase the occupancy from 750 to 1030 persons , located at 1033 Danby Rd , Tax Parcel Numbers 43 . - 1 -2 . 2 , 43 . - 1 -2 . 3 , and 41 . - 1 -30 . 2 , Multiple Residence , MR , and Medium Density Residential , MDR . Assistance will be provided for individuals with special needs , upon request ; 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 : July 7 , 2010 Published : July 9 , 2010 FILE DATE � 7 z / �. ® ZONING BOARD of APPEALS Monday, July 19, 2010 7 : 00 p . m . Present : Kirk Sigel , Chair; Board Members : Harry Ellsworth , Ron Krantz , and James Niefer . Excused : Dave Mountin , Board Member. Staff : Bruce Bates , Director of Code Enforcement; Carrie Coates Whitmore , Deputy Town Clerk ; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town . Others : Jean and Mark Brockway , Suzanne Fullagar, Franklin Sharp , Rick Couture , Herman Sieverding . Call to Order Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7 : 03 p . m . and read the appeals before the board . Appeal of Mark Brockway, owner, Town of Ithaca, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270-66 " Permitted Principal Uses" of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an existing garage on a lot without a principal dwelling unit located at 166 Ridgecrest Rd, Tax Parcel #45 .-1 -21 . 2, Medium Density Residential , MDR. Mr, Mark Brockway introduced himself to the Board and Chairperson Sigel briefly reviewed the appeal . Chairperson Sigel noted that Mr. Brockway built the garage in 1990 and recently discovered when he applied for a building permit to reroof the garage that the property was not in compliance with Town Code . Mr. Brockway expressed his frustration with having to go before the Board for a variance in order to reroof his garage . Chairperson Sigel sympathized but explained that a mistake by a government official is not grounds for automatically being granted an exemption . Mr. Brockway understood . He added that there is another property down the road from him under the same exact circumstances . Chairperson Sigel solicited comments from the Board . Mr. Krantz commented that it would be inappropriate to let the roof cave in . Chairperson Sigel noted that it is not so much about the roof , but bringing the property into compliance . Chairperson Sigel asked why Mr. Brockway was not interested in consolidating the parcels . Mr . Brockway gave several reasons for not consolidating— 1 ) they bought the property as two separate parcels and it was an incentive for them to ® buy the properties , 2) they have two children and they don 't know what they may or may not do with either property at a later date , and 3) they have 7 cars and Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 ® Approved they will not be able to take their cars with them when they move into a retirement home years down the road . Chairperson Sigel explained that the Board is in a difficult position because the use variance criteria are very strict . He wasn' t sure how the Board could craft justification for the use variance criteria . Chairperson Sigel thought the board could argue that the hardship was not self- created even though the applicant is supposed to fully understand the Zoning Ordinance . It could also be argued that it wasn ' t self-created . Chairperson Sigel added that the variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood , but it would be more difficult to meet the financial hardship criterion . Mr. Brockway responded that it would be a financial hardship for him to have to pay to store his vehicles offsite . Chairperson Sigel suggested that a narrower view of financial hardship could focus on that point . Attorney Brock explained that the financial hardship criteria applies for all permitted uses of the property . It doesn ' t focus on what it would cost Mr. Brockway to move his cars ; it is supposed to focus on the parcel in question and whether the applicant can make a reasonable return if it were to be used for any ® of the permitted uses . She said that the Board would have to find that the situation was such that any of the permitted uses would not give him a reasonable return . Chairperson Sigel asked the Board for their opinions regarding the proposed use variance . Board members were in favor of granting a variance and thought that they needed to figure out how to grant it. Mr. Brockway commented that the Town has a right-of-way across the property to access the water tank. He also put the driveway to the garage over the right- of-way for easier access to the tank . Chairperson Sigel suggested that if the variance is granted , then the board should consider a condition that the variance only be valid for as long as the lots are owned by the same entity . The lots appear in every way to be one lot. Mr. Brockway commented that if he does move to a retirement home he wants to be able to keep the garage , but he understood if that' s not possible at this point. Attorney Brock stated that the Board may feel that fairness and equity means that the variance should be granted . She researched the issue# and found that the courts are very hard lined in saying that a municipality still needs to enforce its zoning as it is even if the building permit was issued and the applicant relied on it . Once the error is discovered , the municipality needs to go ahead and ® enforce the zoning as it exists . She went on to say that the courts do not carve out an exception and say because fairness and equity are on the side of the applicant that it is okay to let them maintain a structure . Attorney Brock gave Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 Approved several examples of court cases where municipalities have ordered demolition of structures and the courts have upheld the decision . The court' s rationale is that the applicant should have constructive knowledge , that the applicant should have known and cannot rely on the permit since it was illegally issued . It is a different result if the permit had been legally issued in the first place and the applicant relied on it, spent a lot of money, constructed something and then the zoning changed . Environmental Review The Board reviewed Part II of the environmental assessment form . Chairperson Sigel then moved to make a negative determination of environmental significance based upon the information in the SEQR Part I form and for the reasons stated in Part II prepared by Town Staff. Mr. Ellsworth seconded . Vote—carried unanimously . ZB RESOLUTION 2010-016: Environmental Assessment, Use Variance, Mark Brockway, 166 Rid_gecrest Rd, Tax Parcel No. 45. 441 .2 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, Seconded by Harry Ellsworth. ® RESOLVED, that the Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance based upon the information in the SEOR Part 1 form and for the reasons stated in Part 11 prepared by Town Staff. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: None. Motion was carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 24 p . m . and invited the public to address the Board . Frank Sharpe appeared before board and expressed support for the appeal . He asked about the grandfather provision and whether or not it applied to Mr. Brockway , Attorney Brock explained that there is a grandfather provision , but it doesn ' t apply where a use was never permitted in the first place , which is the problem before the Board . She went on to explain that the grandfather provision applies when a use is permitted by zoning , but then is no longer permitted due to a zoning change . ® Suzanne Fullagar appeared before the Board and also expressed support for the appeal . She referred to another property in the neighborhood with a similar situation . She commented that Mr. Brockway keeps the property immaculate . Zoning Board of Appeals July 19 , 2010 ® Approved Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 7 : 27 p . m . Chairperson Sigel moved to grant the appeal finding that the criteria of a use variance had been met and with the condition that the variance is only valid for as long as both parcels 45 . - 1 -21 . 2 and the 45 . 1 -21 . 1 are owned by the same owner or owners . Mr. Ellsworth seconded . Vote—carried unanimously . ZB RESOLUTION 2010=017. Use Variance, Mark Brockway, 166 Ridgecrest Rd. Tax Parcel No. 45. m 1 -21 .2 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, Seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this Board grants the appeal of Mark Brockway, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270-66 "Permitted Principal Uses" of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an existing garage on a lot without a principal dwelling unit located at 166 Ridgecrest Rd, Tax Parcel No. 45. 4 -21 . 2, Medium Density Residential Zone, based upon the following: ® Findings: The applicant has demonstrated an unnecessary hardship, specifically: 1 . That the applicant cannot realize a reasonable return and would experience financial hardship without the variance because the garage is already built based on an erroneously issued building permit and the cost to demolish the garage plus the added cost for the applicant to house his vehicles off site would impose an unreasonable financial hardship on the applicant, 2. That the alleged hardship is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood given the fact that it is rare for a building permit to be erroneously issued and a substantial portion of the neighborhood does not have two lots adjacent to each other owned by the same owner, 3. That the requested variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood given the fact that the two lots from all appearances appear as one lot given the way that they are landscaped and maintained and the fact that the garage is setback further from the road than the house next to it, ® 4. That the alleged hardship was not self-created given that the applicant was erroneously issued a building permit approximately 19 years ago to build a garage. Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 Approved Condition: That this variance is only valid so long as both lots, 45. 4 -21 . 2 and 45. - 1 -21 . 1 , are owned by the same owner or owners. At such time that the lots are not owned by the same owner or owners, the 45. - 1 -21 . 2 lot must be brought into compliance by either the demolition of the garage or the building of a valid principle use on the property. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: None. Motion was carried unanimously. Appeal of Ithaca College, owner, Integrated Acquisition & Development, Agent, requesting an interpretation to determine if a use variance is needed by Ithaca College to allow Circle Apartments to use an Ithaca College Parking lot located on a different tax parcel and to allow those parking ® spaces to be included in Circle Apartments ' parking requirements. If so, then Ithaca College requests a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270=68A. The Agent is also requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270-227A( h) " Off Lot Parking " , Section 270=227B(4) " Rear Yard Parking" , Section 270= 111 " Additional Special Requirements" for set back reductions, and modification of Zoning Board of Appeals Resolution No. 2002=014 to allow off site parking and to increase the occupancy from 750 to 1030 persons, located at 1033 Danby Rd , Tax Parcel Numbers 43 .- 1 -2 .2, 43.- 1 -2 .3 , and 41 . -1 -30 . 2, Multiple Residence, MR , and Medium Density Residential , MDR . Mr . Herman Sieverding and Mr. Rick Couture introduced themselves to the Board . Mr. Sieverding announced that Ithaca College has purchased the Circle Apartments property since the variance materials were submitted . He was not sure what impact that would have on some of the requested variances . Chairperson Sigel suggested that the Board discuss the requested interpretation first because he agreed that it may change whether or not a variance is needed . He noted that the documentation explains that the parking lot next to Circle Apartments will be designated as a Red Parking lot. Mr. Couture explained that a Red Parking lot is student parking ; the parking lot would no longer be just for Circle Apartments residents . Mr. Sieverding added that the apartments do not require additional parking spaces ; it is convenience parking and not zoning required parking . Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 Approved Attorney Brock explained that the reason this needed to come before the board was because the parking would be an accessory use to the apartments on a separate parcel , but that was no longer the case . Chairperson Sigel asked the board if they were comfortable with making the determination that a variance was not needed since the parking lot was owned by Ithaca College even though it has a different tax parcel number . Chairperson Sigel moved that the board determines that the proposed parking for the current College Circle proposal on tax parcel no . 41 . - 1 -30 . 1 does not require a use variance because Ithaca College owns the parcel and the parking lot is designated as student parking . ZB RESOLUTION 2010-018: Interpretation, Ithaca College, 1033 Danby Rd. Tax Parcel No. 41 . = 1 -30.2, 43. 44. 3 and 43. 44.2 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, Seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this Board makes the determination that the parking proposed by the applicant for the current College Circle proposal located on 41 . 4 -30. 2 does not require a use variance based upon the following: 1 . Ithaca College owns lot 41 . 4 -30. 2 and the adjacent lots 43. - 1 -2. 3 and 43. - 1 -2. 2 for which the parking will be a partial benefit for, and 2. The parking lot will be designated for use by students regardless of where they are located on campus or off campus, and not just for students that are located on the adjacent College Circle property. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: None. Motion was carried unanimously. Mr. Sieverding explained that the College was requesting a modification to the variance to allow the maximum occupancy of the apartments to be increased to 1030 students . He then gave an overview of the proposed site plan pointing out the new buildings . He added that the additional beds at the apartments will free up beds on campus for freshmen . Mr. Sieverding pointed out several benefits of the project—the site is already zoned multiple residence , it' s being done in a manner that in -fills and takes advantage of space between buildings , uses a ® heavy investment in infrastructure , and the college' s residents program . Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 ® Approved Mr. Sieverding directed the board ' s attention to their packet and noted that page 3 attempted to address the criteria the board must consider in making their decision . He proceeded to review page 3 and how Ithaca College was meeting each of the criteria . Chairperson Sigel didn ' t remember the justification for the limitation on occupancy . Attorney Brock was not able to determine why the Planning Board was involved with limiting the occupancy when she read through the minutes of the Planning Board . She knew that the Zoning Board became involved because of zoning requirements limiting the number of unrelated persons in an apartment. Discussion continued regarding the proposed increase in occupancy and the Board was satisfied with building code requirements regulating the occupancy . Chairperson Sigel asked if the Board needed to conduct a SEQR review and Attorney Brock explained that the Planning Board review looked at SEQR , including potential impacts of Zoning Board actions . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing with regard to the proposed increase in occupancy at 8 : 02 p . m , and invited the public to address the Board . With no one interested , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 8 : 02 p . m . ® Chairperson Sigel moved to grant the appeal of Ithaca College requesting modification of ZB 2004-014 to allow an increase in occupancy from 750 persons to 1030 persons finding that all criteria of an area variance had been met , specifically listing how each criterion was satisfied . Mr. Ellsworth seconded . Vote—carried unanimously . ZB RESOLUTION 2010-019: Area Variance, Ithaca College, 1033 Danby Rd, Tax Parcel No. 43. = 1 -2. 3 and 43. 44.2 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, Seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this Board grants the appeal of Ithaca College requesting a modification of Zoning Board Resolution No. 2002-014 to allow an increase in occupancy from 750 persons to 1030 persons at 1033 Danby Rd, Tax Parcel Numbers 43. 4 -2. 2 and 43. 4 -2. 3 with the following: Findings: That the benefit to the applicant does out weigh any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, specifically: 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve cannot be achieved by ® any other means feasible to the applicant given that they already have a substantial investment in infrastructure in this location. This location would Zoning Board of Appeals July 19 , 2010 Approved appear to be the best location to add additional apartment housing for students, 2. That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that there are already a substantial number of apartment buildings in this area. Adding some additional units would not be expected to change the character of that area substantially, 3. That the request is not substantial given that their lot coverage areas and number of dwelling units per square foot will still be well under those allowed in a Multiple Residence Zone, 4. That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the Long Environmental Assessment Form, which was voted on by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in a coordinated review, 5. While the alleged difficulty is self-created given that the college is seeking this variance for one of their needs, that 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, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: None. Motion was carried unanimously. Mr. Krantz felt that the proposal should be considered a new project instead of a modification of an existing approval . Chairperson Sigel explained that it is considered a modification with regard to the Zoning Board because the request was for modification of a previous approval . Setbacks—Mr . Sieverding directed the Board ' s attention to pages 4-7 and explained the setback requirements . He said that the Code requires that when someone builds in the MR zone and that zone abuts a more restrictive residential zone , such as Low Density Residential , then the side yard setback of the more restrictive zone is doubled for anything built within the MR zone . He went to the site plan and pointed out the areas where this provision applies . Mr. Sieverding explained that the College tried to purchase vacant land abutting the Circle Apartments property in order to meet setback requirements , but the owner was not interested in selling . The owner, however, did send a letter to the Board in support of the variance request. Mr. Sieverding went on to describe the Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 Approved character of the surrounding properties . He said that there were a number of mitigating factors that suggest that the request is not unreasonable . Mr. Sieverding reviewed the required setbacks for each building and described whether or not the building met the setback. He pointed out that the restriction was designed to protect lower density areas from multiple residences . Mr. Sieverding then reviewed how the College felt they met the criteria for an area variance (described on pages 4-7 of the variance application materials) . Attorney Brock reminded the Board that they cannot use adjacent parcels in their justification for granting variance . Mr. Bates corrected that there is another MR zone on South Hill , just off of King Rd . Mr. Sieverding agreed , but noted it was not contiguous to College property . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 8 : 19 p . m . and invited the public to address the Board . There being no one , he closed the public hearing at 8 : 19 p . m . Chairperson Sigel moved to grant appeal of Ithaca College requesting a variance from section 270- 111 D , additional special requirements , finding that all criteria of an area variance had been met , specifically listing how each criterion was met and with the conditions that the buildings be built as shown on submitted plans and within the setbacks discussed . Mr. Krantz seconded . Vote—carried unanimously . ZB RESOLUTION 2010=020: Area Variance. Apartment Building Setbacks, Ithaca College, 1033 Danby Rd, Tax Parcel No. 43. = 1 -2.2 and 43. = 1 -2. 3 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, Seconded by Ron Krantz. RESOLVED, that this Board grants the appeal of Ithaca College requesting a variance from Section 270- 111 (0) Additional Special Requirements for setback reductions at 1033 Danby Rd, Tax Parcel Numbers 43. - 1 -2. 2 and 43. - 1 -2. 3, with the following: Conditions: 1 . That all of the proposed buildings that do not meet the required setbacks be built as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant to this Board, 2. That the building in Area B as identified on Sheet C002, submitted by the applicant, have a setback of no less than 30 feet, 3. That the buildings in Area A as identified on Sheet C002 have setbacks of no less than 30 feet, and Zoning Board of Appeals July 19 , 2010 ddlik Approved 4. That the building addition identified in Area C on Sheet C002 have a setback of no less than 20 feet. Findings: That this Board does find that the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, specifically: 1 . That while the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve may be possible through other means, what the applicant has proposed is reasonable and in keeping with the current development and has setbacks approximately equal to other buildings on the property, which were built under a previous zoning ordinance, 2. That an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or nearby properties will not take place given that the new construction is in character with the existing construction on the site, 3. That while the request is substantial, reducing the required buffers in two cases from 80 feet to 30 feet and in another location reducing the required buffer from 30 feet to 20 feet, that again since there are existing buildings on site with similar setbacks, that mitigates the substantialness of the request, 4. That there will not be adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared and voted on by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, 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, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: None. Motion was carried unanimously. Parking requirements—Mr. Sieverding explained that parking is not allowed within required setbacks in an MR zone and that occurs once on the site ( 19 parking spaces) . He thought that the impact of the variance was mitigated by the fact that Ithaca College now owns Circle Apartments . The parking is consistent with parking being developed on both sides of the property line . Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 Approved Chairperson Sigel asked if Section 270-227B (4) applied . Attorney Brock responded that variances were not needed for Section 270-227B (4) or 270- 227A( h ) . She thought that the Section 270- 111 ( D ) applies because it states that no structure shall be placed nearer to any residence zone than double the maximum distance of the side yard requirement of the adjoining zone and Town Code considers parking lots as structures . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 8 : 28 p . m . and invited the public to address the Board . There being no one , he closed the public hearing at 8 : 28 p . m . Chairperson Sigel moved to grant appeal of Ithaca College requesting a variance from section 270 - 111 D , additional special requirements , finding that all criteria of an area variance had been met , specifically listing how each criterion was met and with the condition that the parking lot be built as shown on submitted plans and within the setbacks discussed . Mr . Ellsworth seconded . Vote--carried unanimously . ZB RESOLUTION 2010-021 : Area Variance, Parking Lot Setbacks, Ithaca College, 1033 Danby Rd, Tax Parcel No. 43. - 1 -2.2 and 43. 44. 3 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, Seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this Board grants the appeal of Ithaca College requesting a variance from Section 270- 111 (D) Additional Special Requirements for setback reductions related to parking along the north side of 1033 Danby Road, Tax Parcel Numbers 43. 4 -2. 2 and 43. 4 -2. 3, Multiple Residence Zone, with the following: Condition: That the parking spaces be constructed as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant to this Board. Findings: That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, specifically: 1 . That while the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve may be possible through other means what the applicant has proposed is reasonable and in keeping with their overall plan for the property, 2. That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the properly that this parking area is encroaching on is also owned by the applicant, Zoning Board of Appeals July 19, 2010 Approved 3. That in this case the request is not substantial given that the property that this is encroaching on is also owned by the applicant, 4. That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, 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, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: None. Motion was carried unanimously. Attorney Brock asked about the programming of the apartments . Mr . Couture explained that the residential programs will continue in the apartments ; the apartments will be treated in the same manner as other on -campus housing . There was brief discussion regarding whether or not the apartments would come off the tax roll . Mr. Sieverding explained that there is currently a PILOT agreement in place and the College did not have plans to change it. He then suggested that the tax parcel number of the medium density residential zone is incorrect. Sheet C002 shows the parcel as 42 . - 1 - 13 . 2 . *" Mr . Bates reviewed tax maps after the meeting and determined the correct tax parcel number to be 41 . - 1 -30 . 2 . Other Business The Board discussed expiring terms and if there was anyone interested in becoming an alternate member. Mr. Bates informed the Board of an upcoming training opportunity this fall . Adjournment With no further business , Chairperson Sigel adjourned the meeting at 8 : 38 p . m . Kirk Sigel , Chairperson FILE DATE L ® ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010=016 Environmental Assessment Use Variance Mark Brockway 166 Ridgecrest Rd Tax Parcel No. 45 .- 1 -21 . 2 July 19 , 2010 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , Seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance based upon the information in the SEQR Part I form and for the reasons stated in Part II prepared by Town Staff . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . ® STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 19th day of July , 2010 . 1 c AV railyLl Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca FILE D AT E7A7 ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010-017 Use Variance Mark Brockway 166 Ridgecrest Rd Tax Parcel No. 45.=1 -21 . 2 July 19 , 2010 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , Seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that this Board grants the appeal of Mark Brockway , requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Section 270 -66 " Permitted Principal Uses" of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an existing garage on a lot without a principal dwelling unit located at 166 Ridgecrest Rd , Tax Parcel No . 45 . - 1 -21 . 2 , Medium Density Residential Zone , based upon the following : Findings : The applicant has demonstrated an unnecessary hardship , specifically: 1 . That the applicant cannot realize a reasonable return and would experience financial hardship without the variance because the garage is already built based on an erroneously issued building permit and the cost to demolish the garage plus the added cost for the applicant to house his vehicles off site would impose an unreasonable financial hardship on the applicant , 2 . That the alleged hardship is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood given the fact that it is rare for a building permit to be erroneously issued and a substantial portion of the neighborhood does not have two lots adjacent to each other owned by the same owner, 3 . That the requested variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood given the fact that the two lots from all appearances appear as one lot given the way that they are landscaped and maintained and the fact that the garage is setback further from the road than the house next to it, 4 . That the alleged hardship was not self-created given that the applicant was erroneously issued a building permit approximately 19 years ago to build a garage . Condition : That this variance is only valid so long as both lots , 45 . - 1 -21 . 2 and 45 . - 1 -21 . 1 , are owned by the same owner or owners . At such time that the lots are not owned by the same owner or owners , the 45 . - 1 -21 . 2 lot must be brought into compliance by either the demolition of the garage or the building of a valid principle use on the property . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 19th day of July, 2010 . Deputy Town-clerk Town of Ithaca FILE DATE ® ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010=018 44 Interpretation Ithaca College 1033 Danby Rd Tax Parcel No. 41 .- 1 -30 .2, 43 .- 1 -2 .3 and 43.-1 -2 . 2 July 19, 2010 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , Seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that this Board makes the determination that the parking proposed by the applicant for the current College Circle proposal located on 41 . - 1 -30 . 2 does not require a use variance based upon the following : 1 . Ithaca College owns lot 41 . - 1 -30 . 2 and the adjacent lots 43 . - 1 -2 . 3 and 43 . - 1 -2 . 2 for which the parking will be a partial benefit for , and 2 . The parking lot will be designated for use by students regardless of where they are located on campus or off campus , and not just for students that are located on the adjacent College Circle property . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : ® AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 19th day of July, 2010 , Deputy Town-Clerk Town of Ithaca FILE DATE ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010-019 Area Variance Ithaca College 1033 Danby Rd Tax Parcel No. 43.-1 -2. 3 and 43.- 1 -2. 2 July 19, 2010 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , Seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that this Board grants the appeal of Ithaca College requesting a modification of Zoning Board Resolution No . 2002-014 to allow an increase in occupancy from 750 persons to 1030 persons at 1033 Danby Rd , Tax Parcel Numbers 43 . - 1 -2 . 2 and 43 . - 1 -2 . 3 with the following : Findings : That the benefit to the applicant does out weigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , specifically: 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve cannot be achieved by any other means feasible to the applicant given that they already have a substantial investment in infrastructure in this location . This location would appear to be the best location to add additional apartment housing for students , 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that there are already a substantial number of apartment buildings in this area . Adding some additional units would not be expected to change the character of that area substantially , 3 . That the request is not substantial given that their lot coverage areas and number of dwelling units per square foot will still be well under those allowed in a Multiple Residence Zone , 4 . That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the Long Environmental Assessment Form , which was voted on by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in a coordinated review , 5 . While the alleged difficulty is self-created given that the college is seeking this variance for one of their needs , that nevertheless the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community . ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2010-019 ® PAGE 2 A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 19th day of July , 2010 . J,� � Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca FILE DATE 0 ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010=020 Area Variance, Apartment Building Setbacks Ithaca College 1033 Danby Rd Tax Parcel No. 43 .- 1 -2 . 2 and 43.- 1 -2 . 3 July 19 , 2010 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , Seconded by Ron Krantz . RESOLVED , that this Board grants the appeal of Ithaca College requesting a variance from Section 270- 111 ( D ) Additional Special Requirements for setback reductions at 1033 Danby Rd , Tax Parcel Numbers 43 . - 1 -2 . 2 and 43 . - 1 -2 . 3 , with the following : Conditions : 1 . That all of the proposed buildings that do not meet the required setbacks be built as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant to this Board , 2 . That the building in Area B as identified on Sheet C002 , submitted by the applicant , have a setback of no less than 30 feet , ® 3 . That the buildings in Area A as identified on Sheet C002 have setbacks of no less than 30 feet , and 4 . That the building addition identified in Area C on Sheet C002 have a setback of no less than 20 feet . Findings : That this Board does find that the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community, specifically : 1 . That while the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve may be possible through other means , what the applicant has proposed is reasonable and in keeping with the current development and has setbacks approximately equal to other buildings on the property, which were built under a previous zoning ordinance , 2 . That an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or nearby properties will not take place given that the new construction is in character with the existing construction on the site , 3 . That while the request is substantial , reducing the required buffers in two cases from 80 feet to 30 feet and in another location reducing the required buffer from ® 30 feet to 20 feet, that again since there are existing buildings on site with similar setbacks , that mitigates the substantialness of the request , ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2010-020 ® PAGE 2 4 . That there will not be adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared and voted on by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , 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 , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 19th day of July , 2010 . t Deputy Town-Clerk Town of Ithaca FILE DATE ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010-021 7 Area Variance, Parking Lot Setbacks Ithaca College 1033 Danby Rd Tax Parcel No. 43 .- 1 -2. 2 and 43.-1 -2. 3 July 19, 2010 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , Seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that this Board grants the appeal of Ithaca College requesting a variance from Section 270- 111 ( D ) Additional Special Requirements for setback reductions related to parking along the north side of 1033 Danby Road , Tax Parcel Numbers 43 . - 1 - 2 . 2 and 43 . - 1 -2 . 3 , Multiple Residence Zone , with the following : Condition : That the parking spaces be constructed as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant to this Board . Findings : That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , specifically: 1 . That while the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve may be possible through other means what the applicant has proposed is reasonable and in keeping with their overall plan for the property, 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the property that this parking area is encroaching on is also owned by the applicant, 3 . That in this case the request is not substantial given that the property that this is encroaching on is also owned by the applicant, 4 . That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , 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 , Ellsworth , Krantz, Niefer ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2010-021 PAGE 2 NAYS : None . Motion was carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 19th day of July , 2010 . L 1 Deputy Town - C Jerk Town of Ithaca TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SIGWIN SHEET DATE : July 19 , 2010 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINTADDRESS / AFFILIATION 1A rK4v (?c I AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL e STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS . : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) I, Carrie Coates Whitmore, being duly sworn, deposes and says, that deponent is not a party to the actions , is over 21 years of age with a professional address of 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York. That on the 12th day of July, deponent served the within Notice upon the property owners of the following Tax Parcel Numbers : 166 Ridgecrest Rd, Use Variance Joshua Chase and Kelly Brady Tessa Sage Flores Suzanne Fullagar 158 Ridgecrest Rd 154 Compton Rd 161 Ridgecrest Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Thomas and Penelope Gerhart Scott Golder and Angle Boyce Terri Gerrard 602 Spencer Rd 171 Ridgecrest Rd 165 Ridgecrest Rd thaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ronald and Marie C Lacey John E and Amy W Little Yaws Environmental Inc 160 Ridgecrest Rd 159 Ridgecrest Rd 156 Ridgecrest Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Franklin E and Margaret Sharp Philip Wilson and Robert Gross Town of Ithaca 162 Ridgecrest Rd 167 Ridgecrest Rd 215 N Tioga St Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 College Circle Apartments Expansion, Area Variance and Interpretation Ayman Abbad Peter Alario Leonisa Ardizzone 8 Walraven Dr, Apt A 1028 Danby Rd 7A 407 W Seneca St Goshen, NY 10924-2169 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Rodney Beers & Joseph Lee Matthew Bryant & Kirsten Elzer Lawrence & Martin Bowman 3B Vista Ln 1C Vista Ln 1477 Peruville Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Freeville, NY 13068 icholas Clary & Holland Jancaitis Gary Cleveland Travis & Kathy Cleveland D Vista Ln PMB522 721 Hudson St Ithaca, NY 14850 PO Box 2428 Ithaca, NY 14850 Pensacola, FL 32513 Mark & Jill Cordano Nathan Dennis Jason Dorvee 1B Vista Ln 1019 Danby Rd 1032 Danby Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Robert Farley Stephen and Danalisa Gotz Joan Heffernan 1845 Richmond Ave 15234 Coral Isle Ct 3A Vista Ln Bethlehem, PA 18018 Ft. Myers, FL 33919 Ithaca, NY 14850 Jennifer Hudler Ithaca College Ithacare Center Service Co 022 Danby Rd 7D 200 Job Hall 1 Bella Vista Dr haca, NY 14850 953 Danby Rd Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 b� y Affidavit of Service by Mail Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 7/ 19/2010 J . Michael , Nancy & Althea Kelly William & Anna Larsen Pauline & Bruce Layton 379 Hargrave St 1005 Danby Rd 1029 Danby Rd Inglewood, CA 90302 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Edward Mazza James McCollum & Laura Thomas Evan Monkemeyer 307 N Tioga St 1046 Danby Rd 123 King Rd E Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Jack Nelson Margaret Arnold Gina Parker 319 Van Kirk Rd 1013 Danby Rd PO Box 4524 Newfield, NY 14867 - 8901 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14852-4524 David Richards Robert, Mary & Abigail Roemer Donald Schettini 1058 Danby Rd 1D Vista Ln 115 West 73 `d St, Apt 2d Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 New York, NY 10023 Vince Nicotra, R . A. David Herrick, PE Richard Couture QPK Design TG Miller, PC Assoc . Vice President PO Box 29 203 N Aurora St Ithaca College yracuse, NY 13201 -0029 Ithaca, NY 14850 201 Facilities Building Ithaca, NY 14850-7092 Herman Sieverding, Vice President Integrated Acquisition & Development PO Box 4860 15 Thornwood Dr Ithaca, NY 14852-4860 By depositing same enclosed in a postpaid 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. Carrie Coatesttmore, Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca Sworn to before me this 12`h day of July 2010 . No ry Public Debra DeAugletba 09MV POW - State of New %to No. OtDEet4803g GuaGfled iit tomptdns V4 � ► "a 2 TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , 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 , July 19 , 2010 7 : 00 P . M . Date of Publication : Friday , July 9 , 2010 Location of Sign Board Used for Posting : Town Hall Lobby Public Notices Board 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca , NY 14850 Date of Posting : Wednesday , July 7 , 2010 Carrie Coates Whitmore Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9th day ,of July , 010 Notary Public PAULETTE NEILSEN Notary Public, State of New York No , 01 NE6156809 Cualified in Tioga County 41Commission Expires Deoember 4. 20 LV theithacajournal.com I Friday, July 9, 2010 � 1 Legalls 0501 lrequesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270-227A(h) 'Off Lot Padang", Section 270-227B(4) 'Rear Yard Parking', Section 270- , I11 ciditional Special Re. quirements' for set back re- ductions, and modification of Zoning Board of Appeals _ Resolution No. 2002-014 to allow off site parking and to TOWN OF ITHACA increase the occupancy ZONING BOARD OF from 750 to 1030 persons, APPEALS located at 1033 Danby Rd, NOTICE OF PUBLIC Tax Parcel Numbers 43.- 1 . HEARINGS 2.2, 43.- 1 -2.3, and 41 .-1 : j MONDAY, 30.2, Multiple' Residence, j JULY 19, 2010 MR, and Medium Density 215 North Tioga Residential, MDR. Street, Ithaca Assistance will be provided 1 7:00 P.M. for individuals with special ' Appeal of Mark Brockway, needs, upon request; re- owner, Town of Ithaca. quests should be made not 'Agent, requesting a variance less than 48 hours prior to ,from the requirements of the public hearings. Chapter 270, Section 270- Bruce W. Bates i 66 "Permitted Principal Director of Code �• Uses' of the Town of Ithaca Enforcement (Code to be permitted to 607-273-1783 maintain an existing garage Dated: July 7, 2010 n a lot without a principal Published: July 9, 2010 dwelling unit located at 166 I Ridgecrest Rd, Tax Parcel #45.1 -21 .2. Medium bensi- ty Residential, MDR. Appeal of Ithaca College. owner, Integrated Acquisi- I pion 8 Development. Agent, I requesting an interpretation to determine if a use var. fiance is needed by Ithaca - College to allow r Circle Apartments to use an Ithaca College Parking lot located f Ion a different tax parcel and Ito allow those parking spaces to be included in Cir- i � cle Apartments' parking re- quirements. If so, then Itha- I ca College requests a var-! lance from the requirements! jof Chapter .270, Section ; 270.68A. The Agent is also �: , , moi t P. I 0 :: .'