HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2010-09-20 ® Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
Monday, September 20 , 2010
Agenda
1 . Appeal of Pamela Johnston , owner, Raymond Schlather, agent , requesting
modification of Zoning Board of Appeals Resolution No . 2009-017 to alter the
structure within the same footprint of the building and a variance from the
requirements of Chapter 270 , Section 270-47 " Building Area" , located at 901
Taughannock Blvd , Tax Parcel No . 25 . -2 -41 . 1 , Lakefront Residential .
2 . Discussion of Stream Setback Law Recommendation to Town Board .
3 . Discussion of fill permits (City of Ithaca)
4 . Adjournment.
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20 , 2010
215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca
7 : 00 P . M .
Appeal of Pamela Johnston , owner , Raymond Schlather, agent , requesting modification
of Zoning Board of Appeals Resolution No . 2009-017 to alter the structure within the
same footprint of the building and a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 ,
Section 270-47 "Building Area located at 901 Taughannock Blvd , Tax Parcel No . 25 . -
2 -41 . 1 , Lakefront Residential .
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 : September 8 , 2010
Published : September 10 , 2010
TOWN OF ITHACA
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SI&WIN SHEET
DATE : September 20 , 2010
(PL EASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINTADDRESS / AFFILIATION
Q AAKIAC4 16q f� QJM16JJ V)
FILE
DATE 4
® ZONING BOARD of APPEALS
Monday, September 20, 2010
7 : 00 p . m .
Present : Kirk Sigel , Chair; Board Members : Harry Ellsworth , Ron Krantz , James Niefer,
Dave Mountin , and Bill King ,
Staff Present : Bruce Bates , Director of Code Enforcement ; Susan Ritter, Assistant
Director of Planning ; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town ; Carrie Coates Whitmore ;
Deputy Town Clerk.
Others : Ray Schlather, Richard Hautaniemi , Robert Terry, and Sara Murray.
Call to Order
Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7 : 07 p . m .
Appeal of Pamela Johnston , owner, Raymond Schlather, agent, requesting
modification of Zoning Board of Appeals Resolution No. 2009=017 to alter the
structure within the same footprint of the building and a variance from the
requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270=47 " Building Area" , located at 901
Taughannock Blvd , Tax Parcel No. 25.=2-41A , Lakefront Residential .
Ray Schlather and Richard Hautaniemi , agents for the applicant, introduced themselves
to the Board . Mr. Schlather gave an overview of the appeal before Board . He noted
that Ms . Johnston still has not occupied house because she has been trying to complete
the renovations . Ms . Johnston is proposing changes to what was previously approved
and those changes have been outlined in materials submitted to the Board . The
proposed changes do not change the building footprint.
Mr. Schlather went on to say that the lot coverage area has been recalculated at the
request of Mr. Bates and the lot coverage , including the decking , is 12 . 29% . As a
result, Ms . Johnston is requesting a variance from the 10% lot coverage requirement.
Chairperson Sigel noted that the lot coverage requirement in 1993 was 20% ; the
allowable lot coverage was reduced when the property was rezoned to Lakefront
Residential ,
Chairperson Sigel asked if there were questions from the Board . He thought the
changes seemed fairly minor. Mr. Krantz agreed ; the footprint was not being changed
and changed seemed reasonable .
Mr. Mountin asked if the walkway and the garage were included in square footage
calculation of the previous variance for the property. Mr. Bates explained that the
® applicant was proposing to enclose the area under the midlevel deck. Mr. Mountin
noted that the footprint of the building was not changing , but rather the interior square
Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of September 20 , 2010
Final
footage was being increased . Mr. Bates explained that the lot coverage has increased
due to the increase in the size of the deck; the 10% rule should have been triggered
when the deck size was increased .
Chairperson Sigel thought that enclosing the deck space was a non-trivial addition , but
nonetheless , it does add to the mass of the building .
Mr. Bates explained that the May 2009 variance had a condition that no changes be
made to the plans submitted . As a result, the applicant needed to come back before the
Zoning Board for changes she had made to the plans . Mr. Schlather asked that if the
variance was granted , would it be possible to include language that would allow small
changes to plans submitted without having to come back before the Board . The Board
discussed the request in detail and found that it was reasonable to allow changes that
did not increase the footprint of the house or volume of interior space ; it was reasonable
to allow aesthetic changes (such as paint color, door and window size , etc) to the plans .
Chairperson Sigel asked if the Board needed to do a SEQR review. Ms . Brock said no .
Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 33 p . m . and invited the public to
address the Board . Robert Terry introduced himself to the Board . He agreed with the
proposed condition of allowing modifications that do not increase building footprint.
Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 7 : 34 p . m .
Chairperson Sigel moved to grant appeal of Pam Johnston requesting modification of
variance granted May 18 , 2009 allowing additional changes to the approved plans with
conditions that limit changes that can be made to the submitted plans without Zoning
Board approval and finding that all conditions of an area variance have been satisfied ,
specifically listing how each criteria was satisfied . Mr. Krantz seconded . Vote—carried
unanimously .
ZB RESOLUTION 2010-026: Area Variance Modification, 901 Taughannock Blvd,
Tax Parcel No. 25. 441 . 1
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ron Krantz.
Resolved, that this Board grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston, requesting a
modification of a variance granted on May 18, 2009 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board
of Appeals permitting the alteration of her house to add two spiral staircases, change
exterior paint color, reinstall two windows, add a deck water removal system, add an
exercise pool in an existing greenhouse including replacement of single pane glass with
double pane glass, and enclose the underside of the midlevel deck on the south side,
located at 901 Taughannock Blvd, Tax Parcel #25. -2-41 . 1 , Lakefront Residential (LR)
® Zone with the following:
CONDITIONS:
Page 2 of 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of September 20, 2010
Final
1 . Modifications to be built as indicated on the plans submitted to this Board, dated
August 30, 2010, as may be updated to conform to Building Department
requirements, and may be changed by applicant as long as the interior volume of
the house does not change or expand, the building footprint does not increase,
and no existing building footprint may be covered by expanded roof area, and
2. All other conditions in the December 15, 1993 variance remain in force, except
as modified herein.
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, modify exterior stairways, change paint color, add windows, add a
deck water removal system, install a small pool and modify an existing
greenhouse, cannot be met by any other means feasible,
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,
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 includes other minor changes
to house design,
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, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, and Mountin
NAYS: None.
® Motion was carried unanimously.
Page 3 of 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of September 20 , 2010
Final
® Mr. Krantz commented that the Board should not be getting into such minor details as
changing panes of glass and color of paint . Chairperson Sigel thought that the appeal
probably would not have been brought before the Board if only a minor change , such as
changing the color of paint , had been made . The Board further discussed setting
conditions that require that no changes be made to submitted plans and the impact
and/or precedent that it may set .
Lot coverage—no discussion
Chairperson Sigel moved to grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston requesting a variance
of the requirements of 270-47 Building Area to be allowed lot coverage not to exceed
12 . 5% with the condition that the existing lot coverage and building footprints not
expand in any way and with the findings that all requirements of an area variance have
been satisfied , specifically listing how each criteria was satisfied . Mr. Mountin
seconded . Vote—carried unanimously .
ZB RESOLUTION 2010-027: Area Variance, Lot Coverage, 901 Taughannock Blvd,
Tax Parcel No. 25. =2-41 . 1
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Dave Mountin.
Resolved, that this Board grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston, requesting a variance
from the requirements of Chapter 270, Section 270-47 "Building Area ", located at 901
Taughannock Blvd, Tax Parcel No, 25. -2-41 . 1 , Lakefront Residential Zone, to allow the
lot coverage not to exceed 12. 5 % with the following:
Condition:
1 . That the existing lot coverage and building footprint not expand any.
Findings:
That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety, and
welfare of the community, specifically:
1 . That the benefit that the applicant wishes to achieve, which is that of maintaining
their existing buildings on the lot cannot be achieved by other means feasible,
2. That an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties
will not take place as the lot and buildings have existed in this present state for
quite some time, albeit with minor modifications that slightly increase the lot
coverage,
® 3. That the request is substantial being over a 20% increase in the allowed 10% lot
coverage,
Page 4of7
Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of September 20, 2010
Final
4. That there will not be adverse physical or environmental affects, and
5. That the alleged difficulty is not self-created as the Zoning Law was changed
after this house was built.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, and Mountin
NAYS: None.
Motion was carried unanimously.
Agenda Item : Stream Setback Law
Ms . Ritter introduced herself to the Board and gave a brief history of how the law was
developed and explained what streams are covered under the law.
Mr. Mountin asked if streams were looked at after flood conditions and how they would
swell versus the year to year norm . Ms . Ritter responded no ; the law is based on
® drainage area and they did not go out on site . She explained that streams may flood
® based on uses that are going on adjacent to it; it is not necessarily the size of the
stream . She added that it would be difficult to walk every stream in the Town .
Mr. Mountin concluded that the setback widths were not determined by the 100 year
flood levels . Ms . Ritter said that the width of the setback is determined by the size of
the stream ; the largest drainage area has the largest setback.
Mr. Mountin asked if the Town has a history of structures being built within the proposed
stream setbacks. Ms . Ritter said that there are and the Town has received calls from
people with concerns . She explained that turf grass does not hold in the stream banks
very well ; streams erode because they do not have shrubs and tree roots holding them
in place . Water flows into streams faster when it is coming off of impervious surface .
Mr. Krantz spoke with Ms . Ritter before the meeting about concerns he had . He thought
it was important to keep the community attractive and looking nice , but on the other
hand , the more rules and regulations there are , the more difficult it is to build or do
anything . It also means more staff and expenses . He felt that there is a balance that
needs to be reached and was concerned that more people may need to come before
the Zoning Board for variances . He was not sure if the addition of the new rules and
regulations was going to help the balance .
Mr. Mountin asked about the '/2 acre exemption . Ms . Ritter explained that the law
applies to all parcels greater than '/2 an acre ; lots that are smaller are exempt.
Page 5 of 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of September 20 , 2010
Final
Mr. Mountin commented that 25 % grade is fairly steep . Ms . Ritter agreed and explained
that the grade triggers additional requirements such as enlarging the setback area . Mr.
Mountin asked if there are smaller streams with such a steep grade . Ms . Ritter said that
there are a few; there is one near Max' s Drive with a fairly steep slope . There are
different variations in the Town depending upon its location . Mr. Niefer asked if each
stream has a zone 1 and zone 2 . Chairperson Sigel explained that every stream does
have a zone 1 and zone 2 area ; the widths of the zones vary depending upon the
stream .
Mr. Niefer asked if there is a grandfather provision for existing conditions . Ms . Ritter
explained that if a property owner has built his/her house , has a garden and is mowing
the lawn , he/she can continue to mow the lawn and maintain the house and garden .
New construction on a lot would be required to leave the existing vegetation along the
stream . The Planning Board will also look at stream setbacks during site plan review.
Mr. Mountin asked how the stream setback was measured . Ms . Ritter answered that
setback for the small stream is from the center of the stream and for anything larger the
setback is measure from the top of the bank. Mr. Mountin then asked if additional
surveying would be required during the planning review process . Ms . Ritter responded
that the setback will need to be marked during construction and it should be shown on
site plan and subdivision maps .
The Board and staff went on to discuss how the Town has solicited ( and will be
soliciting ) public input on the proposed law. The Town will hold a public hearing before
the law is adopted .
Chairperson Sigel asked if other Board ' s make an official recommendation to the Town
Board . Ms . Ritter said that the Conservation Board and Planning Board responded with
a positive recommendation . However, a few Planning Board members had concerns
and they were going to express them individually. Attorney Brock suggested that the
minutes of the meeting be forwarded to the Town Board ,
Mr. Mountin noted that there are a lot of neighborhoods with streams going through
them so the proposed law will be an additional setback requirement for any type of
construction . Ms . Ritter commented that many of the properties in the northeast are
less than a 'h acre in size , which exempts them from the law. Mr. Mountin asked where
people were being impacted the most. Ms . Ritter thought that Forest Home residents
have been the most concerned . The language of the law has been clarified to increase
the comfort level with the law. She did not see huge problem areas where entire
neighborhoods would be impacted ; it is more here and there .
The Board then discussed how the '/z acre size exemption was arrived upon .
Mr. Krantz joked about exempting poison ivy and beaver dams . Attorney Brock noted
that existing vegetation can be moved where it poses safety or health hazards .
Page 6 of 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of September 20 , 2010
Final
Chairperson Sigel encouraged board members to submit individual comments to Ms .
Ritter and the Town Board ,
Agenda Item : Proposed Fill Site
Mr. Bates informed the Board that the City of Ithaca is proposing to use the old gravel
mine in the further southwest corner of the Town for fill . The property is zoned
Conservation . The City will need to come before the Zoning Board for a special permit.
Mr. Bates pointed out the location on the Zoning Map .
Ms . Ritter explained that the fill will be from City projects and it will mainly be soil -based
material . Mr. Bates gave the example of excavating a water line and old fill being
removed and replaced with clean fill . The excavated fill would be brought to the fill site .
The City is going to try to recycle old blacktop .
The Board and staff discussed whether or not the Board would like to have a separate
presentation on the project. It was decided that a separate presentation was not
necessary ; the Board felt that the applicant would make a sufficient presentation when it
was before them with an appeal . The Planning Board would be having an informational
meeting with the applicant and Zoning Board members were welcome to attend the
meeting .
Adjournment
With no further business before the Board , Chairperson Sigel adjourned the meeting at
8 : 40 p . m .
Kirk Sigel ,
Chairperson
Page 7 of 7
FILE /Z�)
DATE ' a o
ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010=026
® Area Variance Modification
901 Taughannock Blvd
Tax Parcel No. 25 .=2-41 A
September 20, 2010
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz .
Resolved , that this Board grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston , requesting a
modification of a variance granted on May 18 , 2009 by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board
of Appeals permitting the alteration of her house to add two spiral staircases , change
exterior paint color, reinstall two windows , add a deck water removal system , add an
exercise pool in an existing greenhouse including replacement of single pane glass with
double pane glass , and enclose the underside of the midlevel deck on the south side ,
located at 901 Taughannock Blvd , Tax Parcel #25 . -2-41 . 1 , Lakefront Residential ( LR)
Zone with the following :
CONDITIONS :
1 . Modifications to be built as indicated on the plans submitted to this Board , dated
August 30 , 2010 , as may be updated to conform to Building Department
requirements , and may be changed by applicant as long as the interior volume of
the house does not change or expand , the building footprint does not increase ,
® and no existing building footprint may be covered by expanded roof area , and
2 . All other conditions in the December 15 , 1993 variance remain in force , except
as modified herein .
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 , modify exterior stairways , change paint color , add windows , add a
deck water removal system , install a small pool and modify an existing
greenhouse , cannot be met by any other means feasible ,
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 ,
ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2010-026
PAGE 2
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 includes other minor changes
to house design ,
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 , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer, and Mountin
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 20th day of
September, 2010 .
IL
Deputy Town-Clerk
Town of Ithaca
FILE
DAT
ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION 2010=027
Area Variance , Lot Coverage
901 Taughannock Blvd
Tax Parcel No. 25 .=2-41 A
September 20 , 2010
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Dave Mountin .
Resolved , that this Board grant the appeal of Pamela Johnston , requesting a variance
from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Section 270-47 " Building Area" , located at 901
Taughannock Blvd , Tax Parcel No . 25 . -2 -41 . 1 , Lakefront Residential Zone , to allow the
lot coverage not to exceed 12 . 5 % with the following :
Condition :
1 . That the existing lot coverage and building footprint not expand any.
Findings :
That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety , and
welfare of the community , specifically:
1 . That the benefit that the applicant wishes to achieve , which is that of maintaining
their existing buildings on the lot cannot be achieved by other means feasible ,
2 . That an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties
will not take place as the lot and buildings have existed in this present state for
quite some time , albeit with minor modifications that slightly increase the lot
coverage ,
3 . That the request is substantial being over a 20% increase in the allowed 10% lot
coverage ,
4 . That there will not be adverse physical or environmental affects , and
5 . That the alleged difficulty is not self-created as the Zoning Law was changed
after this house was built.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows :
AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer, and Mountin
NAYS : None .
Motion was carried unanimously.
ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2010-027
PAGE 2
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 20th day of
September, 2010 .
Deputy Town Clerk
Town of Ithaca
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL
0
STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS . :
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS )
1, 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 13 'x' day of September, deponent served the within Notice upon the property owners of the
following Tax Parcel Numbers :
901 Taughannock Blvd, Area Variance and Interpretation
Bonnie J Mathers Richard Berggren Curtis J and Amanda Ufford
909 Taughannock Blvd 119 Williams Glen Rd 147 Honness Ln
Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850
Bonnie Howell Holochuck Homes LLC NYS Electric and Gas Corp
4 Beacon Way, Unit 304 7 Brightside Ave 70 Farm View Dr Freeport
Jersey City, NJ 07304 East Northport, NY 11731 New Gloucester, ME 04260
*ans Christian Wien Bradley G and Nancy S Corbitt Robert E Gates
913 Taughannock Blvd 907 Taughannock Blvd 885 Taughannock Blvd
Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850
Cayuga Medical Center Patricia A Dekar Thak and Siu Ling Chaloemtiarana
101 Harris B Dates Dr 879 Taughannock Blvd 881 Taughannock Blvd
Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850 Ithaca, NY 14850
Shawn M Gillespie Linda J Waymire 901 Taughannock Blvd
8811/2 Taughannock Blvd 34439 Iris Cir 9 Maplewood Pt
Ithaca, NY 14850 Philomath, OR 97370 Ithaca, NY 14850
Robert E Terry Richard C Wentzel Adam R Schaye
107 Worth St 11 Greenridge Dr 59 Wedgewood Dr
Ithaca, NY 14850 Clifton Park, NY 12065 Ithaca, NY 14850
Thomas Dwyer
1935 Plugas Ave
Palo Alto, CA 94303
0
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 Coate's-Whitmore, Senior Typist
Town of Ithaca
Sworn to before me this 13 `h day of September 2010 .
otary Public
Debra DeAug no
Notary Public - State of New Yb*
No. 01DE6148035
Ouatified in Tompkins Coun
MyCommission Expires June 19,
0
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 , September 20 , 2010
7 : 00 P . M .
Date of Publication : Friday , September 10 , 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 , September 8 , 2010
Carrie Coates.lz hitmore
Deputy Town Clerk
Town of Ithaca
STATE OF NEW YORK)
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS :
TOWN OF ITHACA)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 10th day of September, 2010
4NotkL.Rublic
7:S
Debra DeAuglstine
Notary Public - State of New Vork
No. OIDE6148035
Mallfied in Tompkins county
\ _ MY Commission Expires June 19, 20 G
Friday, September 10, 2010, The Ithaca Journal
Legals� ' � 050; 1
TOWN OF ITHACA
ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC
' HEARINGS -
MONDAY,
'SEPTEMBER 20, 2010
215 North Tioga - i
Street, Ithaca
7:00 P.M.
,Appeal of Pamela John-
ston, owner, Raymond - I
ISchlather, agent: request-
'ing. modification of Zoning 1
,'Board of Appeals Resolu-
tion No. 2009-017 to alter I
Pthe ,structure within the i
.same footprint of the build- -I
;ing and a variance. from the i
'requirements of Chapter i
1270, Section 270-47 'Build- ;
ing Area', located at 901
iTaughannock Blvd Tax Par-
cel No. 25.-2.41 . 1 , Lake.
(front Residential.
Assistance will be provided
for individuals with special 1
needs, upon request; re
,quests should be made not
'less than 48 hours prior to
tthe public hearings.
Bruce W. Bates
IDirector of Code Enforce-. '
Iment
x:607-273-1783 l
Dated: September 8, 2010
'9/10/2010
rI %noo
girtlkDa , f�i;SQms>T 17i a:?Cr4taup