Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2022-10-11Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Tuesday, October It, 2022, at 6:00pm 215 N. Tioga St. The niecting 1k).'r the Zoning Board of Appeals will be held in -person with the option for the Public to also attendby video conferencing through the Zoom App. The public will have an opportunity tea see and hear the meeting live and provide comments through the Zooin App. If anietriber of the public would like to attend the meeting virtually, for viewing purposes only, it i.s recommended to watch the li vestreain video on the Towns YouTube page. Agenda - ZBAA-22-124, Appeal of Zhila Sadri, agent of 831 Taughannock Blvd., Tax Parcel No. 25.-2-37 - ZBAA-22-126 Appeal of Neil and Brigid Shipman, owners of 681 Five Mile Drive, Tax Parcel No. 31.-2-21.2 INSTRUCTIONS TO ACCESS THE MEETING VIRTUALLY ON ZOOM: If you have a computer, tablet, or srnartphone, you can access the Zoom meeting by going to and clicking on "JOIN Meeting", and entering 852-5587-1576 into the Meeting ID. You can also call in to the Zoom meeting at +1 (929) 436-2866. To join the meeting directly, go to littps://LisO6Nveb.z(.)oiri.Ltsi/95255871, 76.1fjoining through the Zoom - - -- -- ---- -- ---- ------ --- -------- - App, you will be placed-o- --- ii- hold - ---- until -- the -- meeting - - - -- starts. - arts --------------------- INSTRUCTIONS TO ACCESS THE MEETING VIRTUALLY ON YOUTUBE: If you have a computer, tablet, or smartplione, you can access the meeting by going to the Town's YonTUbe channel. To join the meeting directly, go to C, 9vycX.k.J6q<]Vlib,lh(."'y'7NQ/tive ............... ........... Questions about accessing the Zooin video conference should be einai led to cot'res(4�',o\v,r�,itliaci�r�)��t,is or (607) 273-1783 ext.2. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Town of Ithaca ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, October 11, 2022, 6:00 p.m. MINUTES Present: David Squires, Chair; Members Chris Jung and Mark Apker. Absent: Stuart Friedman and David Williams Marty Moseley, Director of Codes; Becky Jordan, Deputy Town Clerk; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Mr. Squires opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. ZBAA-22-124, Appeal of Zhila Sadri, agent of 831 Taughannock Blvd., Tax Parcel No. 25.-2- 37; is seeking relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 270-205A (Nonconforming structures) and 270-46C (Yard regulations) to re -construct stairs within 10.6 feet of the side yard property boundary line. Town of Ithaca Code section 270-205A does not allow for a nonconforming structure to be enlarged, Town of Ithaca Code section 270-46C requires a minimum side yard setback of 20 feet, where the proposed stairs will be rebuilt approximately 10.6 feet measured to the side yard property boundary line. The property is located in the Lakefront Residential Zone. Ms. Brock — Stated that she didn't realize she knew the applicant from walking with her mother in her mother's neighborhood and often exchanging greetings. This doesn't rise to the level of conflict of interest but in the interest of full disclosure she wanted the board to know that she knows who the applicant is as often happens in a small town. Overview — The applicant's son, Ata gave a brief overview of stairs previously running from side of house on south side as well as stairs running down to the lake front where the dock is. What we're trying to address with this variance is adjoining the newly renovated stairs that go down to the lake with stairs meeting at house. Currently there is a gap between the two sets of stairs. Mr. Squires — Are these deteriorated stairs you're replacing? The lower stairs replaced are in the exact location? Ata — Correct, the old stairs running from the side of the house down toward lake ending before the newly replaced ones are old and deteriorated. Mr. Apker — Comment/question not captured by audio Mr. Mosely clarified that the applicants would like to put in a 4 ft stair which would encroach into the side yard setback and are the set of stairs in question. Mr. Squires opened the public hearing. There was no one wishing to address the board and the public hearing was closed. ZBA 2022-10-11 (Filed 1/13) Pg. 1 Ms. Brock — No SEQR required as this is a type 11 action — (1) construction of a minor accessory residential structure and (2) granting of an individual setback variance and grandfathered. Mr. Apker - Comment/question not captured by audio Mr. Moseley stated that the complexity is that the stairs exceed 36" in height Ms. Jung — Thinks this is straightforward. See no trouble with this variance. ZBAA Resolution 22-124 Area Variance Zhila Sadri, owner 831 Taughannock Blvd., Tax Parcel No. 25.-2-37, LRZ Resolved that this board grants the appeal of Zhila Sadri, agent of 831 Taughannock Blvd., Tax Parcel No. 25.-2-37 seeking relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 270-205A (Nonconforming structures) and 270-46C (Yard regulations) to re -construct stairs within 10.6 feet of the side yard property boundary line, with the following: Conditions: 1. That the project be built substantially as shown in plans submitted to this Board at approximately 10'x6', and Findings: That the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community, specifically: 1. That the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by any other means as the project consists of replacing existing stairs that have deteriorated and stair access is required due to the steep slope of the terrain. 2. That there will be no undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties given that the project is a replacement of existing deteriorated stairs. 3. The request is substantial as code requires a minimum 20 ft side yard setback whereas the proposed stairs will be rebuilt approximately 10.6 ft measured to the side yard property boundary line however, the replacement stairs are being built to NYS Uniform Code compliance which requires them to be slightly wider than they currently are. 4. The request will have no adverse physical or environmental effects as evidenced by no SEQR requirement. 5. The alleged difficulty is not self-created as, with the size of the lot and existing structure, any exterior stair along the side of the house would encroach the side yard setback, not neighboring property. On balance, the board finds that the benefit to the applicant outweighs the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community for reasons stated above. Motion by David Squires Seconded by Mark Apker Vote: ayes — Chris Jung, David Squires, and Mark Apker ZBA 2022-10-11 (Filed 1/13) Pg. 2 ZBAA-22-126 Appeal of Neil and Brigid Shipman, owners of 681 Five Mile Drive, Tax Parcel No. 31.-2-21.2; are seeking relief from Town of Ithaca Code section 270-59 (Height limitations) for an accessory building that is approximately 19'6" in height. Town of Ithaca Code section 270-59 allows for an accessory building to be a maximum height of 15', where the height of the newly built accessory building would be approximately 19'6" The property is located in the Low -Density Residential Zone. Overview — Mr. Shipman stated he is asking for a 4 ft variance for a pole barn. He started back in April with Dana in Codes. Due to variance in sq footage for the lot size Dana explained he could either apply for a variance or obtain property from neighbor to increase his 2.83 acre property to 3 acres. He bought land from neighbor to bring his parcel to 3 acres, secured a lot line approval from engineering, and had it resurveyed. He was told that as long as his lot is 3 acres he was good to go so he told the builders to go ahead. Dana was going to confirm with Abby one more time the morning of the build start. The next day Dana called to advise that upon further review she realized a height variance and not to begin building. The builders were already there. There are multiple barns in the area many within'/4 mile including Amabel, Bus Garage, Calvary Cemetery, Tompkins County Highway, Ithaca Beer Company, 809 Five Mile, 187 Five Mile and Bostwick, Old Hundred House. The reason for the height variance is storage for a near 10 ft tall boat. The location of the pole barn is a 6-8 ft drop from the road and the peak doesn't go over the height of the 2-story house. Upstairs is for storage. Pitch is for adequate snow fall. Screened in greenery especially the North side which is surrounded by trees. Mr. Shipman stated he wouldn't have built if he knew he was in the wrong, he is in law enforcement. Things in the area come up missing. He's had things come up missing and wanted secure storage. Mr. Squires opened the public hearing at 6:33 p.m. A member of the public stated she did research on zoning and couldn't find a reason for the height variance. Rear yard, height, color, reasons why denied. So just height which isn't above house Ms. Brock stated that is something that the Town Board sets through Zoning. The ZBA has to work with zoning as set by the Town Board. Mr. Moseley stated that zoning restricts accessory structures to a maximum height of 15 It and placement in rear yard. Mr. Squires closed the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. Ms. Brock stated there are two changes since the applicant last appeared before the board. The applicant is no longer seeking a variance of the total square feet of all accessory buildings due to their acquisition of property to an accumulative 3 acres or more and permanently sealing off a part or all of the second -floor storage so it will be permanently closed and no longer count toward the 2000 square footage allowed. They will also have a decrease in height. Mr. Moseley added that the decrease in square footage is a result of the applicant indicating he will be adding permanent bracing on the trusses to plot off the second -floor area to reduce the square foot. To reduce the height variance the applicant has indicated he will add fill in and around the structure ZBA 2022-10-11 (Filed 1/13) Pg. 3 for a height reduction from the original application of 21 ft 4 in to 19 ft 6 in. measured from grade to highest point. No different than a typical truss in your house with a 12 ft pitch, it's not really useful for storage or anything besides insulation. Ms. Brock clarified there is no area variance tonight and the height variance is nearly 2 ft less than last time. Mr. Squires stated he visited the sight. Visually it doesn't impair the community as it is barely visible from across the street. <board discussion not captured by audio> Mr. Squires supports variance. Building be limited to storage of personal property. Owner agrees not to extend... Mr. Shipman — It is solely for storage. There are no intentions of bringing electrical, plumbing, water or sewer utilities out to the barn. Ms. Shipman explained that the way the lot and water and sewer lines are laid out and the placement of her house, the water and sewer is limited to residential. The water to her house comes from the main house. Mr. Apker - whether the benefit can be achieved by other means... Marty, you have worked substantially with the applicants, have we exhausted mitigation measures that are reasonable? Mr. Moseley replied yes, based on the topography and vegetation on their lot against adjoining neighboring properties and the proposal to bring in additional fill I think they've exhausted just about every opportunity except lowering the building itself. Ms. Brock stated the balancing test is whether the applicant has shown they need a building of this size with this height for their intended purpose. Last time the board made a finding that they haven't provided any justification or more specific information why a barn/accessory structure that complies with town code would not be sufficient. The applicant did state that due to the placement of the structure being near existing vegetation the roof won't be exposed to sun so the steeply pitched roof is for snow to slide off. They also have a boat and need a certain height to get the boat in. Mr. Shipman stated that the height needed to get the boat in is 9 ft. ZBAA Resolution 2022-126 Area Variance Neil and Brigid Shipman, owner 681 Five Mile Drive, TP 31.-2-21.2 LDR Resolved that this board grants the Appeal of Neil and Brigid Shipman, owners of 681 Five Mile Drive, Tax Parcel No. 31.-2-21.2; seeking relief from Town of Ithaca Code section 270-59 (Height limitations) for an accessory building that is approximately 19'6" in height. Town of Ithaca Code section 270-59 allows for an accessory building to be a maximum height of 15', where the height of the newly built accessory building would be approximately 19'6", with the following: ZBA 2022-10-11 (Filed 1/13) Pg. 4 RERMUM t. 'riiatthe btiildingbebtiiltsubstaiitiallyassliowi!ivvithaheight of'19'6', 2. That the building use be limited to storage of personal prol.x,.rty M= Tbat the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriniLlit to the health, safety, and welfare of the community, specifically: 1. That the benefit cannot be achieved by other means fieasible due to the applicant's desire fbr indoor boat storage that t equires a 10' door and steep pitch to accelerate S110W U11110V41 1 'mat the accessory building will not result in an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties given that it is adjacent to as stream and there are similar type buildings within a 1/4 mile including,rompkins County I fighway facility, Ithaca it�y School District bits facility, Ithaca Beer Company, Calvary cernetery, Arnabel housing development, air(] another residence on Bostwick Road, A drop in elevation firom road to structure is approximately 6-8 fi resulting in appearance no higher than the peaks ofthe two residences on the property. The structure is in the rear yard of the properly and abuts foliage and railroad tracks so the impact on neighboring residences is further mitigated as there are no residences behind this property. 3, That the request is substantial, 3 111/0, with 15 11 height allowed by code whereas this structure is 19 fi, 6 in 4. The request will have no adverse physical or environmental effects as evidenced by no SEER requirement being a Type 11 action, construction ofa ininoraccessory residential structure. 'rhe structure as proposed would not encroach the street setback in the area and is outside the flood zone area, 5. The hardship is self.created in that the applicant chose to build a structure that does not comply with town code and continued with construction after being informed a building permit could not be issued without variances first being granted. Nevertheless, on balance, the benefit to tire applicant does outweigh detriment to health, safety and welfare of. the community for the reasons stated above. Motion: David Squires Seconded: Mark Apker Votes: ayes — Jung, Squires, and Apker Other Discussion: The board may expect three area variances next inorith. Meeting adjourned at 7:20 prn, upon motion by David Squires. Aa. Submi d by eckyyJIo'rd,a'tyt/i,Depury Town Clerk ZBA 2022-10-11 (Filed 1/1.3)