HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA History Combined (12)
Zoning Board of Appeals History as of 45.-1-5.2
108 Ridgecrest Road
Tax Parcels involved, with address if known 108 Ridgecrest Road 45.-1-5.2
with no subdivision or readdressing. Lawsuit in 1960s and 1970s see parcel.
History:
1990 – Special Approval to use front building as offices during construction of
residential neighborhood – Approved
1988 – Area Variance for subdivision - Denied and occupancy of westerly building to
cease immediately
1980 – Special Approval for 5 unrelated occupancy – Moot lease expired
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1990
7: 00 P.M.
By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS
HEREBY GIVEN t$t Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday, November 14, 1990, in Town
Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, (FIRST Floor, REAR Entrance, WEST Side) ,
Ithaca, N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7:00 P.M. , on the following matters.
•
APPEAL of Cornell University, Owner/Appellant, Arthur G. Stiers, Agent,
requesting the special approval of the Board of Appeals, pursuant to
Article V, Section 18 , Paragraph 4, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning .
Ordinance, for the proposed construction of a 30-foot by 18-foot "Gas
Cylinder Storage Dock" , proposed to be located on Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 6-64-1-2, Residence District R-30 , in the Cornell Orchards
area on Palm Road adjacent to the General Stores Warehouse.
APPEAL of Vinay and Saga Ambegaokar, Owners/Appellants, Ted Bronsnick,
Agent, requesting the approval of or the grant of a building height
variance with respect to the construction of a one-story, two-car,
detached garage, set back five feet from the road right of way, at 3
Sugarbush Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-61-1-14 . 5, Residence
District R-15. The average natural slope of the subject property
exceeds an 8 per cent fall at the road right of way line resulting in
a building height for said proposed garage of 19 feet 10 inches.
Article IV, Section 13 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance limits
the height of detached garages to 15 feet unless the natural slope of
a property exceeds an 8 per cent fall directly from the street line
(not road right of way) , in which case said Ordinance limits the
height to only one story, which may be presumed to be greater than 15
feet in height.
APPEAL of Glenn F. Hubbell, Owner/Appellant, requesting variance of the
requirements of Article V, Sections 18 and 19, of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance, for the operation of an antiques and second hand
goods shop in an Agricultural District at 1308 Mecklenburg Road, Town
of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-27-1-14 . 1, (Residence District R-30
regulations apply) . Said Ordinance does not permit antique and
second hand businesses in a residential district.
APPEAL of Chase Farm Associates, Owner/Appellant, Harrison Rue, Agent,
requesting the special approval of the Board of Appeals, pursuant to
Article IV, Section 12, Paragraph 3, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance, for the continuation of the use of a residential property,
located at 108 Ridgecrest Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No.
6-45-1-5.1 and -5.2, Residence District R-15 , for business purposes
with respect to the development of a residential area.
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING (adjourned from October 10, 1990) , under Article
XIV, Section 77, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, for an
interpretation by the Board of Appeals of Article VII, Section 35, of
said Ordinance to determine if any uses permitted in Business
Districts "A" , "B" , and "C" may be permitted in a Business
District "D" , and further, to determine what sales/uses may be
customarily encompassed within a gasoline sales station.
Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7: 00 p.m. , . and said
place, hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto.
Persons may appear by agent or in person.
Andrew S. Frost
Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer
Town of Ithaca
273-1747
Dated: November 6, 1990
Publish: November 9, 1990
Town of Ithaca 8
Zoning Board of Appeals
November 14, 1990 •
Mr. Hubbell responded that he would endeavor to meet
whatever regulations were required. He said that he has painted .
the house, fixed the windows and improved the property. He said
the letter from Mr. Frost was only received a few weeks ago and
that did not leave him time to clean up 14 years of negligence.
• Mr. Hubbell stated that he purchased another 6. 6 acres below
the original which gives him a 400 or 500 foot buffer zone to the
east toward the City so there are virtually no neighbors who look
into the front, side or back yards of his property.
•
Mrs. Reuning stated that she agreed with Chairman Aron
regarding the negative declaration on the environmental
assessment form. She suggested that the Board give Mr. Hubbell a
couple of weeks to clean up the outside of the buildings and then
come back to the Board for further consideration of his request. •
Further discussion followed regarding what alternatives the
Board has.
MOTION
By Mrs. Joan Reuning; seconded by Mr. Edward King:
RESOLVED, that the Appeal of Mr. Glenn Hubbell be adjourned
until the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on December 12,
1990 to give Mr. Hubbell a chance to comply with the
previous order of the -Board to clean up the outside storage
on his property.
The voting on the motion resulted as follows:
•
Ayes - Reuning, King, Aron, Hines, Austen.
Nays - None.
The motion to adjourn the matter was carried unanimously.
The last Appeal on the Agenda was the following:
•
APPEAL OF CHASE FARM ASSOCIATES, OWNER/APPELLANT,
HARRISON RUE, AGENT, REQUESTING THE SPECIAL APPROVAL OF
THE BOARD OF APPEALS, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IV, SECTION
•
12,' PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING
ORDINANCE, FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE USE OF A
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, LOCATED AT 108 RIDGECREST ROAD,
TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS NO. 6-45-1-5.1 AND -5.2,
RESIDENCE-DISTRICT R-15, FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES WITH
RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
Town of Ithaca 9
Zoning Board of Appeals
November 14, 1990
Mr. Harrison Rue passed out information to the Board
entitled "Proposed Moving Costs" and "108 Improvements to
Office", copies of which are attached here as Exhibits #7 and #8,
respectively. He stated that the business has undergone some
reorganization and as part of the function of that the
organization and the number of employees and the impact on the
neighborhood is considerably smaller than it was when Mr. Frost
first notified them that there had been a complaint.
Mr. Rue stated that it would be very difficult to undergo a
move right now. It would be a substantial economic injury to the
organization to have to move now and then to move again. He said
they have every intention next Spring or Summer of moving the
offices. As he stated in his letter he has asked permission to
maintain the office at the present location until August 1991.
He said that their intention is certainly to move before that but
that would give them some flexibility.
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing.
Mr. Roger Sayre, 110 Ridgecrest Road, stated that he and his
wife have no animosity toward Mr. Auble and his associates.
However, this particular property (#108) which is next to his
property is a real thorn in the side of the community due to the
nature, its division, and the construction of the second work
structure which was originally intended to be a workshop and
became a residence and is now an office.
•
Mr. Sayre said that he would admit that the property has
improved for the better, it has been spruced up since Mr. Auble
took it over. He would like to maintain that this is a
residential neighborhood and he thinks in keeping with the spirit
of Zoning Laws we should maintain that residential character in
the neighborhood and such a business should not be operating out
of the neighborhood. Mr. Sayre stated that there are alternative
locations that this business could be headquartered in. There is
a model on King Road which is equally as large as this residence
that is currently being used. He stated that he thinks this
property should be maintained as a single family residence
property and perhaps even raze the structure in the back if that
is what it is going to take to prevent the dual nature of the
property.
In answer to Chairman Aron's question, Mr. Sayre stated that
he is opposed to the applicant being given a variance for his
request. Mr. Sayre said that he understands that the request is
for a limited period' of time, to August 1991, but he believes
that is only a postponement of a bad problem. He stated that it
is a personal affront to him to look out his window and see cars
parked in a parking lot and business activities going on.
Town of Ithaca 10
Zoning Board of Appeals
November 14, 1990
Mr. Rue explained that the rear building has been shut down.
There are only five people working in the front unit. The
kitchen has been totally removed from the rear building and at
the moment it is only being used for storage. The front building
was three apartments. It.. has now been converted to one unit
which is used for office space. Two of the three kitchens in the
front unit were also permanently removed at the same time as the
kitchen in the rear unit.
Mr. King asked Mr. Rue if the use were permitted to continue
until next August, would he continue to use that rear building.
Mr. Rue stated that at the moment they are using the rear
building and he sees no reason to use it for other than storage.
Mr. Frost interjected that there is a long history on this
property. He said that essentially there was a restriction that
prohibited the use of that back building for anything other than
an accessory building. Mr. Frost stated that from the standpoint
of the Ordinance, a property is entitled for at least up to one
year to have buildings used as part of a development. - If and
when this ultimately turns back to a residence, the back building
will not be issued a certificate from his office for .anything
other than an accessory building, absent of any residential
dwelling unit.
Mrs. Carolyn Richter, 110 Ridgecrest Road, spoke on the
history of the property and stated her opposition to the
proposal.
Discussion followed on .the floor.
Mr. Rue stated that Mr. Auble is not connected with the
project any longer. He wanted to give Mr. Auble credit for
assessing the fact that this was an eyesore when he bought this
house and their intention at the time of the purchase was to
clean them up, use them temporarily as an office and then revert
them to single family ownership.
Mr. Rue spoke on the economic hardship issues.
Mr. King asked Mr. Rue what their eventual proposed use of
these buildings are. Mr. Rue said that they propose at the
moment to sell the building. Numbers 104 and 106 Ridgecrest Road
are advertised for sale as of today. Number 108 will also be
eventually sold as a residential dwelling.
Further discussion followed regarding the reasons the
company does not want to move their office facilities at this
time.
Town of Ithaca 11
Zoning Board of Appeals
November 14, 1990
Mr. Rue stressed that the economic hardship to the
organization would be significant given the current state of the
- general economy.
Mr. Hines asked for assurance that Mr. Rue's organization
will not be back in front of the Board in the future asking for
another extension of time for this building.
Mr. Rue stated that he can guarantee that he, personally,
will not be back in here before the Board asking for another
extension.
Town Attorney Barney spoke of the history of the house back
in the late ' 60 's and early ' 70 's.
Further discussion followed regarding the number of persons
utilizing the office space in the building in question.
Chairman Aron closed the public hearing and asked the Board
for a motion on the matter.
MOTION
By Mr. Edward King; seconded by Mrs. Joan Reuning:
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant Special Approval to Chase Farm Associates for the
continuation of the use of a residential property located at
108 Ridgecrest Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 6-45-1-
5. 1 and -5.2, for business purposes with respect to the
development of a residential area, with the following
findings and conditions:
1. that there is a significant investment involved in the
business.
2. that there will be no more than . 5 people employed to
work in or out of that building or on the property.
3. that the building be returned to residential use on or
before July 31, 1991 and in the meantime the rear
building, 108A, will be used only as an accessory .
building for storage and like uses, without any
personnel using it for an office or other such uses.
4. that the impact would not be unreasonable on the
neighborhood, being apparently less than it has been in
the past year.
5. that the economic situation is so bad that it would be
a particular hardship for the company to have to move
twice.
Town of Ithaca 12
. zoning Board of Appeals
November 14, 1990
6. that when the building is restored to residential
purposes, the gravel area behind the first building
shall be re-converted to lawn.
Chairman Aron called for a voice vote which resulted as
follows:
Aye - Mr. King
Aye - Mrs. Reuning
Aye - Mr. Hines
Aye - Mr. Austen
Aye - Mr. Aron
The motion was carried unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING (ADJOURNED FROM OCTOBER 10, 1990) ,
UNDER ARTICLE XIV, SECTION 77, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING
ORDINANCE, FOR AN INTERPRETATION BY THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF
ARTICLE VII, SECTION 35, OF SAID .ORDINANCE TO DETERMINE IF
ANY USES PERMITTED IN BUSINESS DISTRICTS "A", "Bn, AND "Cm
MAY BE PERMITTED IN A BUSINESS DISTRICT "D", AND FURTHER, TO
DETERMINE WHAT SALES/USES MAY BE CUSTOMARILY ENCOMPASSED
WITHIN A GASOLINE SALES STATION.
. - Chairman Aron -referred to written statements by Mr. King and
Mr. Hines, attached hereto as Exhibits #9 and #10, and extensive
discussion followed on the floor.
It was the consensus of the Board that Mr. King and Mr.
Hines will draft a resolution to submit to the Board. The draft
resolution will come back to the Board on November 28, 1990 for
consideration and review.
The meeting adjourned at 10: 05 p.m.
' oth-e-centir.
•
Connie J. Holcomb
Recording Secretary
Henry Aron, Chairman -
TOWN OF ITHACA FEE: $40.00
126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED: 1ohbi9f0
Ithaca, New York 14850 CASH - ( )
(607) 273-1747 CHECK - (,tj)
ZONING:
APPEAL For Office Use Only
to the
Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer
and the
Zoning Board of Appeals
of the
Town of Ithaca, New York
Having been denied permission to continue use of the existing
S� nD1 P fermi 1 y reSi c1enre aS a tempnry off i re For the development _
of Chase Farm.
at 1 flR Ri clger•rest Rnad , Tovri of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. - s. + 5, 1 as shown on the accompanying
application and/or plans or other supporting documents, for the stated reason that the
issuance of such permit would be in violation of:
Article(s) IV , Section(s) 12
of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance,
the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and, in support of the
Appeal, affirms that strict observance of the Zoning Ordinance would impose PRACTICAL
DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows:
(Additional sheets may be attached as necessary.)
see attached
Ch se Farm ssociates
Douglas D. Wilcox
Signature of Owner/Appellant: • Date: 10-12-90
Harrison Rue
Signature of Appellant/Agent: Date: 10-12-90
APPEAL TO ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS -
Temporary use of 108 Ridgecrest Road as an office
We respectfully submit that strict observance of the
Zoning/ordinance would impose both practical difficulty and
unnecessary hardship. We request special approval of the Zoning
Board of Appeals to permit use of the property as an office for an
additional year (through August, 1991) .
Chase Farm Associates has been undergoing a change in ownership and
management for the past few months . These changes, coupled with
the general state of the economy, and particularly the real estate
sector, have forced us to cut back on overhead, staffing, surplus
properties, and general construction activities.
We believe that it would be a practical difficulty for us to move
the offices to another location during the middle of this
reorganization, before the new management has had a chance to focus
on a comprehensive plan and marketing strategy. A new office
location would depend on the outcome of these decisions (to be made
over the next few months . ) . The practical difficulties of moving
include moving phone and fax lines, moving and setting up computer
network and other functioning office equipment, files and maps,
changing mailing addresses and stationery, notification of new
address to subs, vendors, and customers, etc . . Using staff time to
accomplish these tasks would make our current primary tasks very
difficult, indeed.
Unnecessary hardship would be imposed by a premature move. We
expect to be able to move the offices by next spring or early
summer, (if not sooner) after we have assessed our needs and
potential locations. Moving the office twice would cause
unnecessary hardship particularly since our impact on the
neighborhood has been minimized due to decreased staff, traffic,
and construction activity.
Significant economic injury would be created; since the cost of
moving would be substantial, moving twice would impose major
financial burdens on the organization. Physical costs of the move
would add up to several thousand dollars, plus costs for re-wiring
and re-installing phones, computer networks, other office machines,
printing stationery, notifying business contacts, etc . . In
addition, staff time to prepare for and recover from a move could
add up to several thousand dollars worth of down-time. Our
estimates for such a move range from $10,000 to $20,000 in costs .
The variance requested is small since the office is already in
place and its impact on the neighborhood has been reduced
substantially. Traffic and noise over the winter months will be no
more than that in many of the surrounding homes. There will not be
any substantial change in the character of the neighborhood by
allowing the office to continue for the next several months in its
present location.
....
...:23:6.-c-kst6,---•-t-nikarEtfer.:162,-;*,W;;,t,g-e$34,7-1,166ael f,..,t,Wia.€71-:.-174.1S4:tair4r,4...,toeitAi., :)it';.,:t 1.1.1rZ:41.4.04;2;eti,,iet;t a+A;11.i•r-::.",..rd:i7.4rAititeR•r;.'::: a:.,•:.:•..,..0..,3,PR.,',C.::,.i:.er..-.r:44...se.P.0:1;:,,C.C,,,,,t,,,1.1.-,,, ,,,7,,...- 0,`:;:,,,..
--..........1...................._.ssa.............-..........,......0....e..L- .......-...................-.-a...arena...-.••4.,.........-..-.........c...-._-.. ..... .,.....-,.....,......i..-.-4.............-....-.1..}..--........4.-.. ,... _......-....-....:. _ .... , ...-.--. ... ..-1........... •
- 'AT 4:341.i tajnt.'t.C.:5"t14:4;f:-'4.gli104.41.1:da:;t7:+. ilKISZA1•4:P•C•TiS-41 C''TWATiffrel' 1/2:Ver I tq 1.71771trir.Y..;'..-L;;,1 c.i457,14Tre re'r&r:14“VW5i-Ntev rhea...6.‘„,,,W r',...r.•7/..ititt"..n,rg ii$4.,...41;ta..;:ip.1
t -AV.p a.0 ttflt '7aliaalca.ta a 4[:"*.1".:41e5Ota,raot4,719.4'.:C-41,1^54-"t396rnt c'- tAn.:21":- ct.‘ ::"‘M 4.AtT:1/4.. -rCill 4,":.**it•1 i le:, tOiglitS'Artrir: • kz-ii‘r-l'Ar.‘P-1-'44-'1.:•-•-v-r=.4-•- •••:::Te•itifi-1 'Y';:::'.V.C-'-Ati••!-11'. ..teks,;?:
_,-, !•?..1‘. ..-warcihtt,-- -,:-_,-',A-1•,^cir•sE, -:-Pa ,-)."-,•:;""-J-111-21-4,v• •44,- t is?';''",-i"- 4 .4,p, - -74. : : -.itir,--VA ••ffiL.i-,r-z, 1111.S4. .7 ..--at-••• -•;' 11.frreliCti ktg•t
'''.1 .:1•9•5'..Ar rX.314:\‘."."3". IEWEIC 14:15;;I:.-;.;Xi..t.4)-`:::k4,:..•?:.;:1:2:7:•il..rat:-.3?-172 z19..21.4i-tk:::... .`t;4=4:-..2:it'fl'<t-,:i‘1....-:=.',n,t,tiri--;,•,„ ;:.:4-•, . .,, ,,t,_t...treat••.--••••:,:....: r_ :.• - wt.-,:, .../..,-....,
Exibiiiifr,a1c-44 piii-bk iii1/4..,::.9,7,....45„-:„... te,„,•,,t,.? ...4,---).4t. ,-,,,,:•.--;,-;•-cr-F,,.;.te,"4,-..--,i...-?:,;,z.4._,....7-,c .i.•,.. •...4-Z., .- st.7.:::' z•-'-‘,,v.--.7.7•7;;;;ifict,}4:4,,,At.;t' -49.;ait;1 .2, a:1‘.
1401\ - .
'----4 LUISEIte ''
C=2 NEVLEROW
c....) aZOKT2 MEMOREMGAlf
. .
.
•-• • c.i...s .-,. ksi;•;&_s ..-
-sarmittocessamtir--to.- 1-573/ft 456
r:
-t "PIPE 16
0J1.MOLNal
Wellat30..01.6.—% i OF LtuE
24ja.a4a1
• 6f0A1E •
....... DRIVE ,.
*
- •••
.
PM)4 cAt • ". . ip.,a-o
....c.ii. %
‘..—
.
............. —
II
. ....• .
• • ,
- ...............
• .. . <
. -?\
1 ........................... .
•
•. - •
4 la
i ? •
9106A . ••. `'.. .
1: ra __ • • ' • ..'' I.
•-• ' 4,-. i &OP! 411:10 ..
. ....... ....-
0 i•-• c*z.. beila0 . • . ................ . it; in
11 al •o Oat itt
4 • Ch- PA110 i broti '........ ..,a• .
htUt1.0
s AREA: 0.1.8 t AL. •cic3
6 • EffirV "4 L
t
•11 Ling: LIWERLX019.10 trriutiEb mar Z.
MOW BYTHIO SURVEY ‘u
o
..a
E %-nt CELLAR.es ,
=
. ..,
• ;-, .
. \ . ROOaF L' ML•\•1.2 2 06 110-t9E00 y. q
r
Pal( A • LAOVID E RNKER ADV ROEX b SlagE- . L'I' a' -fa'-•c.4 2/I!45‘-7 6r•8e-4 2:17 n7:95r...1D&3m7tV)P 2i-a"11 t
't
1 _
.--1-0 eon.CO criay
ge •}Th.
0.a.• EDZ.V.711:8 N°Naw.a*.
1\
t.3334 nu 4 LA9 & NE? REFEREOLE6 ' Vz.
'14
' •CLIME 9M214 6u5VIVIbiol3/42 •-•PHAtE ONE' MAP OP/ROE 1016 OU 611.1LE15AUGH ROAD
il
• 1\ .
• DaMIJOART UDE MA9 PREPARto 61 bE00.LE BY L.IRMO/a/
6NRYEY DC &MUSK,r.i.,Lb. .-- ?J. - . . 'PAYED:9•12-19.51•
• . ., .
OATEO:9•6•1986 . .. '
- . . •
108 12.1126ELIZE5-1- 1OA-0
•t, NOIR MR a610a TO TIte NalMial WWII'WTI 5.11101 MN ... • GEOWESCHLECH
•LAUPb OF 4iCALE LA-4MM- ist .„. . • - SUBOVISION3OFTHEMDCYOR‘STATEBDUCATOraa... latasadia SCOW
.
K.A.SAXER • .r. - mon.ssoutswosusualon
OD MILITARY tor PAYED: 6-27903 t : 9-19fl Ma 0.5-.._,.......:M sraz: Da 20'
' -;1-.1' -.1if:-..10: '-• I memo et-334.• ;0;09 NEP i j..0
-MUM Of ITHACA .-LOtittrY of itomfKILlh . t- c sa 41
.....,..- ...z 7.1.,:.: ; thezeby certify to anzgsa Atialfrb amt,Et.e.. rt6 SuE6toc6Ami/orAteneasb;
.
. o
6TAIE Of MEV YORK ... , .. - 4
.....'""t.,..":* 3h4-5.- 3, z-,Lhal ham a licensed land surveyor.New YorK5latrticense No.,049190.and that this ' 111- ' LI '"•A 4
.
7.. '''• ....-t.-,-:.;i''''•"zt,rja.,1,1Z,•..r.C.>:;.,-we•..- .-: -,•.‘•-::;;-.1:1...-) V-C41.:1-.:7:-7•. ...-.1 el, mi%43-7.4 ,: . 4-- . •t. •
-7i-
-.:--:Z:#':f.:: ii.::.I";:ti%..‘FFaZg•'-4--.ei-.:.S er."2":1"-f.trAt,17:tibtatet=t‘Cr..-f;;C'er•;:i.:;:."'"15e::::4t\74.7-'1,1 ..t.'
'''''''‘Va'-'n'0_V'A-"C•lell?3..itM1.- L'atre7r-a-t.7...17,,tr,:ti:C7lereerlr%st rrr ti..":?‘thIA,'''.nr:-,n't -- t
ititittraTiall 47.0.V - - - I . . fibifdifialiaitat:4 setttk•firAP • '
1
I�
(° OF 9 TOWN OF ITHACA
d5 126 EAST SENECA STREET, ITHACA, N.Y. 14850
TOWN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY 273-1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273-1736 PLANNING 273-1736 ZONING 273-1747
July 27, 1990
Mr. Doug Wilcox
Chase Farm Development
108 Ridgecrest Road
Ithaca, New York 14850
RE : Temporary Office/Zoning Violations
Dear Mr. Wilcox:
This letter serves as a follow up to our recent conversation with
respect to the use of the existing single family residence at 108 Ridge-
crest Road as an office , in conjunction with the operation for the Chase
Farm and Chase Pond residential development.
Article IV, Section 12 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance permits
"a temporary building for commerce or industry where such building is
necessary or incidental to the development of a residential area. Such
building may not be continued for more than one year except upon special
approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals" .
I believe your use of the residential property at 108 Ridgecrest Road,
as offices for your development, has extended beyond 1 year and as such,
your property is in violation of Article IV, Section 12 of the Zoning
Ordinance .
I have given an application for an appearance and appeal to the Zoning
Board of Appeals to Harrison Rue of your office. Please complete the
application and submit it to this office as soon as possible and I will set
a tentative hearing date for September 12 , 1990 .
Should you have any questions please feel free to call me at 273-1747 .
Sincerely, /
/4 7 I
AndrewaF'rost
Building Inspector/
Zoning Enforcement Officer
A F/d 1 w 1 c -9 b -Cji4Na,,,,," ",,£. cz _6-3-it I I eSZ \)
cc: Shirley Raffensperger 2B� ,,� _ M . hit- 7-6A
Henry Aron , L L. �le q-13 , Zer
c-t)c-4 GT:
(. .cf-vt) 7 7-4-0-y-Je 27,p4os‘9_/)
a-2 Y11:7-0-14 -1? -Y10)'")
^1-0—c ' if 'C/ v V( J c3 v 1 call �//)y,,/� C! o Ac V J / �Q�//}-r�i' )
/_6 X9 -e p
(((/// I } / YI I h
i cg.
iro-r-a--14d-,g
•
o -vro niado-ta J014-)o
QC JYDOGJ `r?rd J140 140 1JY,C7 ' �7,4,-, lOg.4y-r-v-1
w y! -_)..1 $v yS.Sool so Lco.S S-1,
- 1 zsir b ,/ f -Z v-vrenr' -2 7gr-r-p-a-0-190s ' 1 f
04° 2'-r ) -7-t 4-170-t T-°-j 6 621/1°-t1 6 ri-)0 104-z9cl &I-?-14 '-) iti
149
07--ei-9
roco 1�1�� A,70 "1��
S ZfJ ` --1r-ra"vf, _�?rs O c i-do /� Z"--vt,rc7al -Y
i
-' -a-s�,/�,, OW pa sod� �cr 1 6, y ) y
p Q,6 y l-yo GI-> -a-v ,t - ri
?fp, 1�11 D .s .7 rJ gu--lit---)o-vado cbY10J 5 s,-710610AI n,l/r
7,7,Tyv Cv--yrir„ogi-4 a S AO i-m
1 V' 0 U _f_ 0 V
' obb1 -).-1 r' J E Y r y_so v }- T _,
,b-D-0-'9.1`I
s-zr,t-) "0 b C l
111110:777-
TOWN OF ITHACA
COMPLAINT - INVESTIGATION
Date: r-20- p
Owner/Defendant : OAJV ,. A0q„k)
Address of Owner/Defendant : ( CT 241,,,A.NA724)
Address of Property (if different) :
If there is a Complainant :- Name: ralJAa AAu W , / -rbu,�
Address:
Telephone Number:
MATURE OF COMPLAINT: CA1c..--z- Q�w�, e'')A-C-17A., 6') 1
6j/1 ife�� T — t 3 _
Complainant Notified:
RESULTS/ACTION/DATES: CCU e1 .�
.t.:. k)t, Wgot l `-a2 1)
-23 c,0 i - S �- . i, ,�Ds
'nspector: Date:
Zal ii (Y-Rcj
R, dle_cee-St
•
P6ziM0.e)i bUtiLl;P°\ S���ctP obild[; I
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 29 , 1988
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 Wednesday, June 29 , 1988 , in Town Hall,
126 East Seneca Street, (FIRST Floor, REAR Entrance, WEST Side) , Ithaca,
N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7:00 P.M. , on the following matters.
ADJOURNED APPEAL (from May 11 , 1988) of Ivar and Janet Jonson, Appellants,
requesting the authorization of the Zoning Board of Appeals for the
construction of a second dwelling unit to be attached to an existing
legal non-conforming single-family dwelling at 934 East Shore Drive,
Town` of Ithaca Tax Parcel NO. 6-18-5-10 , Residence District R-15 . The
proposed addition is to be located on an abutting legal non-conforming
vacant lot, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-18-5-9, which is to be
consolidated with said Parcel No. 6-18-5-10 . The request is made
under Article XII, Section 54 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance
whereby no - non-conforming building .` may be extended except as
authorized by the Board of Appeals.
APPEAL of Opal W. Sprague, Appellant, Sybil ,S. Phillips, Agent, requesting
variance of Article V, Section 23, Paragraph 2, of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance and Section 280-a of New York State Town Law, for a
2± acre parcel proposed to be subdivided from an 8.82± acre parcel
located at 817 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-35-1-12 .2,
Residence District R-30 . Said 2± acre parcel is proposed to have 75
feet of road frontage, 150 feet of road frontage being required.
APPEAL of Kenneth A. Horowitz, Appellant, William. Gallagher, Agent,
requesting authorization by the Zoning Board of Appeals for the
extension of Ian existing legal non-conforming building on a legal
non-conforming lot at 1006 East Shore Drive, Town of Ithaca- Tax Parcel
No. 6-19-2-25 , Residence District R-15. The proposed extension will
' not substantially increase the footprint' of the existing building,
being primarily the addition of living space over a ground floor
through' the extension of a second floor. The , request for
authorization is made under Article XII, Section 54 , of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance.
APPEAL of Frank A. Bettucci, Appellant, requesting variance of Article IV,
Sections 14 and 16, of the , Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, with
respect to premises -known as 108 Ridgecrest Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 6-45-1-5.2, Residence District R-15, said Sections
requiring a side yard building setback, of 15 feet, a lot depth of 150
feet, and a lot area of 15,000 square feet. Said existing lot is
comprised of 12,5001 square feet, with a lot depth of 125t feet and an
existing building setback on the south side of 11± feet. AND FURTHER,
Appellant is requesting variance of Article IV, Section 16, of the
Town- of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and Section 280-a of -the New York
State Town Law, with respect to premises known as 108 R•idgecrest Road
Rear, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1-5.1 , said parcel -having no
frontage on a Town, County, or State highway.
Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at ' said time, 7:00 p.m. , and said
place, hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto.
Persons may appear by agent or in person.
Andrew S. Frost
Building Inspector/-Zoning Enforcement Officer
Town of Ithaca -
273-1747 "
•
Dated: June •21, 11988 _
•
Publish: June 24, 1988
•
18
environmental significance.
Joan Reuning seconded the motion .':..', -
The voting was as follows:
Aye - Hoffmann, Reuning, King, Austen
Nay - None . : 5 ,
The motion was unanimously ' carried.' - -
' As to the .extension of. a .non-conforming- structure a motion
was made _by Joan 'Reuning• as follows:„ �.,
WHEREAS, - the proposal appears to have a . low : impact on the
neighborhood and would not-be detrimental to the , surrounding
neighbors; and
WHEREAS; no one appeared .in,-opposition .to :this-proposal; it
is therefore
RESOLVED, that this Board- grant permission t'o the applicant
for the extension of:a •'non-conforming structure. ,,-, ,- The voting was as follows: -
Aye - Reuning, Austen,, King",--•Hoffmann- - _ , -
Nay - None
The motion was unanimously carried'.'' %"' i
The last matter on the agenda was as follows-: -
APPEAL of - Frank A._. Bettucci, Appellant, requesting variance -
- of Article : IV, Sections 14 and 16, -of •the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance, -. with respect to - premises- .known :as 108 =
' Ridgecrest Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1-5.2,
Residence District R-15,- said Sections requiring- a side yard
building setback of 15 •feet, a lot depth of 1'50 feet, and- a '
lot area of 15,000 square feet. Said existing` lot -- is'
_ - comprised of -12;50'0± square feet, with :a--iot •depth of 125± - - -
feet and an existing building setback on -the` south- side of - --_ -- _-
11± feet. AND FURTHER, Appellant is. requesting •variance of_
Article IV, Section 16, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance and Section 280-a ofi-the 'New York State Town Law,
with respect' to premises known ,-as 108 Ridgecrest. Road_ Rear, .
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1-5.1, said: parcel- having
no frontage on a Town, County, or State highway.
: 6 - -
Mr. Frank Bettucci stated he was a native µ•Ithacan°_ and'
currently resided in Arlington, Virginia. He stated that he was
planning on coming back to .Ithaca some day in the. near- future
•
-19
since:'he had --his 'roots 'here. ; :- lie-, •wanted to , point: but that" he
would 'like- to, 'make 'a correction'•on: the: sketch before the -Board. : -
The" sketch•_-'said 1 lI-,--feet `-on•,the-.south side; and he believed it was
15 feet. He continued- that -the _former. rowner , that, constructed_
that, h'e- believed,- was in compliance. - , Mr. Bettucci said he
. purchased.,this" Ipiece of property An._ August , of • 1985-:and ,at that -
time his'Attorney had•-done-a�=title search.;and there..were no: liens
or encumbrances,,and' no- -hindrances, but" -the attorney informed him _ _
of- a,,dispute' that',,dated back ,to -:1974 and another • one -,in- 1980
- ,between -,the' Town- of- Ithaca arid' the former- owner. -L Mr. - Bettucci
"said he had an agent contact- the zoning officer . in March and
- ` April-o `=this• year and- inuch- to__h,i's- 'surprise she was told that the:
property„ was" not•--in- compliance• :with '�the,'zoning-, laws - so 'he came
from 'Virginia to "•talk--'withk -the:- zoning., "officer: , He asked the
- . ' zoning" officer for a certificate/Of compliance_which,,was' denied.
The 'zoning•`'officer, mentioned;, to Mr... Bettucci • that he ,_must'- go
through- the 'Zoning Board of= Appeals.` Mr.- Bettucci'.--said he was '
, • trying ;.:to_'- formalize'-,an.- existing • situation ; that -dated back 20
years or Ymor,'e and •he:would:like to- have-,that formalization -in the
form - of—a-a '_'certificate' of -',Compliance. = ' _Mr. -Bettucci -said : he
believed the-- front piece 'of- property "dated 'back '20' years:.or' more -
' and that 'piece of. property --at: the time it was , built was':"-built
under a',==different-'-set' of zoning- lawsi-that, were in ex istence 'at
- ' 'that ,time. -He continued that-- the Town :of Ithaca was well aware
_ ' of the existing structure arid he - -thought- the Zoning Board of
' Appeals -was'. "-involved in- that'•''also at 'the time.. .. Mr. Bettucci -'
stated further "that • iri 1974°'the back_','str-'ucture was purchased by
. - him =Ad. ' it`;:iwas now and-“he , had a'`,sizeable investment 'in it and'
- unde'r the' present" conditions•i'it•,.was -a "very--,serious hardship_ for_
him' riot• -'to ` use , .that, -structure: - :,,He -said ' that the existing
structure-'in the rear was buiit' '' he —believed; ; prior --to 1974. and
-- the 'Town-.of Ithaca- was ' involved--in the -issue 'at-that time As •well
as the ,:Zoning Board -of 'Appeals, • and- because Of that_,and •the -way
- - - - - the 'property existed, the owner had rented it for the last „twenty-
years "since the' other property was built', in 1974. Mr. Bettucci
- ' - 'continued'. that_ the owner had•' - lived'-_-in -it' for - awhile . and had °
-- ' rented': it subsequently:'- " Mr:-;,Bettucci- stated he ,.was asking .the
• ' ' ' 'Board = to,' consider" 'these "things`;:and'•- grant •a. certificate -of
'compliance based on the •fact-' that,•'this, property- Was—Jim 'existence
when--he`bought --it- and •in--he 'had tried ,•tol comply with the :existing
`zoning`' laws'-by 'coming,' in;=and""•asking: for ,a '•certificate, ':and based
- ;on..-thatr, ' he 'respectfully requested the, 'Board to .,consider,' _,this••on -
'the basis - of 'the' previous',,existings-�conditions :for ,.this . piece.
of '
property.` - _-< • -,; --. _ .., a . _ -., �;_` .._:�:,1- ,
S -•Mr._] 'King',.-`,said" it appeareds'Yfroni'}the` correspondence"sbetween
_ - `Mr. Bettucci ==and--the--Zoning-.officer that-: the '-residence in- front
(the- east' towards-,Ridgecrest• Road) was the original -residence;-and
that • e bg- of< =that; which` M Bet Guc referred to,-as -
the` secothn- d uildin-parcel;'we wasst' -a- garage?or:ar:workshop.' Mrci,:;. Bettucci. said
-- - =he did''not know what -itwas•Kas:,:'itwas;;�before -,his,-;ownership. - ,•Mr.
King- -inquired'`-,. if when_f•Mr Bettucci cbought:L.the,property, : the
20
westerly building was being used as a residence and Mr. Bettucci
responded 'it was. Mr. King asked how many units it was and Mr.
Bettucci responded it was a . single family, three bedroom,,,three
bath house and a: perfectly good one. , , . .
' - Mr. King said Mr. Bettucci -had mentioned buying property to
the rear and asked if he meant undeveloped land to- the west. Mr.
Bettucci said he was talking about a, 17 acre piece of property to
the rear of the rear structure -to the west and he had an option
to purchase that property. - _ -
Mr. King asked if Mr. Bettucci had- - thought about :the
possibility of moving that existing .second dwelling to a standard
building lot. and Mr. Bettucci , said he• .had not -at this time and
that- he thought the second structure. in -the rear complied with
the square footage as it was 150 by ,25 • feet. Mr. Frost said the
back lot did not have' frontage on a Town road, and through the
subdivision of the back lot, there resulted an undersized front
lot anct when this was apparently done Mr. Bettucci - did not need
formal subdivision approval from the Town. However, Mr. Frost
continued, when it was subdivided . it resulted in two
deficiencies, one the front lot became under 15,000 square foot
and the ,back lot• did not- have -frontage on 'a -Town, State •or County.' -
highway. i .
Mr. Bettucci said he was confused because ,considering the
-dispute that went on previously as one lot and , then the building
'of -the. - back structure, still the _Town had subdivided it
subsequently.. Attorney Barney said the Town never subdivided
it, that Mr. Franciamone may have subdivided it but he did •not do
it with the blessings of the Town.. . Mr. Bettucci asked how- he
could buy two parcels of land that were on the tax rolls and pay
taxes on two parcels of land and Attorney Barney, said he ,had no
-- idea. - _ . _ _
Air. -King said the Assessor might have asses
_ sed, the two�' at
Mr. 'Franciamone's request and Attorney Barney said this did;-not
go through the Town. Attorney Barney said there was quite .a -bit
of history -to this property which he was not sure was clear and
'he was -not , sure it was Mr. Bettucci's •fault, that he was rather
the :beneficiary of some rather unfortunate experiences the - Town
-had with this property back in the ' early .1970s. - -Attorney Barney
- - -said.-the •Town litigated --at great length over, this property with ' - - -
the initial problem being that for the building in the front .a
building permit was obtained for,' he believed, a house and then a
- -building- permit was obtained for a- carport. Attorney , Barney
'continued that later someone went by and noticed three—units, the
carport had been enclosed and used as an: apartment, ,.the existing
house was- used as an apartment, and- _there had,-been a breezeway
-between""-the two that had been enclosed and housed a room and , a
kitchen. Attorney Barney explained that the Town brought an
action • -for- an injunction seeking to have the house , restored to .
• , , - I 21 - ,
the; -condition,. it- was - supposed ' to=-.have ,, -been in subject to ,:the
building permits ,, issued, „and .in' 'the " course"'of, doing' 'that:- -there' - .
-was- a building in the 'back for, `wh'ich -a`_building, permit had,',_been' -
obtained ;to builds,,a• workshop:_:',.,;_t In the", 'course of doing ,-some
- _-. - _ ,inspections, , in.. the _front and ;the rear, he said, it"turned 'outs--; _
- , that the. socalled: workshop , had -A',kitchen, :
dining facilities, -
bed, etc. -; ,and_ _was".obviously being;:occupied as - a - dwelling' unit.
At that- time, 'Attorney,, Barney said that toir -an 'R30 lot, ; which was- '
- - , : a- 30,-000 '-square'•-foot lot, • there 'were''-'four' units 'under building - -
permits::that ,-allowed at most one •and maybe two units. (He could
' - not recall if ,a building-,:permit, was obtained_ to get.'the ',carport
' - - enclosed)::,::,:;Attorney--Barney said'_that the' Town had gone all -the '
-way,,,up: to ;the. Appellate D`ivisidn,-and the end ,-result was the final -
order- -which.'was---ini"the• record' which,,,'to.°his' knowledge', had never'
been -superseded : in` any' way Th`e -order,-"''he-- said;' specifically
enjoined -,the , use.:,of the rear building for;'-anything other than a •
workshop and it',`compelled; the" 'front' building to be restored to
the way it was '_supposed to have , been according to ' the building
permit.-- ' Mr. , Fr`anciamone= neglected or`'failed' to- do that, Attorney
Barney said,.,. and' a _contempt proceeding was brought against him - -
'and,-he:was._tosse_d ,into jail -for .a period: of time,' and owed a,, fine . -
to the Town -and paid all but'-$50.00 -of the .-fine: Attorney Barney
said that ' was subsequent- to :the 'order in '1972.-' 'Attorney' Barney-,.- -
:did :,notz, know: what , happened '; byr: ;way of,-, enforcement because, _ .
"-obviously, .''it ,-had-: been lost .- track ' of- it '' and he 'did not think - .
anyone, was aware_;that -that- workshop had;`'never '-had a 'building -
permit` issued for it for 'expansion`;into a house: ' 'Attorney Barney.'
did not know what the conditionr'of-' the 'front. building was 'today,: . ,
' - - but- if it, was not a 'single family, house ,with -a- breezeway ,and a ` - ,
- carport it- was not in compliance"'with the' order-:-'': `' -' " ,
- - Mr_.+. .-Frost" thought the record would show' that 'the', front
- hous ,-, at,so eme. time in' the litigation-,:'.'was:'acknowledged to be two . -
' families'up- front - and -the----carport made--three families, and the -
- - - ' order was,to convert the-carport' •area back 'to 'a carport `and_ 're- ,:
- Open- he, breezeway, ` .
Mr.,--tBettu_cci said: he knew nothing 1of-t'�this_"situation-,-,until=. , -
Mr.,-,.Frost„informed him of it. _-' , '�' - - ,---- - - - •
_ .,. s
Mr.' ---Frost' - further_- -added;_ that:_ _when, :Mr_: `:'Bettucci 'made the ' _ •
•request ,she went:-to the, files ,-and-_then .discovered the history of -
the,=property. '- - `
- .r,; _; Attorney, Barney said:.the- order.had-:-some."fairly specific ' ' -
directions-in reference to. the house. 'and-;'the accessory building
- including,;, am ong " other 'things-, :'''that- all. plumbing -'related_ to
occupancy.-,'in,,.,the accessory_,.buildings -' be removed; all sinks,
stoves ;;and-. 'r-,efrigeratorS' and ` all' kitchen`'rela::ed '-facilities be• ,
.removed from :the' accessory buildings;�' and•,:`~all -bedroom furniture,: -
- drapes,,,. and -Other,_items `facilitating such,,"use as-/a''dwelling °unit
- be removed. Attorney Barney said: Whatjbothered''him was that the
22
order was filed in the County Clerk's records and when Mr.
Bettucci said his attorney did a title search he was a little
puzzled as to how this order did not turn up. Mr. Bettucci said
his attorney had mentioned there was ' an action in 1972 or 1974
and a follow-up in .1980 and since nothing had occurred on the
part of the Town or the Zoning Board of, Appeals from 1980 until
the time he bought it and there was no, indication that anything
was pending at the time, they had assumed everything was in -I
compliance and he thought that was a fair assumption.
Attorney Barney said that he knew at the time the order was, •
substantially complied with because they had followed up to the '
extent of -determining - that -at that point but whether ' Mr.'°
Franciamone or Mrs. Cascioli, unbeknownst to theTown went ahead
and did 'something they weren't supposed do, he did not know.' ' '
Attorney Barney said the problem was that they. had an order that •
said that the building was supposed to be in a 'certain condition
and Mr. Bettucci had bought something .that was not in the
condition that the order required. -
Mr. Bettucci said that if that order 'was in existence no •
action, was taken from 1980 until, the time he bought it and he had
to assume that ,everything was in.-compliance at the time.
Mr. King asked Attorney Barney whether a notice of -pendency -
was filed in connection with_ this action and Attorney -Barney
replied there probably was not as they are. not generally filed in
connection with an injunction proceeding.The public hearing was opened. - • -
Carolyn Richter of 110 Ridgecrest Road, •Ithaca, New York,
stated' her family lived right door to Mr. Bettucci's property and
• were the ones most concerned with- the: dwellings 'that were' there.. - -She had several; points she-wanted to raise:
a. Mr. Bettucci -said- that he was not - aware of the problems
with the units and she had no reason to doubt that but she did
think his lawyer should have been aware of them and while she
felt .sorry for Mr. Bettucci she did not. think that reason enough .
. to' grant, him a variance. - • ,
• - 2. .=If -Mr.—Bettucci--himself- was not aware of these-problems
it was peculiar since at 110, they became aware of the problems
with the , unit next door and it was rumored all over the street.
She =wondered .how Mr'. - Bettucci could not have been aware • of the
problems unless it• was because he lived in Virginia. = •
3. , ; Her concern,was that Mr. Bettucci was an absentee owner'.
All of the other houses on the street, except for the first 'three
which , are rental _ units, are owner-occupied, single - family
dwellings. She thought„the character of the neighborhood was -not
23 '
' , being maintained .at -,108 ..and d -in, fact-, = people had-,menti'oned for her ,
that, it* was` a _ shame that an eyesore -such. 'as 108 had'- to be next'
door, to;her'•: The house'_ was not•;reared -for` in the same manner -the
other houses'in the•`;neighborhood-were:: - ' - - -
- , J .4._ The workshop certainly was '-not. r a workshop but''Was, 'an
apartment or :house or whattever,',you"wanted to ,call -it. -_-` • -•- ;
• 5. ,, :'Thepreviousltenants'were somewhat ,of "a nuisance to her
for` several ' reasons."''- :They t;were'.'ve'ry' :noisy, and there -was a '
problem-with; garbage. 'There -were'=great mounds of garbage r both in -
thei_front--;and,:;especiall_y.""'in;'the' back yard which repeatedly blew-
over •into., their, property-.•so-_they ,had'to 'pick it: up which was _not =
-, pleasant.. ,L.,rNew._ tenants`, had; just • in6ved; in 'and 'so ,_far there had
been•,a:.,large, _van, and several motorcycles ,parked there and she was
- hopeful _that the,new tenants, would- not be a problem.
' - 6: She- 'was ' concerned •",'th`at something - that ,' had been in -
violation for so, many -years, had been allowed to -go on. Now- Mr.
Bettucai was: asking 'to '-have this made ' legal and she_ did not see
any; ,reason -:why; something"'' illegal that ''had- been ' causing :her- -
p'roblems aesthetically and,,with."noise and 'garbage,,' 'should; 'now be-
,
turned into something legal. = - ,
7. F ` One Of the neighbors: had put a 'fence up so-_ they-' Would
• not"have. .to' look at ;the unit- at -108`''as-- they found -it•disgusting. .'
, - - Roger' Sayre of 110',Ridgecrest. Road, •Carolyn's husband;==- '-' . -
'concurred with,everything she had said`-, and :wanted wanted to raise:a a few -
points,_of his_own i _,rde; A` ; . • , , . , - '
•,?,-1 tThey -were from`'California- `and- 'enjoyed living Min the east
because -there-"was``not a, .lot' offi "broken;'land_ and 'you did not see
fences °with1'"the •intent --of"excluding ,-your,neighbors and the fact -
that a( •.fence' of '•that' nature,'=was present --was -Symbolic ofthe-
• character�'of:4_the dwell ing''next �'door.. ' - • _ ---- ' '' _ - - Y ' -
- - - ';2; -- Y He-:did-"not''think that, -something which was' already' non-- - _
- conforiming,' 'and_; illegal • should'`be _granted; -a variance.ce-. • He'" would' - '
encourage "the Board notiy ;`only' to ;deny'thatr,' request for a variance
',but.,perhaps,',.open:-th-is„'issue m'back`'up '-legally and ask the "zoning , , - _
. , officer:perhaps,
actively- enforce the 'Order -which-had been standing_ for-' ,
- 20 years. - . - ' ' ,.,,y } -' `a - - _ ; - ,. . -' -
3 ., Be -urged the Board to deny-'- the .request .for- .a.' variance -
and take whatever legal action was necessary,. -
,Mr:_,.Joe'-.Jeraci -of,,,112 Ridgecrest Road• said- that he did feel
- sorry, for;Mr. Bett iccl''beca_use 'he'h(ad`-apprently been taken': - Mr.
- 3 eraci``had- _'been•''' flying ' in the' area_- for ',ten ears and three or
four years ago-.when he, came -t'o `ar' Town Board meeting ' when Mr.
' ' . ' - Fr-anciamone was ..acting;, as -an - agent for- another lot, it was
r,rH.l i.°nY.Y'•+rla,Y••4 r •,i .!r r I ' • ,"f•!c r•t•ar•1 1 i •. •(�•
24
brought up that there were people living at 108 in the back. Her
continued that they were told •that it was known that no one was
supposed to be living there and 'it was going to be taken care of.
In the meantime, he said, Mr. Fr <nciamone had 104 and he built an
apartment in his garage and someone had called the Town Board
several years ago when this was starting and let them know that
this was occurring. Mr. Jeraci,
said what he was getting at was
that hecould not endorse the variance because even though he
realized, it was a hardship because Mr. Bettucci had purchased the
property, it was a hardship on, Mr. Jeraci and he thought he
should have a variance to have an apartment on the back of his
property to generate some income because everyone could use some
extra income. Mr. Jeraci said he ' did not want to say that
students caused problems as tenants but they stick out in the
neighborhood because , sounds travel. He continued that everyone
wanted to have country living so the students like to have
parties at one o'clock in the morning.
What Mr. Jeraci worried about was' that if this variance was
approved simply ,because it was existing and had not been
resolved, 'then he assumed Mr. Franciamone would want a variance
on 104. - •
Mr. Frost said _ that .104, for everyone's information,, would
probably be in legal hands In the near future as the notices
alleging -that ' there was an apartment in the garage had been
-
ignored.•
Ms. Myrtle Whitcomb of 233 Troy Road said that she knew her
property was somewhat removed from the subject premises.
However-, she continued, she was an officer of the South Hill
Community Association which included residents of Troy,
Ridgecrest and King Road area. She said she came down to the
meeting to see what the story was and felt moved to say something
in support of her neighbors. She thought that multiple wrongs
never make a right. She felt sorry for Mr. Bettucci as he
probably did have a-hardship but felt, however, that he had other
recourses. One recourse;• would.be to sue the attorney who did not •
properly, advise him and another recourse would be to sue the
person who sold the place- `to hiii under false pretenses.
She concluded by saying-_she would like to request that the_ Board _
uphold the spirit of the -zoning- ordinance.
,, ,The public hearing was closed. _
-Mr. -Bettucci stated'that he' had'a few things to say:
•
1. He was a, little concerned 'about the lack of sensitivity
of some, of the comments of the neighborhood people although he
could appreciate ,their position. , .
2. He was also concerned that this situation had existed
- 25. - - : " • '
- for years and ;yea'rs a`nd this 'groiip'-'of, 'individuals -had 'access to -
this' Board - and 'a- rebuttal system ,that 'Was' !''in`'place. "'He tried- to
comply,, ,with :,then State,., ordinance-, and the zoning ; laws when he
• bought•,the:,property ,aid.,•went;";to`;the,,'• Town--for a ' certificate of
compliance.-, He -thought,the Bard had 'an„ obligation as well -as: . .
- the individuals ,present '- tram',the+:.`neighborhood, who should have"
come to,,the.,,,, Board _when „the previous t•,owner owned the premises
instead -,of, letting'•Mr ' Franci_amone get -away with murder 'without
-- anything happening to him-. "' ' _'
- - :3. ,:The•Tissue in questionF,should- :have' been resolved by the -
Board and, the ndividua =presents tonight_'`prior to his i purchase'
of. .the i ls,
property,. ,.. •,- , ,
,,4-., , He would suffer`.'fr•om„-'a., ,negative. decision, and he ' felt
that was; completely wrong: - - - - - •
- ' Vice-Chairman- Austen. thought �,Mr' Bettucci's attorney 'did not
do a very good job. 'Mr-. " Bettucci 'said:":he'-thought- his' attorney
- did- his -job, that he - -had"toid'` Mr.' Bettucci •that -there was
something-3in+.,the record,in 197.4 ,and 1980. ,
- - -- .Vice;Chairman''Austen-.,,',thought -that "should have 'stopped Mr.
Bettucci -. • . • _ . '� a�_ ,.. _, ' , , 1,, • , .- -
Mr. - Bettucci ' said ',:the points was--- 'that ' from' 1980 ',to": the'
present+time the Board did not„take any. action. - - '_ - -
' .Vice f,Chairman , Austen ,'said- that the Board could not- go--`down
- -and. check, every's_`residence ' and- Mrs`'Bettucci responded that that - -
.was .,an obligation the `,Board" 'had -as' well ,as the -individuals
. • present,, that_ if' there was -something' going on -they' -did'-not`: like _
they-should have_`contacted -the-,Board: - '='h` -- -_ '- • -.
• . •,--,-�-,--:Mr:,,,,King�-asked.-Mr. -Bettucci;-'if''--lie . considered- 'in 1985`y-- when - _
,,he: bought ` the property,:•';of. coming' to the Board and'- asking,'f or=,a ,
• certificate of =occupancy -,at. that';time ' `t`-'''`'y-" ; ' `-- - -`''q,!- - -
' •;- Mr. 'Frost said that Mr.` Bettucci 'had written a;'letter`,saying .
that after' he had`-purchased 'the property'he visited the Town'Hall ,
several` times, in 1986,' .19.87,- and '1988." 'ti` •- : ' , - ' '
-.-; c,Mr:. ,King .,asked" if Mrs " Bettucci ;had' come to the Town-:before-
' - he ,bought,the. property and Mr., -Bettucci r,stated he had -not''because
there:,was,` no, reason to` ' ;.. :',> - - r,•=.--,-- '._.,;'..?�,� ;.,;:, .
Vice=Chairman Austen said,;that- there certainly was a ' reason' = -
to do- so and his- attorney •should have invade-him aware`•of, that.
.Q__, Mr: Frost .;said that-,MOst times,,,when^'a=property 'purChased
the bank, will ' require- a certificate -_4o'f''"'compliance-;'but Mr.
- Bettucci had bought the property' outright. ' - Mr. Frost continued
26
that Mr, ..Bettucci might have been tipped off had a bank required
a certificate of ,compliance. . " ,
Attorney Barney, said in: fairness to Mr: Bettucci in 1985 it
was not the custom to ask for`J" a certificate of occupancy for ''a'.
-single family dwelling but ,more and ,more today. _that is becoming '
the case. He further .stated that if Mr. Bettucci's attorney hadsaid, there was a problem that:might have- triggered, Mr. - Bettucci'
into coming to the Town. - _' '" " ' - ' '
Mr.- B,ettucci said, he and , his attorney had discussed the •
• matter and looked :at the-situation from 1980 to 1985 and there
was nd further action' on the part" of the -Town' and the neighbors"
were not complaining at that time. He stated that he- felt that '
had this issue been raised at a meeting like this before he could
have accepted it more. " Mr.' Bettucci said -he went to the Board
two years after purchasing the property-because he was trying to
comply .with the rules only .to be told by Mr. Frost that he had to
get a variance ,from the Zoning- Board of Appeals. But, he stated,
he was .,there- to. do-,what he was, -told to: do.-
Mr. Frost said that -Mr. Bettucci came, to the 'Town in '-1986 •.
• _ prior to Mr. Frost working- there i,inquiring about encumbrances on -- -_
a property. In response to a letter from 'Mr'.' Bettucci Mr,. Frost .-
- sent a letter to Mr. Bettucci, dated May - l9., 1986, a copy of
which is 'attached hereto as Exhibit 10.'•, _ ,
Attorney Barney said he hated to remind e
- everyone but there
was a •case in New York City where someone in the zoning office
made a: mistake,, and ,later when ' they learned_ 'of it' the: Court
ordered -that 17 - stories had to come off of 'a building:' 'He
further_ stated .that--occasionally',.mistakes- were made even though
no one liked to make them but, he did .not:_think a mistake was made
- - - here.- He thought if someone had taken' a look at' the order they • - --•
-- • . could -see it ,wa_s ;,very, specific.,_ . ,•(A copy, of said -order is -
attached< hereto as _Exhibit ' 11") .` _ ' Attorney ' Barney said that
- • although Mr. Bettucci -was saying- the Town ''had 'done nothing with • -- '
respect to this problem, then `neither "had ' kr. Bettucci done
anything- with regard to. the problem , before he purchased the
., property even . though his'' attorney" had said- there was a history -
there. Attorney Barney felt that- Mt: ,Bettucci should have done- .
some investigating _'in '1985 _befor-e 'he bought the property--when he - _ -
_ - ' . was alerted -by. his :attor-ney- ,that there might be a problem. - He - • • .
- continued that when the;.Town knew_ a property was •in violation the
Town moved on it although -maybe riot as-rapidly as' everyone: woul'd
like because sometimes the Town does not know about- the problem.
:Mr.; Bettucci, said that- for five years the 'Town 'did-'nothing.
Attorney Barney, said the Town did.not know about it for five
years and Mr. Bettucci said ' ,the Town did' because the '"records
showed it. ,, - ,
•
`' • 2 7 ' _ '
Attorney- , Barney asked- ' .what .-records ,,Mr. Bettucci. was
- , -referring,,to: and Mr `,Bettui cc ':'sai :.s d- he' was- peaking' of-the order.
' Attorney' Barney, 'said the-Order- was 'enforced in''-1972 and in 197'5 ' ;
when Mr-='Franciamone was„ thrown into'=jaii''for' contempt:- ` ' -':`'-• -- - .
, .. . '.1'i-- 0::: '- ,. . ., ;�L. . _ -, 1, , . .- _ . .,.
Mr. Bettucci '•said , but. ,nothing happened. Attorney Barney
_ said yes;' something -did--happen-;';:'-•Mr:'-'Fra-nciamone went, to jail, for
- - his '_contempt ;and- he- corrected_' "then'=situat'i'on: _ ' ' - - ' ' _
Mr.--Bettucci said nothing was done about taking the building '
- - down 'and now the Board was asking, Mr. Bettucci to -do -that. '
- Attorney ' Barney said that., in 1975 -they got Mr. Franciamone -�
into compliance: Mr., Bettucci asked what Mr. _ B_ arney meant. ,
- . Attorney Barney ' said' th& bu ldirig- was restructured ih accordance
. with the terms of- the order .and the :back building was vacated as
an occupancy',in,`19 7 5 ` < _
- • _ Mr. ` Bettucci- said_ the'• ';order" indicated- t_he building hadto' -
- -- - come,,down ' -Attorney Barney 'said''''it did' not say,•, it had to come - - . -
down`,_' ._but had 'to'' be 'restructured,'''to ; comply with the' building -
.permit -. as '_`requested. 'e,r,,. He ',Said '_-that ' there -might have' been
modifications --;• that, '-'th'e'',`:`Town -authorized` `and -there -was .some '' _
' question_ as- - to whether _the .,Town - ;might have authorized' - the
continuation of a. two-family , building in the front which he -
,be_lieved.`'they did. >r .'. ;<;t .. ..,'k,' '•'._.:,' , _-,. . s ..,'' y -' :1 '
_, L- .' ,.'.. - :.., t" {:C. -,_.'.,: � .,`;,, . ,.. '. . . , „ ,
Mr.: - Frost said the' ''1975�''reaffirniation 'was ' sent -'to ' Mr.--'
Bettucci along with 'the original letter,.
` -. Mr. • ' Bettucci?- -said?—1i'e 'Icould-' --not' ' understand ,- 'how-"Mr: --
Franciamone was in- compliance, and Attorney, 'Barney' replied that in- .
- - - 197,5"he`-"was• in ompliance -_,that-he.-vacated' the' back premises and -
- --- used it - onnly `as 'a'-''worksh1op.' '`•Mr: 'Bettucc'i' = said''''that was' only •
temporary. 'and-Attorney-Barney asked if'Mr. Bettucci was here then-
and knew about this and if' _so-,- had he made a complaint -because
-. _ had he made- ,a .-complaint then maybe something would have been done -
•
- about _it. .s., .. . _ -:'.. r,,1:. •i. ,:1;; .,;;< ;. _,; - • . , '. , . : .- . -
- :Mr: ,Bettucci 'asked--whyirr'if ,Mr.,'''Fiaric'iamone• was in- compliance •
' and`-'vacated'the` building; - there was a Problem' now:' �`- - - -
. ,,t?-a .. .:,,, z�, s. .r:s , ', ' 10`..;,4 _ -': ;".,, ,.. '_ .. ,'y, ,. , , ,c . - . . " .. .
- ,'' -Mr':' King''responded • that'-:Mr:°,Bettucci ''had a building 'th`at was .
being used :,:as,. "'a dwelling 'unit:'''when''-it`"'was.'° prohibited , ' Mr:=
v v-, e, y 7 fir. � a�,
•
-Bettucci }'claimed -that, Mr." ,Fr'anciamone-- rented out the:' workshop.-•
Attorney'Barney; said as far'as'the'-.Town-knew:when Mr. _Franciamone
was: jailed .he brought'thel'property 'into'compriariae' and,he'was 'not:
_ ' aware - of any,, -problem_until Mr. •Frost spoke to him L.:everal months
ago,about 'it. w i4, 4 !'s 'o� ,1�'} .- irbf-le;1.4' t. ,ti} . a' ` .t.
-'-' _ ",'% ,?Y, - t-7 , _ r ii-_ _ ' -
• Mr. Bettucci said that apparently people in the neighborhood
28
claimed this had been an ongoing problem.
Attorney - Barney said he did not personally know, that- as a
fact and the problem was . that Mr. Bettucci had a building that
was not complying ,now and there was a history,, that - said Mr. ,
Bettucci should have known about this problem.
Mr. ; Bettucci - said it was unreasonable for the Board to
expect him to take an investment :like this and turn it into a
workshop and therefore lose money. He said he could not go -along
with this. _
•
Vice-Chairman Austen said he did not think there was a
choice. • ,
Mr. Bettucci said, it would get ,involved then. •
Mr. King brought up the matter of the option on the adjacent
vacant land. Mr. Bettucci said he did have an option but he was
involved in a - legal suit over this with -Mr. Franciamone. _ - Mr.
Bettucci said if that was successful there was a proposal to ,
knock all the buildings down ,in front except the middle one that
was owned by another individual, and - landscape the -whole -front '
end and if that,...ever -came to, ,pass it would be an aesthetically , -
pleasing,- area. ,
Mr. King asked when Mr. Bettucci expected a resolution of 1
that litigation and Mr. Bettucci responded he was looking for
something to happen by September- of,_1988., , , -
•
Mr. King asked if Mr. Bettucci had' the same ' attorney
representing him that he,,had when he bought the' property. _
- Mr. Bettucci ,emphasized the;.fact .that' his attorney had told,
him there was an action ,in. 19-74 -and 1980 on this property and he
thought the , attorney was ' forthright in ., giving him , that '
information.
Mr. King said it seemed to him that' Mr. Bettucci'-had taken -a'
calculated risk. Mr. Bettucci said he did not think so because '
if there was a zoning ordinance that -said.-that everyone must -have
a certificate of compliance he would have been to ,the- Town '
looking for_:-one before he bought- the property,- but since 'there-
was no regulation on that he did, not do so. . _Mr." Bettucci said he
was a foreign service officer. and; had' come, ,from overseas 'to buy,
the property. He felt he went into the matter, with his - eyes
open, that there was no calculated risk' as there, were no'
compliance requirements, and_he bought the "property: ; ,
Vice-Chairman Austen ' cited 'Section 76 - of the 'Zoning
Ordinance which states as follows:
. . . . . ,
, .. . .
. ,
, .
. .
. , ., , .i• , -',','' , : , . -
_ .
„ .
. .
. , .
. .
29. .
. . ,
. . ,, .
. "Certificate of Occupancy: '„ Each property owner shall be
, - responsible for 'compliance with all ;terms of . this ordinance -
:-4ffectingyhis • prope,rty, including restrictions:- on change of
use. ,i-' , - LUpon- Application_ --and . inspection or . explanation '
satisfactory to - the person _designated by. the'. Town . Board,
such. property owner _ shall be entitled to a Certificate -of
. .2,e,;•,-Odcupancy ''':-certifying'', -that:, the ' Occupancy,:: _or- - proposed
- .-'-:.,:.' ,occupancy,scomplied.,.witli‘-this)'ordinance."- - - „r: ' „r `'.'
. ..
-- :-:-:-_,.., ul-,- ' . :.'• '4'-'-':'-F'-- . - r ''- , z'''".',-..) .'-',.:- ',.- :._ , .'.:'r . +;- . %); . , : - : I' '.
Mr. Bettucci asked how ', far :back this went and , „Attorney-
Barney said it went back to 19,68. L
-.:' ,- ;-; 1:- , , = ', -: •= .,,. 1 ' . ,, -4 ,-.:)," ', , ,' , '%: ,:
',-:-:-lir:- '-aettiicck.,asked',if-)thi-s--Was sayings that •he- as' a property ,
pUrchaseras-,, -required torget• a''-certif idate of domp-liande : and
Attorner:: ,i3arney- - 'responded . that -' as : 'a 'ilproperty'',, -owner ; he.- was,:
required to comply: , .' ,- , .' _ ._.-, -- -,.....n, ,.: --.', ',1 --.. .1 --,. -',-,.L:. ' ,•, J.1„.._ _\_.-,._ • -..,..- .
-...-'a., :-Attorney'' Barney . did ---,ribt: ''warit _the'„ board' -to- have , any
mistinderStanding ..,'He• said„the"order was= not cast in.-stone arid if
onef,read:'the,:order.;•_each provision States-•ithat the "building shall
be ':-',iri ,-• al L;particular '.--configuration' 'unless authorized lair - the .
. plaintif f','(Town',.of Ithada)tso ',the •Board was not locked in-. bY-- this . ,
orderdand2.:•could..,'grant' a -:variance ',juSt. --like it.f would. ;to-'anyone,;,
, else -if-_it- chose- to do so. . ,
111" ' -
, .. ;'-,',::,,,,-1Mr,i:',',..Kin4.)-; felt the ,•-' variances . should be deniedz and 'Mr. ;
Bettucci-asked,iif - he: was'. Speaking_. of- -the front lot -also and Mr`:
. - -. King responded , heY-waS,- that he .:.thought the Board should consider. .
this as. one lot until it saw a legal subdivision of it and there
- .-hadr;notf•P‘beew one:,-, He. -continued, that::the rifront dwelling.,would be
_.
in compliance ,but not the second dwelling. ,- , ••, ,• '7 -Y : ,- i. :,.k. '.: t..,::::
. c(1/Ir".' 'FroSt said ',that the -front' lot -through:, the-process Of the •
,
' subdivisiOn"resulted'. in- a'• square ' footage Of 12,500+ square feet, '•
I- " ' under the A15''t6day 'it :needs to- be. 15,000':Isquare-, foot, so the lot-,,
was :undersized . :'''-'c, .; ' -" -''Ll ; : ."... , - •'.'',';..1.-'1 '--=. - :-1., • (..,::-, ' ...•,-, ---:- ,
'_':- - .• ,- . - -i.„.-• , ._:' , _,: , ,, --. ':, - '
• ,Mr. King said that, there , Was -no eridence that there are .
' actually tWoctitles here' so, he' did -not -see how that could be two separate. lots. ••-1„:1..1' • ---c - "-- •;;;L-,c-,:-_- --' , ' ' -' •L'••!.•:, ',,. ' ,''-' ..'i ' ', --- .L-''''''..'''-. ,
'3 Mt--.:'-'-'Bettlicdi said they had two separate tax parcel 'numbers'. ,
, ,_ - :),c- , • . . -, r- r-• -.., , • ,, ... t.,. _
. . Mr. - King said that' _tax parcels were riot _controlling and that -
- - then-waristhei,Assessor 'set -theiii -'up has I no!:-bearing'',on the, - zoning
-oi•dinance.,..; :..1 ' 1_,Q-, i.t.,,, :_:.., .1 1,7,-..-.,k, ,_,:.,,-:._..,,-,r._' . ...c-:-q',L7-1,-- -1 ,.'.,:,1: :. -.: ? .', -....:•!: „:_'': .:;, ,
.. ' ,f-.:)1--,L-Z,.;''If, ii:ie. c, et..1:: _ -,, ' -. :'--,,,..,. . j
Frost asked'askee-if '.• it 'mould' -make, 'A difference .if .they-:,were?
. . two separte- deeds- 'and. Attcitney •Barney asked, if „there,,was. .'a, map
showing two separate --lots. , - ,
, L,.-:,1 ,,„-,,,af_, -'!1 5 I:,.-:.,`, ., „,:. ,,, c:;-,-_ -..--r: :-,--, ,. -i-,I=.:'.1 '.:' --, 'i .-:'-- , - ' -, •
' - -'` ,;.i7:'!"Vide-4C-hdirtiailv Austeri.:'`stated .the ,map. presented_ to the', Board
• ' ' ,
, . . .
. • , ,
. .
. .
, . .
. • , , ‘•
. . .. . . . ,
. • .
, . .. . •. .,
, , .
30
was not a, certified map.
Mr. King said Mr. Bettucci acquired' title to both parcels at
the same , time and whether they •were --separately described in -that
deed, he did not. know. • - -
•Mr. Bettucci •.said• it seemed as though' - on the map . it was
subdivided. - Mr. King_ said there •was a', dashed line across that
the surveyor had surveyed it as -one lot and somebody had set a
pin .in there
Mr. _ King said, that based on these facts he would move that
the Board find that only-the easterly. dwelling was .in. conformity
provided• that it be considered to occupy the entire parcel- of 100 .
feet by 300 - feet; -•in other words that it occupied- the original , -
parcel that was the subject of the action previously.•
- Mr. Frost asked that if •the Board denied the back building
tonight and Mr. Bettucci, came to• Mr. Frost the •next- day-and asked
for ,a- certificate--of compliance for the front building could that
be, issued 'by Mr: Frost,. • and Mr.. King - responded,; that -no, he , did
not see how it _could. Mr. King said the Board must regard this-,
as one 'building. -lot, _10.0 feet by. 300 feet,• as it-.was.originally.• :T
Mr. Frost asked- if Mr. Bettucci had to do something for the -
Board 'to. regard, this whole parcel as one. . Mr. King responded
that he. ,must terminate the , use of • the rear •build-ing, as s a
residential unit andthat, would- bring it into compliance. ,
Mr., Bettucci said he had a year's lease on that -and he ,would
be in litigation with his tenants. . - _
Mr. Frost said_ that 'both the , front building and the -back -building- were vacant as- of the date of his-,initial =visit •to that
property and Mr-.' Bettucci said that was correct,, that-it had' been - -
vacant for almost ten months but he could not pay mortgages
without collecting rent. - -
Attorney ' Barney asked if there - were mortgages , on , -the
property now and Mr. Bettucci responded there were. -
n_ Mr.,, Frost said .that :on-,-May 13th he was . at the, property and - -
both buildings were vacant.
, -•Mr. King inquired 'when Mr. Bettucci had leased the buildings
and Mr. Bettucci responded that one was leased on the 15th of• • -
June and the other one was leased shortly after the 15th of June,
for- one : year. . .Attorney Barney asked if there. -were•- people in
there .now, and Mr. Bettucci responded there were. ,• .
Mr. Frost mentioned that he had had a complaint about noise,
motorcycles,. cars,_ - etc. on the property •just several days , -
_ - o
`I: - - 31 .
earlier. , , - - - ' - - "
-A .motion_was, made by Edward King as follows: w - ."
' - WHEREAS, this Board finds ,the following:- - -
' - 1. The area in question =is ,a strictly residential area.
- -. _ 2. , ' The dev.,elopment ,on -the- subject.. property is certainly -
- - twice- as_ intense , as it- ought to .' be under the Zoning
- Ordinance. ' . - . -
'3. -While perhaps the applicant has been hurt financially it-
- - . appears_ that the neighborhood would be even more hurt ,and
depressed by Our endorsing -this kind of intense occupancy.--`
- , 4. The' AAA' foot -by 300 foot total -lot depth; •does not.lend
itself " to- the kind- of :subdivision. that has occurred in the-
- past- on these- lots. -
-5. , 'It may be that the-- applicants will find,. some ., other `
' _ _ solution -` in' his litigation/ concerning adjacent -.property ,
., - where he - might be able toonsider moving' this unitFto a
full size ,lot- elsewhere. - ,
- 6. - The Board -finding that , it was dealing with one -
' - building -lot rather-than two, legally :subdivided lots. ' -
" 7. .The' proposal would not promote .the, -general welfare of
the"community. _
THEREFORE, be it --
-
RESOLVED, that- this, Board -denies the._ requested variances; - -
- , - - and it is further , ; - - ' , - ,
- - - - RESOLVED, that- this Board, shall requi're- the cessation of use - . -
- of the -westerly- building as a dwelling unit promptly.
- - _ Joan Reuning- seconded-the -motion.- - ,- -- . ,- - -
The voting-'_was as- follows:' - - -
Aye =, Reuning, - Austen, King, Hoffmann - - '
Nay - None- . , '
The motion was unanimously. carried. . - ' - , - ,
•
32
The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beatrice Linco
Recording Secretary
Exh. '2ts-1. through 11 attached
APP V DO-
te,
Zia e'
Edwa-r0 Austen
Vice-Chairman
APPROVED*
Henry Aron
Chairman
• bat_ zo; itauzo44y uMoy zno o; za;;vm •
sTgf za;az o4uoTgov ti
anvq •TTTM, 1886 T 'St }snbny acq zn000 anogs ati;
;o zaql.Tau 'PTnoTS •BmT4 gvtf 4, Pvog gsazoabpTg 80T qv MbuTPTTnq
ATza4sam.' au; ;o Aouvdnoao acts1 amp xo ' '-886T - 'ST -gsnbny Aq sweat
au3 ;o Adoo v 'am o; ;Two noA ;vq4 •buTxsv uiv I 'XTTvuTil
•pa.Tnbaz aq gou 'TTTAOOT v, a;,TPwT uvq; aa4uvzvnb
;ouuvo I 'z0A9A014 '4zvd znoac uo uoTgov vgVTPaumcT xaas_ uvgq zaunvz
'uodn paazbp WI uvo Nagvp aouvTTdmoo„ v ;T auTmaagap' sdpuzad
•
_f __--Pum=1 assaT _ST144-;o.. ddoo p MaTA91 :oq _bu_rTTTM aq PTnoM I ' MasvaT„
p zapun squpuaq P i ttoA ;vgq 886-T '6Z -bunk-uo--buizvag'zno -------- ?`- --_-
qv pa4PoTpuT noA aouTS •uoTgntosaz sTpaddy ;o pavoa- buTuoz ag;
g;TM 'buTATdwoo pup suoTgvTOTA buTuoz aim -buTgvgv znod ,'Azvssaoau
;T uOTgop TpbaT ubnoiuu 'ansznd gsnut-I ,aUITl uT ' quT0d szct;_ ;K
•eouvuTpzp:-buTuoz VovuPi ;o uMoy au; ;0
9T pup t,T uofoag 'AI atoTgi1 jo uoTgeTOTA uT buTaq sp saT;zadozd
znoA pagTo 'seta;T zaggo buouiv goTTM 'zaggaT 8861 - '61 ARK Am
sTpaddV ;o pzpog buTuoz au; azo;aq aoueavaddv -znol 'oq zoTzd .
. •4Tun bITTTaMp -P sp paTdn000
buTaq TTT4S ST wbuTPTTnq 1CTza4saM„ sT114 ;abpa1Moux A m oy
_ „•ATgdmozd- -
;Tun buTTTamp a sv, pasn aq o; aspao isbu-Tp[Tnq ATzagsaM„ -agl.
;o esn auk 4pg4 paATosea zaggzn; pzpog agq. App gpuq. uo Pup ' 886T
' 6Z ATnr uo pzaog buTuoz ati4 Aq paTuap azaM s;sanbaz znox
(,•noX off. za;;aT 18861 ' 6T iPW -
Aui oq za;az aspaTd) MVII uMoS, aqV S xaox MaN agq. ;o p-08Z u0Tg0aS
pup 'aoupuTpzp buTuoz Pomp' ;0 uMoy atJ ;0 91 Pup 'T u0TJ,oaS
'AI 9-1°T4'V moz; SeDUPTZPA buTgsanbaz s1paddv ;o pzpog buTuoz
poet;{I-;o.-uMoy..aip, azo.;aq pa.zveddp noA 88,6T ' 6Z aunt up
. . Toon q.,ag •ski zp8Q
_ Z• S Pup T ' ST-S-'-9#
- Taoipd xpy popggI ;o- uboy .
- ppog ;sazoabpTg 801 :ag
TOZZZ KA' '1404buTT1V
--� ;aei s 114LT 1441ON THE
J - Toon;;ag ){upz3 •1HI
.2,4Ax.,,?----d„.,-,7--,-x-7-7-- ,-2,./--r V • P
886T it 4snbfV '
r V:) H.s[ a O NMO.� Offlit• t
1 -- - X1ox MIN 'vwrw .
11 -1“
Vat: ,:ate s � ®a�
L_____L______JC
r
K&aE@PI
lk.
TOWN OF ITHACA FEE: $40.00
126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED: /a)
Ithaca, New York 14850 CASH - C
(607) 273-1747 . CHECK - 0210)
ZONING: AL - 1,5
APPEAL For Office Use Only
to the
Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer
and the
Zoning Board'of Appeals
of the
Town of Ithaca, New York
Having been denied pennissionfor Certificate of Compliance for 108 Ridgecrest Road
District R-5 Tax parcel 6-45-1-5.1 and Tax parcel 6-L5 -1-5.2 (108 on the road)
at ' 108 Ridgecrest Road - , Tows of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1-5. 1 & 6-45-1-5.2 , as shown on the accompanying
application and/or plans or other supporting documents, for the stated reason that the
issuance of such permit would be in violation- of:
Article(s) , Sect ion(s)� J b ) a�6O-A y.S,1 )WP L
of t' he Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance,
the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and, in support of the
Appeal, affirms that strict observance of the Zoning Ordinance would impose PRACTICAL
DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follaNs:
(Additional sheets may be attached as necessary.)
At the time property in question was purchased in August 1985, there was nb indication
of' a zoning problem as the property was then rented and functioning normally. Title searc
indicated there were no leins or judgements against the property. The town zoning had
divided the the single lot into two distinct parcels and taxes have been paid on the two
parcels. My visits to the Town of Ithaca office in 1986, 1987 and 1988 gave no indication
that there was a zoning problem when talking to Town of Ithaca Officers, and discussing
right of way through the 108 Ridgecrest property. The Town of Ithaca has permitted the
former owner to carry on a rental business and occupy the premises in questioned without
Signature of Owner/Appellant: Date: June 1, 1988
Signature of Appellant/Agent: Date:
Town Of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
CONT'D Appeal
challenge or without futher dispute which is indicative of no challenge for or
question of any zoning restriction for me as applicant for a zoning variance
and request for a Certificate of Compliance.
As the applicant has conducted business openly, without any attempts to conceal
his intentions and had made his ownership known to the Town of Ithaca on
numerous occassions without challenge, nor has the Town of Ithaca ever challenged
the former owner prior to purchase by applicant after 1981, applicant should be
grandfathered into compliance and given a Certificate of Compliance for which he
humbly requests at this time.
Frank A. Bettucci June 1, 1988
Owner
-_- , - -- - -• --- - - - - - • - . _ -
. �. , -MA-GN ETI,C 1ag3_ -
PtPE- _ -
Sg
_ 6o
: - GOUC::R'
., : ,:: -, , - ' ' , ,
- N 11
- , / . . , v.- ,
-• ".SA,QcggS ` s
49 •
• . _ 1-• 0 ,,,,•' of NEIV '-..''P a . O _
� �� ,9
_ ,_ _ _ , . 1 ' ..•. ;toil, 1' i Cr i _
-- . . LAND S• '
/ _
+=- - -_ -
fAq 10o' " Z3G�-,- S 8_471a. -FD, I,PiPri - - - - - -
GT _I,Pr• /u ' - _ ' `� �•s ✓T 1•_P-.I'11 _ .• - ' ' - -
- _LA U Q i n O Iv Id '
IV" 612,1•17j2)3 ;t: 43i 1 '
e.-21 _
a t` v Qi ,
A _0- J i ;` —- - ET ,i„PIP i_ (f; /
1 an
`�W . T - • I � Q -T ti 1
SET I,P111� SST I'PIK - '16 CoNc - ,
v, , �sr,
Q E.Ge•E T"- -ZOAD - e'f 5 O'-4 1 - -
a-n-d, - _E Chase , _Jr. R-idg e:ct-e st, Road - Town " of; Ithaca , -
August 27,.1-983_ .' , - -Sc:a1e` - 1 = 1001 ,_ - , - - -
- . - - -lIt A RA•KIFR L.S. O49415, .
5:T•I,PIu '
., — LEM, LA-KIDS OF —*- � �F
LA4 EAN-DE E, CF4ASE ,j Z. (eo,) FE
45- I-2.2 �' �' eeM
/FD, I.PIPE-
l l s9p
I
LACI CAND E E, CH+hsE , J e, (e,O)
6 to - 5Z-7 45-1- 2.Z
l G.74 AGaE S
TO Try L.
M
'
5AWYEe (E,O,) I
d5- 1- 13
Q1
rri
II . 74 AGEES
1
t
G45 ,81 S 8�47‘E
• ` FD, 1.PIPE. .40E5, -- FD.1,Pif 3[
0
tv
' IN 1 .7 ' 0 I O I C
1 d
I
i `- - G
3 �' WN Zn , u 1
aQ N � : N z' � ¢ Ln
_ c! z V CI 'T U
e
3 I -) Y
e/v./z_ SET
25, `
e/w -7 25', cL eloc,Ec
Lands of Grace Casc iol I and Part of Lands of Lagrand E
, Tompkins County. - New York _
Ithaca Zoning Office May 9, 1988
Ithaca, New York 14850
Dear Mr. Frost,
This is my notification to you to apply for a Certificate of Compliance for
108 Ridgecrest road. This property covers one building on the main road,
composed of one two bath, th3'ee bedroom apartment and a one bedroom, one bath
apartment as one unit. The rear lot has a two bath, three bedroom house.
The front lot is 100ft. by 125 ft. and the rear lot is 100 ft. by 150 ft.
The COC is important at this time as I may sell the property.
It is also important to note that shortly after purchase in 1985, I contacted '
by personal visit,your office and made it known that I was the new owner and
to determine the status of the property as listed. At that time there were
no restrictions nor encumberances concerning the property. Subsequent to that i
1986, 1987 and recently in 1988 I made about four visits to you office to discu
my property and the 17 acre lot directly in back of 108 Ridgecrest for which I
have an option to purchase from Vince Franciamone. We are now in litigation over
the option to purchase the 17 acres.
My main point is that at no time since my purchase of this property has there
been any comments from your office for non compliance over the past three years.
This is especially noteworthy as I have personally contacted your staff over
these years.
Therefore I would gather from the silence of your office that I was grandfathered it
a compliance mode and request that your office issue me the certificate at your
earliest convenience.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Frank A. Bettucci
•
• — S1 ua.31 '
- - - - -
Nizb
C
G� qt./s
1
1
1
s-- - a
s
5 3. Y
•
•
1'
o �
. .........„,
,-------a--(&7m\-1
, D, _._, .......„,,.,7
AUG 1 51988 BARNEY, GROSSMAN, ROTH & DUBOW
-�.„�„-"i ATTORNEYS AT LAW
TOWN OF ITHACA 315 NORTH TIOGA STREET
mod✓✓ P.O. BOX 6556
JOHN C.BARNEY ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851-6556
PETER G.GROSSMAN _ __ TELECOPIER
NELSON E ROTH (607) 273-6841 (607) 272-8806
DAVID A.Dueow
RICHARD P. RUSWICK
ROSANNE MAYER
August 12, 1988
Andy Frost, Engineer
Town of Ithaca
126 East Seneca Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Dear Andy:
- Pursuant to our discussion, enclosed is a proposed Affidavit
for use in connection with the Bettucci matter. Before the
Affidavit is sent out, the date of the Court Order should be
filled in in the blank provided and copies of the lease and the
Court Order should be attached as Exhibits A and B respectively.
I would then suggest that it be sent to Mr. Bettucci with the
request that he sign it and return it to you within some
specified time frame. If he does not accomplish it within that
- time frame, then I suggest that we may want to consider
instituting legal proceedings against him.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
With best regards.
Sincerely yours,
JCB:sew
Enc.
1 i
10
•
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF NEW YORK )
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) ss. :
FRANK BETTUCCI, being duly sworn, deposes and says: .
1. He is the owner of premises located at 108 Ridgecrest
Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, bearing Tax
Parcels No. 6-45-1-5. 1 and 6-45-1-5.2 .
'2 . The premises contain two buildings, one consisting of
more than one dwelling unit and being situated closer to
Ridgecrest Road (the Front Building) , and one consisting of a
single dwelling unit located behind the front building (the Rear
Building) .
'3 . The Rear Building is presently occupied pursuant to a
lease which expires June 15, 1989. Annexed hereto is a copy of
the lease as Exhibit A. -
4. Deponent agrees, represents and promises that upon the
expiration of such lease,- or commencing June 16, 1989, whichever
date is later, the Rear Building will not be leased, rented or '
otherwise occupied in any manner by any person, corporation or
entity. Deponent further represents, agrees and promises that by
July 1, 1989 , any and all kitchen-related appliances , bedding,
and any other furnishings or. fixtures assisting human occupancy
will be removed from said building and the building shall be
restored to the condition required of it by the court order
pertaining to said building dated • -) 3 - 75 , a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit .B.
5. This agreementis made to induce the Town of Ithaca to
- consider refraining from instituting enforcement proceedings
against the undersigned for possible violations of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and of the order attached hereto as
Exhibit B, and is made with the full understanding that the Town
will rely upon same. It is• further understood by deponent that
the acceptance of this Affidavit does not require the Town to
' withhold enforcement proceedings and that the deponent further
understands that it is the Town's position that the premises are
presently in violation, and that each week they remain in
violation is a separate and distinct offense under the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. Deponent further understands that if
the Town, should in its discretion elect to withhold institution
of enforcement proceedings atthis time, and if deponent fails to
cause the Rear Building to be vacated by the dates set forth in
this Affidavit, that the Town may choose to seek fines and
penalties for the entire period (including any period prior to
.
June 15, 1989) that the premises have been occupied in a manner
which violates either the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance or the
court order pertaining to said premises.
Frank Bettucci
Sworn to before me this
day of August, 1988.
Notary Public
•
1ucc --- 103 Kiel.qe.c.,ie, -1- - P-61) - 6-aS-as 28i
. .. _
____;:
,... .
fe&_6100.1 ....,:.:,
ue.c.- -. __ ___
(S-i-ct_dD;a 1 o f
..***\N*\ _ I ....., .,
'--'-' 1_,---. ' iwilimmolit 7 r : ---_-7:-=-- _
•- -'-A;,
,fir.` -- -- •
,T
- �-_ �' . -
-
TOWN OF ITHACA
126 EAST SENECA STREET
ITHACA, NEW YORK
1I*0
May 19 , 1988
Mr. Frank Bettucci
3301 North 17th Street
Arlington, VA 22201
Re: Certificate of Compliance
108 Ridgecrest Road
Dear Mr. Bettucci :
This letter serves as a follow-up to our recent telephone
conversations with respect to your request for a Certificate of
Compliance for your property at 108 Ridgecrest Road which you are now
attempting to sell.
As we have discussed, .there is a rather long history involving
litigation between the Town of Ithaca and the former owner, Vincent
Franciamone. It is not my intent to review this history in this
letter; my intent is to bring out certain details only as they may
pertain to your request for a Certificate of Compliance. I am
enclosing, however, copies of two documents, which are a Court Order
issued to Mr. Franciamone in 1972 and a reaffirmation of that 1972
Order issued in 1975 . Where these documents discuss the use of
residential space in a former "carport" in the front building, that
matter has been resolved.
I have received your letter dated May 9 , 1988 , formally
requesting a Certificate of Compliance which, as I indicated during
our recent conversations , cannot be issued for several reasons which
will be described further on in this letter. In your letter you
stated that, since you purchased the property in 1985, you have come
into Town Hall several times over the ensuing years -- 1986 , 1987 , and
1988 -- to discuss 108 Ridgecrest Road and the seventeen acres of
vacant land behind it, inquiring about any encumberances related to
the properties . I must say that I have been the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Officer since August of 1986 and I have never spoken to you about
zoning violations at 108 Ridgecrest Road, until now, nor have I had
reason, until now-, to go back to past files on this property. Such
record searches are usually done when - certificates of compliance are
requested. Perhaps your visits to Town Hall were for inquiries about
the seventeen acres of vacant land only. It is noteworthy that when
you purchased the property in 1985 you did not seek a certificate of
compliance at that time and that -your visits to Town Hall were made
after your purchase.
Mr. Frank 'Bettucci -2- May 19 , 1988
At this point, your request for a Certificate of Compliance is
denied for the following reasons . -
108 Ridgecrest Road, located in a Town of Ithaca Residence
District R-15 , is listed in the Town of Ithaca Tax Roll as two
separate parcels, delineated as Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1-5 .1 (108
Ridgecrest Road Rear) and Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1-5 . 2 (108 Ridgecrest
Road) . Relying on tax maps only and not official survey maps, along
with past records in Town Hall, it appears that parcels -5 . 1 and -5 . 2
were created through the subdividing of the original parcel 6-45 -1-5 .
At some point prior to this subdivision, there was a two-family home
in the front of that parent parcel and a non-residential accessory
building at the rear of that ' parent parcel, however, the rear
accessory building "became" a residential - building, and remains so
' today.
When the land was subdivided, the lot size created for the front
"lot" , parcel 6-45-1-5 .2 , was 12 ,500 square feet, whereas the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance required, and still does require, 15 ,000
square feet. This parcel, 6-45-1-5 .2 , is "in . violation- of Article IV,
Section 16 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance.
The lot size of the rear parcel, 6-45-1-5 . 1 , appears to have the
required 15,000 square feet, however, Article IV, Sections 14 and 16 ,
of the Ordinance, and Section 280-a of New York State Town Law,
require that a front yard of a parcel front on a Town, County, or
State roadway.- By definition in the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance,
a "front yard" is "the open space between the street right of way line
and the front line of the principal building. . . " Parcel 6-45-1-5 . 1
does not have a legal front yard and is in violation of the
above-noted laws.
' The Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance_ also requires certain
building setback distances from property lines. Without "as-built"
survey maps I cannot determine if any setback violations exist at this
time.
The other matter which is addressed in the Court papers, was that
the Court ordered Mr. Franciamone to revert the use of the rear
residential building back to an accessory non-residential building .
On May 13 , 1988 , I inspected both buildings at 108 Ridgecrest
Road, in the presence of a real estate agent, Ms. Kate O'Brien, of
Dick Wilsen Real Estate, and found the front building existing as a
two-family structure and the rear lot building existing as a
single-fami]jy structure.
Again, your request for certificates of compliance (one for each
parcel of land would be required) are denied for the reasons as noted
above.
Mr. Frank Bettucci -3- May 19 , 1988
As we discussed, you may apply to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board
of Appeals for variance of Article IV, Section 16 , of the Zoning
Ordinance for an undersized lot, and, variance of Article IV, Sections
14 and 16 , of the Ordinance, and -Section 280-a of the Town Law, with
respect to the building without frontage on a public roadway. I
recently sent you an Appeal Form for making application to the Board
of Appeals in this regard. I would suggest that you submit such an
application to the Board of Appeals, with the requested documents as
described in the instruction sheet, along with a recent, as-built,
survey map for both parcels . I cannot issue any certificates of
compliance to you until such time as variances have been granted by
the Board of Appeals.
We have also discussed other alternatives, such as the
consolidation of both parcels back into one parcel, and the conversion
of the rear building back to non-residential use, as a means of
abating the above-noted violations without the need for the granting
of variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals .
In conclusion, at this point, this letter also serves as Notice
to you that your properties, known as 108 Ridgecrest Road Rear and 108
Ridgecrest Road, are in violation, of the above-noted laws , and, even
though you should decide not to sell the properties , these violations
remain outstanding and need to be resolved. Again, I suggest that an
appropriate avenue to such resolution is to seek variances from the
Zoning Board of Appeals .
Should you have any questions , please do not hesitate to call me
at (607) 273-1747 . Also, as we discussed, you may have your attorney
contact the Town of Ithaca Attorney, John C . Barney, at (607)
273-6841 .
Sincerely,
Andrew S . Frost
Building Inspector/
Zoning Enforcement Officer
ASF/nf
enclosures
cc - Noel Desch _
Henry Aron
John C. Barney, Esq.
1
- TOWN OK:ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4 , 1980 ,
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, under the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca, on
Wednesday, June 4, 1980, in the Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street (second
floor) , - Ithaca, N.Y. , at the following times and on the following matters:
7: 30 P.M. Adjourned Appeal of Grace Cascioli from the decision of the
Building Inspector denying permission to have five or more unre-
lated persons residing at . 108 Ridgecrest Road, Parcel No. 6-45-1-
5.2. (Adjourned from March 11, 1980. )
7:40 P.M. Appeal of Zeev and Rachel Lavon, Appellants, .from the decision
of the Building Inspector denying permission to rent a single
family home containing two dwelling units to more than three
unrelated persons at 123 Snyder Hill Road, Parcel No. 6-57-1-4,
Ithaca, N.Y. Permission is denied under Article IV, Section 11,
paragraph 1, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance.
7: 50 P.M. Appeal of Richard F. and Ann B. Pendleton, Appellants, from the
decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the
occupancy of a two-family dwelling by four unrelated persons at
324 Forest Home Drive, Parcel No. 6-66-3-7. 2, Ithaca, N.Y. Per-
mission is denied under Article IV, Section 11 (2) (a) (3) , of the
Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. .
8:00 P.M. Appeal of Celia H. Bowers, Appellant , from the decision of the
Building Inspector denying permission for home occupation in an
area containing more than 200 sq.ft . at: 1406 Trumansburg Road,
Parcel No. 6-24-1-25.3, Ithaca, N.Y. Permission is denied under
Article IV, Section 12 , paragraph 6, of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance.
Said Board of Appeals will at said times and said place hear all persons
in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by
- agent or in person.
Lewis D. Cartee -
Building Inspector •
Town of Ithaca -
Dated: May 27, 1980
Publish: May 30, 1980
• 'EXCERPT from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of
. June 4, 1980. .,
PRESENT: Chairman Peter Francese, •Edward Austen, Joan Reuning.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
IN THE MATTER OF: ADJOURNED APPEAL OF GRACE CASCIOLI FROM THE DECISION
OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO HAVE FIVE OR MORE
UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING AT 108 RIDGECREST ROAD, PARCEL NO. 6-45-1-5.2,
ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV, SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH
1, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. (Adjourned from March 11, 1980.
Chairman Francese declared the adjourned Public Hearing in the
above-noted matter duly opened at 8 : 15 p.m. , and presented for the record
the Clerk's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Adjourned
Public Hearing in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on May 27, 1980, and
May 30, 1980, respectively. Mr. Francese noted that since this is an
adjourned hearing, no further service by mail of said notice upon the
. various neighbors of this property was made, with the exception of the
' appellant and her attorney, Mr. Peter Costanza, as parties to the action.
Mr. Cartee, the Building Inspector, stated that he had been taken
through the structure located on the subject property by a gentleman who
stated that he was the maintenance man. Mr. Cartee stated that he saw one
other person on the site who said he was a student . Mr. Cartee stated
that it would appear at this time that there is one apartment with one
bedroom that is vacant , and, one apartment with three bedrooms that is
- occupied by one student .
Mr. Francese stated that the record should show that the Building
Inspector of the Town of Ithaca informs this Board that as of this date,
June 4, 1980, it appears that this structure, known as 108 Ridgecrest Road,
Parcel No. •6-45-1-5.2, is in compliance. Mr. Francese stated that if
the attorney representing Mrs . Cascioli in this matter requests a certifi-
cate of occupancy, Mr. Cartee could issue such certificate, or could not
issue it , depending on the circumstances at the time of such request .
MOTION by Mr. Peter K. Francese, seconded by Mrs. Joan Reuning:
RESOLVED, that as of this date, June 4, 1980, the matter of the
Appeal of Mrs. Grace Cascioli, is moot .
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a, vote.
Aye - Francese, Austen, Reuning.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS . :
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS )
I , the undersigned Deputy Clerk and Secretary to the Zoning Board
of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY:
- Excerpt Z .B.A. Minutes 6/4/80 (cont . ) -2-
That the foregoing Excerpt from the Minutes of the meeting of
the Zoning Board of Appeals of said Town, including the resolution con-
tained therein, held on the 4th day of June, 1980, is a true and correct
copy of the original and of the whole of said original so far as the same
relates to the subject matter therein referred to.
I FURTHER CERTIFY that all members of said Board had due notice of
said meeting and that , pursuant to Section 98 of the Public Officers Law
(Open Meetings Law) , said meeting was open to the general public and that
I duly caused a public notice of the time and place of said meeting to be
given to the following newspapers and/or other news media as follows :
Ithaca Journal May 27, 1980 - published May 30, 1980
WHCU May 27, 1980
WTKO May 27, 1980
WVBR May 27, 1980
WICB-AM-FM-TV May 27, 1980
The Ithaca Times May 27, 1980
and that further notice of the time and place of such meeting was given
to the public by posting such notice in the following place on the
following date and by -giving such other notice as follows :
Town Clerk' s Bulletin Board - May 27, 1980
Service by Mail upon Parties May 28, 1980
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the
seal of said Town this 16th day of June, 1980.
22/2,
Nancy M. Ft ler
Deputy Tow Clerk
_ and
Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeals
S;-E'-------
�A i
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
TUESDAY, MARCH 11 , 1980 •
By .direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals, NOTICE
IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by thee -Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Town of Ithaca under the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of
Ithaca, on Tuesday, March 11, 1980, in the Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street
(second floor) , Ithaca, N.Y. , at the following times and on the following
matters:
7: 30 P.M. Appeal of Janet M. and Clifton R. Gordon, Appellants, from the
decision of the Building Inspector denying Certificate of
• Occupancy for home placed on lot with side yard less than 15
feet at 107 Hillcrest Drive, Parcel No. 6-26-4-14, Ithaca, N.Y.
Certificate is denied under Article - IV, Section 14, and Article
XIV, Section 76, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance.
7:45 P.M. Appeal of David G. and Edith Cassel, Appellants, from the
decision of the Building Inspector denying permission to have
four unrelated persons living at once at 152 Pine Tree Road, •
Parcel No. 6-58-2-6, Ithaca, N.Y. Permission is denied under
Article IV, Section 11 , paragraph 1, of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance. .
8: 00 P.M. Appeal of Heinz and Margaret Schacht, -Appellants, from the
• decision of the Building Inspector denying permission to have
• four unrelated persons living at 326 Stone Quarry Road, Parcel
No. 6-38-3-5, Ithaca, N.Y. Permission is denied under Article
IV, Section 11, paragraph 1, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance. -
8: 15 P.M. Appeal of Grace Cascioli , Appellant , from the decision of the
Building Inspector denying permission to have five or more
unrelated persons residing at 108 Ridgecrest Road, Parcel No.
6-45-1-5. 2, Ithaca, N.Y. Permission is denied under Article IV,
Section 11, paragraph 1 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance.
Said Board of Appeals will at said times and said place hear all
persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may_
appear by agent or in person.
• Lewis D. Cartee
Building Inspector
Town of Ithaca
Dated: March 3, 1980 '
-
n,,I-.14r1, . ,,,.._.ti, a 1aQn - -
Zoning Board of Appeals 7 March 11, 1980
Mr. Austen wanted it to be clarified that this is set up as
a one-family house and not one with two kitchens, bathrooms, etc.
Mr. Schacht stated that it is a one-family house -- there are not
two kitchens.
Mr. King stated to Mr. Schacht that the Zoning Board of
Appeals is only an administrative body -- it cannot change the
zoning ordinance, for example, more than one family in a one
' family home, and so on -- we are stuck 'with it. Mr. King stated
that the Board regards all requests for occupancy as a "use
variance" and whether the zoning ordinance ought to read as it
does is not up to this Board to determine. Mr. King stated that
it has been this Board' s policy not to grant this type of
variance, however, the Board does recognize the situation of
people who have rented in good faith and have tenants, adjourning
the matter until the lease is expired but, thereafter, they have
to comply with the ordinance or get the Town Board to change it.
Mr. Schacht wondered if every house in 'the Town of Ithaca
was checked. Mr. King answered, yes, that is being done. Mr.
Schacht stated that he liked to say that they will tell their
friends to check around too, commenting that there are many
. places with a number of cars. Mr. Schacht commented on the City
zoning which allows sororities, fraternities, etc. , noting that
these are groups, and wondering if it is not the same for the
Town. Mr. King pointed out that each municipality has its own
zoning ordinance and, in the case of the Town, the Town Board
enacts the ordinance and amends it. Mr. Schacht asked what he
can do to change the ordinance. Mr. King stated that he should
write a letter to the Town Board explaining that he thinks it
' should be changed and why. Mr. Schacht stated that he wanted to
get it clear in his thoughts that so far, the Board allows them
to have the four students to live there until the 15th of June,
after that not allowed -- no more than three unrelated people
living there in that particular home, unless the zoning ordinance
is changed. Vice Chairman Hewett stated that the Board may pass
a resolution allowing the four students to remain there until
June 15th.
Mrs. Schacht stated that she felt like this is a crime,
adding that last year they had three in there and then there was
another one -- last year three , but really four -- this year _
four. Mrs. Schacht stated that they look for good people, from
good homes. Mrs. Schacht commented that about ten years ago you
could put in the lease -- no overnight visitors allowed -- not
today any more. Mr. King stated to Mrs. Schacht that, as the
owner of the property, she can control the property. Mrs .
Reuning commented that the zoning ordinance is there for
everyone ' s protection, noting that the Schachts are good
landlords but others may not be . Mr. Schacht commented to the
Board that two years ago they had three peoples -- they had a
rock and a little dent on the roof! He said that they got from
Cornell a letter -- thank you for taking such good care of our
students.
Zoning Board of Appeals 8 March 11, 1980 '
The Secretary presented for the record a letter received
March 11 , 1980 , from Frank R. Liguori, Tompkins County
Commissioner of Planning, dated March 7 , 1980 , and reading as
follows:
"Re: Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239-1 and-m of the New
York State General Municipal Law. Case: Appeal of Heinz
and Margaret Schacht for use variance at 326 Stone Quarry
Road.
Dear Mr. Cartee:
This will acknowledge the receipt of your proposal for review
under Section 239-m.
The proposal, as submitted, will have no significant deleterious
impact on intercommunity, county, or state interests. Therefore,
no recommendation is indicated by the County Planning Department
and you are free to act without prejudice. "
MOTION by Mr. Jack Hewett, seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning:
RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of
Ithaca adjourn and hereby does adjourn the Public Hearing in the
matter of the Schacht Appeal until June 16 , 1980 .
There being no further discussion, the Vice Chairman called
for a vote.
Aye - Hewett, Austen, King, Reuning.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the
matter of the Schacht Appeal duly adjourned at 8 : 29 p.m.
APPEAL OF GRACE CASCIOLI, APPELLANT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE
BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO HAVE FIVE OR MORE
UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING AT 108 RIDGECREST ROAD, PARCEL NO.
6-45-1-5 . 2, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV,
SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH 1 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE.
Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the
above-noted matter duly opened at 8: 30 p.m. , and accepted for the
record the Clerk' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the
Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on
March 3 , 1980 and March 6 , 1980 , respectively, together with the
Secretary' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice 'upon the
various neighbors of the subject property, upon Mrs. Cascioli, as
party to the action, and upon Peter Costanza, Esq. , Attorney for
Mrs . Cascioli , on March 4 , 1980 . Vice Chairman Hewett read aloud
from the Notice of Public Hearings as noted above and referenced
the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Peter Cortanza,
Attorney for Mrs. Cascioli, under date of February 28 , 1980 , and
Zoning Board of Appeals 9 March 11, 1980
which reads as follows: " . . .Having been denied permission to
have five or more unrelated persons residing at 108 Ridgecrest
Rd. , . . .Apartments are currently leased to five or more unrelated
persons until end of Spring term - about May 30 . After these
leases terminate future rentals will comply with occupancy
regulations. Variance is requested until May 30 only. "
Mr. Costanza appeared before the Board and stated that the
matter is the same as the previous case, i.e. , five people in a
two-family dwelling and request for continuance until May 30 for
the two apartments.
Mr. King asked if the two apartments are legal. Mr. Cartee
stated that it is a legal one ' family with the garage converted
into a second dwelling; the house has been enlarged, in essence ,
, in our eyes, it is a one family. Mr. King asked how many are in
each "apartment" . Mr. Costanza replied, three and two, or four
and one, he was not sure, however, after May 30th there will be
no more than three unrelated persons, total, in the structure.
Mr. King noted that what the Board does is not actually grant a
variance, merely adjourning the matter until after the lease
expires and thereafter, there will be compliance.
"Re: Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239-1 and-m of the New
York State General Municipal Law. Case: Appeal of Grace
Cascioli for use variance at 108 Ridgecrest Road.
Dear Mr. Cartee:
This will acknowledge the receipt of your proposal for review
under Section 239-m.
The proposal, as submitted, will have no significant deleterious
impact on intercommunity, county, or state -interests. Therefore,
no recommendation is indicated by the County Planning Department
and you are free to act without prejudice. "
MOTION by Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mr. Edward Austen:
RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of
% 'Ithaca adjourn and hereby does adjourn the matter of the Appeal
of Grace Cascioli until June 1 , 1980 .
There being no further discussion, the Vice Chairman called
for a vote. -
Aye - Hewett, Austen, King, Reuning.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the
matter, of the Cascioli Appeal duly adjourned at 8 :35 p.m.
Zoning Board of Appeals 10 March 11, 1980
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion, Vice Chairman Hewett declared the March 11 ,
1980 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly
adjourned at 8 : 36 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary,
Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals. -
Jack D. Hewett, Vice Chairman
TOWN OF ITHACA
ed. / 7, s® (C4eeA)
NEW YORK #/?5'/jo
APPEAL
to the
Building Inspector
and the Zoning Board of Appeals
of the Town of Ithaca, New York
Having been denied permission to V, Gt 1i 4 is oc
at 1 0 c, ) 14-L„ c- _ , Ithaca, New York,
as shown on the accompanying application and/or plans or other supporting
F I
documents, for the stated reason that the issuance of such permit would
be in violation of -
Article(s) 1` , Section(s) / l p ., 1
of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance
the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this appeal from such denial and,
in support of the appeal , affirms that strict observance of the Ordinance
would impose PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as
follows:
Af> t ce ; e_ cc/ Lv � � tl�y c
Q L. tom. L'_ c, t. 4 c._d jJ �-s o s
e. -F s p ,-,c Lop± 3 0
--P4e.L 4 r, e al-s S v e.. / u- e �"�� `e - - (-es,
[ )1-4\ O c C c� -O c, i
�C7 ha,n �• / ���.ti ) �l C, ` 4 aZ S
Vet- i ozc, r e 7 S Loy LC e- d [i• �-. ► � 'l d 0 o
ie
Signed _ 1
AZ: C;V:Ltz)
Dated: f . 2_ a / (Clcae) p< i ,s . Carsc i n !
Ithaca, New York -
PPP . 4i7 din