Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Use Variance 10/13/1993 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date ) 1q3 TOWN OF ITHACA o G � ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CIe-L nm ' OCTOBER 13, 1993 THE FOLLOWING MATTERS WERE HEARD ON OCTOBER 13, 1993 BY THE BOARD: APPEAL OF NANCY DICKINSON, APPELLANT, WILLIAM CADY, AGENT, REQUESTING A VARIANCE UNDER LOCAL LAW #4 -1979 AS AMENDED APRIL 12, 1993 TO BE ALLOWED TO MAINTAIN A PROPERTY WITH FIVE AUTOMOBILES NOT CURRENTLY REGISTERED FOR USE ON A PUBLIC HIGHWAY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 215 RENWICK DRIVE, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 17-4-11, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15. - DENIED. APPEAL OF DELORES SAYET, APPELLANT, RICHARD KINNER, AGENT, REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, UNDER ARTICLE XII, SECTION 54, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE TO BE ALLOWED TO ENLARGE A NON-CONFORMING BUILDING/LOT BY MODIFYING A GARAGE AND CONSTRUCTING ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE AT 20 RENWICK HEIGHTS ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 17-3-30, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15. SAID GARAGE IS 7+ FEET FROM THE SOUTH SIDE LOT LINE, WHEREAS A 10.FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED. THE PARCEL OF LAND HAS A LOT WIDTH OF 82.45 + FEET (100 FOOT WIDTH REQUIRED) AND A LOT DEPTH OF 143 + FEET (150 FOOT DEPTH REQUIRED) . A VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV, SECTION 14 MAY ALSO BE REQUESTED SINCE THE PROPOSED LIVING SPACE WILL BE 7+ FEET FROM THE SOUTH SIDE LOT LINE, WHEREAS A 15 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED FROM BUILDING LIVING SPACE TO A SIDE YARD LOT LINE. GRANTED. APPEAL OF TERRY FISK, APPELLANT, REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV, SECTION 11 AND ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 68 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE TO BE PERMITTED TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND DWELLING UNIT WITHIN AN ACCESSORY BUILDING ON A PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINING A PRINCIPAL DWELLING, AT 109 WOOLF LANE, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 23-1- 20.1, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-30. DENIED. APPEAL OF EDWIN HALLBERG, APPELLANT, 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 AN EXTENSION OF THE ONE-YEAR TIME LIMITATION FOR THE USE OF A TEMPORARY BUILDING NECESSARY OR INCIDENTAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA. THE SUBJECT RESIDENTIAL AREA IS KNOWN AS DEER RUN SUBDIVISION, AND THE SUBJECT BUILDING IS LOCATED ON 154 WHITETAIL DRIVE IN RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15 ON THE TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 44-1-165. APPELLANT HAS PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED SUCH AN EXTENSION WHICH EXPIRED ON JUNE 30, 1993. GRANTED. APPEAL (ADJOURNED FROM AUGUST 13, 1993) OF KEVIN HAVERLOCK, APPELLANT, REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE IV, SECTION 11, PARAGRAPH 6, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE, TO BE PERMITTED TO CONSTRUCT A TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A BUILDING HEIGHT OF 37 + FEET (30 FEET MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED) AT 5 CHASE LANE, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 45-1-59, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15. • GRANTED. 1 FILED - _ TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Date(I�o1 I Co Q3n Clerk: tam° OCTOBER 13, 1993 PRESENT: Edward Austen, Edward King, Harry Ellsworth, Pete Scala, Town Attorney John C. Barney, Zoning Enforcement Officer/Building Inspector Andrew Frost, Assistant Town Planner Louise Raimando. OTHERS: Terry Fisk, William Cady, Kevin Haverlock, Kris and Neil Ailing, Jack and Amy Little, Delores Sayet, Leslie Sayet Wyatt, Richard Kinner, and Ed Hallberg. Chairman Austen called the meeting to order at 7:12 P.M. and stated that all posting, publication, and notification of the public hearings were completed and are in order. The first Appeal to be heard by the Board was the following: APPEAL OF NANCY DICKINSON, APPELLANT, WrL TAM CADY, AGENT, REQUESTING A VARIANCE UNDER LOCAL LAW #4 - 1979 AS AMENDED APRIL 12, 1993 TO BE ALLOWED TO MAINTAIN A PROPERTY WITH FIVE AUTOMOBTT.FS NOT CURRENTLY REGISTERED FOR USE ON A PUBLIC HIGHWAY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 215 RENWICK DRIVE, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 17-4-11, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15. Chairman Austen asked Mr. Cady to give the Board information as to why there are so many cars there that are not registered. Mr. Cady said that he did not know where the number "5" comes from. He said that there might be up to five. He said that someone might have estimated that number, that at some point there may have been that number, but, at this point, he does not know where that number comes from. Mr. Cady reviewed the photographs, pointing out to the Board which vehicles were registered to Nancy [Dickinson] and which vehicles were not registered. He said there were three classics: the '65 Volkswagen, '70 Maverick, and '62 Falcon. Mr. Scala said that there were two cars with Maine license plates to which Mr. Cady said Mr. Scala was correct. Mr. Scala asked if the Maine license plates were out-of- , date, and Mr. Cady said that they were out-of-date at the present time because they have not been re-registered in Maine. Chairman Austen repeated that the registration has expired, and Mr. Cady said that was true. Chairman Austen said that he thought, from the photographs, that perhaps these were classics which someone was getting ready to restore, and Mr. Cady said that this is the case. He said that, at some point in time, that is what is going to be done. Chairman Austen said that it is his understanding that the vehicles have been setting there for several years. Mr. Cady said the vehicles have been registered, then used and then taken off the road. He said they have been on and off the road through the years. Mr. Frost informed the Board about the history of the property and the Town's first involvement which started around 1991. The Town's Property Maintenance Law was slightly different. He said the Town has had difficulty communicating with the property owner who also.has the property posted for trespassing. He said it has been difficult for the Town to actually verify current registration for any of the vehicles involved, other than taking pictures from either the roadway or from the next door neighbor's property. Mr. Frost said that back in 1992 the Town did obtain copies (which he passed around to the Board) of what was alleged to be registered in 1992. Mr. Frost said that he did not know exactly what month the registration was, but he said the Town had not pursued the issue. With the Town amending the local law for property maintenance, it provides the petitioner the opportunity to come before the Board to seek a variance, as Mr. Cady is Town of Ithaca 2 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 doing to keep the vehicles. Mr. Frost said.that two years ago, the Town could not get to this point of having Mr. Cady come before the Board. Mr. Frost again stated that he was not able to tell from the registration copies as to the length of time the registration was valid for, other than they are for 1992 and from the state of Maine. Mr. Frost said that under the advice of Counsel, the Town has not trespassed on the property, basically doing what they could do for enforcement in this appeal from the road. Mr. Scala spoke to Mr. Cady in regard to the Falcon. Mr. Scala commented that the Falcon is behind the fence, and one could not get it out without tearing the fence down and cutting the bushes out, unless the Falcon was moved sideways. Mr. Cady said that the fence is bolted, and, therefore, he said that from the manner in which the fence was constructed, the locks on the side can be brought up and the posts lifted out of the posts and the Falcon brought out from that side. He sated that the post could then be put back into the frame of the fence. When asked by Mr. Scala, Mr. Cady answered that if someone intends to get it out, one could. Mr. Scala asked if he thinks it runs, and Mr. Cady said that he knows that it runs. Chairman Austen opened the public hearing. No one appeared to address the Board. Chairman Austen read into the minutes an October 7 letter from Karen L. Smith and R. David Smith at 221 Renwick Drive. The Smiths requested this variance be denied. Mr. Cady expressed surprise that, if this was the case, that the Smiths did not approach the Renwick Heights Association rather than go to this extent or why the Smiths did not contact Nancy. Mr. Cady said the whole thing could have been cleared up. He stated - that the interest in the cars has been that they are classics and that the restoration was not for sale, but for the purpose of show and that sort of thing. Mr. Cady said that everyone is busy with other things in their lives and do not get to things that one wants to do. He said that perhaps he might not get to the cars for some period of time, but he continued that the vehicles are running. He said they are potentially show pieces and that •every one of them is a collector's item by the kinds of standards -of classic auto clubs--the '65 Beetle, the first year and early run of the Maverick, the Falcon is a very desirable two-door body style for that car. He said that he does not know why the Smiths are thinking that a business or a garage is being run there. Mr. Frost asked if the Volare is registered, and Mr. Cady said that it was. 'Mr. Frost said that the Falcon, the Volare, the Maverick and the Volkswagen (VW) are the vehicles that • are no longer in production. Mr. Frost said that he wanted to also clarify that the zoning ordinance would permit a homeowner' to maintain a customary home occupation as a mechanic in a residential zone and fix up vehicles. Mr. Frost said that he was not suggesting that there is ,a business there, in fact, he said that he established that, but again, the ordinance would permit in a residential zone, a customary home occupation or a mechanical trade such as an automobile repair, with some limitations that would restrict noise, dust and other objectionable components of that operation in disturbing the neighbors. Mr. Frost said that he offered this information, not to say that Mr. Cady is or is not running a business there, but it could be a permitted use in a residential zone. When asked if Mr. Cady was the owner of all of the cars, and Mr. Cady, indicated that he was. Mr. Cady said that the cars-that fall under question of what is going on here, are not the ones that are currently registered. Mr. Cady said that if the Board is talking about the '65 Volkswagen, the '62 Falcon andthe '70 Maverick, he is the owner. Mr. King asked Mr. Cady about the other cars, and Mr. Cady said that the Mercury belongs - to Nancy. Mr. King asked Mr. Cady who "Nancy" is, if she was the owner, and Mr. Cady said that he referred to Nancy Dickinson, the owner. Mr. Cady said there is a Pontiac _ which belongs to her, a Volare which belongs to Mr. Cady (which was the last production year of the full- bodied Plymouth with the slant six, the last year that that was built) Town of Ithaca ,3 • Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 and the Dodge Aries belongs to Nancy's son. Mr. King said that there was then six cars. It was discussed, ascertaining that the picture taken by Andy Frost was taken on Friday. Mr. Cady then said, in case there is an eyesore problem in someone's mind or perception, that he erected a fence which does shield the view considerably. Mr. Frost said to the Board members that he had a grey Mercury (with a license plate) , a blue VW (with a Maine license plate) , a blue Maverick (with a Maine license plate) , a Volare (white or tan with no plates) , a blue Pontiac LeMans (with plates) and a blue Ford Falcon (which at one time had old New York plates) . Mr. Cady said that vehicle has Maine plates on it. Attorney Barney asked Mr. Cady why there are Maine plates on the cars, and Mr. Cady _informed him that it was because he lives there. Mr. Scala asked the year of the Maine plates, and Mr. Cady referred to a piece of paper, stating that "that" was registered up through December 1992, when they expired. Mr. King stated that, having driven by, he said that it looks like Mr. Cady has a garage operation, body shop, or something. He further stated that, with all the cars out in front, it really looks terrible. He continued that one of the neighbors spent $400.00 in bushes and shrubbery, trying to screen the area. Mr. Cady said that he was surprised that she did not come across the line and speak to Nancy and/or him. He said that the whole thing could have been discussed and that he was really surprised. He said that neither he or Nancy had any idea about this. Mr. King asked Mr. Cady if he had any idea that the neighbors did not appreciate all of the cars, and Mr. Cady answered that he did not. He said he wished they would have made that clear. Mr. Frost said that the first complaint, and Mr. Cady had seen a copy of this today, - came on letterhead from a member of the Renwick Heights Association.Mr. King asked if this was October 9, 1991, and Mr. Frost said that that was the first complaint when the Town of Ithaca first got involved. Mr. Frost said that another one came over the telephone by an individual on June 2. Mr. Frost said that he did not give Mr. Cady the name of the individual which is shown on the investigation sheet. Mr. Frost said that that was the most recent complaint. Mr. Cady said that he felt that if it was a neighborhood kind of thing and that was the concern about the situation, he did not understand why they felt if they had a good relationship with Nancy, that they could not have just approached her. Mr. Frost said that people will often facilitate that kind of communication through the building inspector/zoning officer. This happened back in 1991 when they unsuccessfully attempted to communicate with the property owner. Mr. - King asked if any notice was sent by the Zoning Enforcement Officer and Mr. Frost said that registered letters were sent. Mr. Frost told Mr. King that the one sent on August 11 and received August 12, 1993 was the most recent, with the earlier citations going back to October 30, 1991, November 15, 1991, and there was a letter from the Town Attorney in April, 1992. Mr. Frost said the letters were available to the Board members. Mr. King asked if Nancy Hart and Nancy Dickinson were the same person to which Mr. Cady answered that she was. Mr. Cady questioned the unsigned letter in that the Town took a complaint without a signature. Mr. King said that there was an ordinance. Mr. Cady said that someone in the office said something about what the order was, and it was brought into compliance with the ordinance at that time by registering the vehicles. Mr. Frost said that he did not agree fully with that statement. Mr. King said that there certainly were many notices sent to Nancy about the situation. Mr. Cady said that she is quite upset about that, but she does not feel that she should be bothered to this extent by that kind of a thing. Mr. King asked Mr. Cady if Nancy does not believe in zoning, and Mr. Cady said that, if it was a neighbor thing, then the neighbor might very well have approached her. Mr. Cady said that he believes that Nancy said that in one of her letters that he had Town of Ithaca 4 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 read the other day-that she felt that if it was a neighbor problem, that they might better have approached her on the issue, rather than trying to make a public issue out of it. He said that a tempest has been created here out of a small thing which could have been resolved a lot more simply. Mr. Scala said to Mr. Cady that Mr. Cady has been looking at them for so long, plus owning them, that Mr. Cady does not think of it as a tempest. Mr. Scala said, but, if anyone else looked at it, they would think it was a junkyard. Mr. Scala said that he goes by the site all of the time, and he said that, coming by in the car, there is no way you can notice those cars, even with that one parked in the driveway. Mr. Scala said that the ones that are tucked in side-by-side, including the VW, one can hardly see them from the road. He said that normally that is a corner that swings around, and one buzzes by. Mr. Scala said that he would guess that the average person going by would not notice. He also stated that, since they are out of commission, that it is not like six cars are coming and going out of the driveway. He added that that scenario would be a disaster on that sloping drive on that busy corner. Mr. Scala said that the only other thing he could see was that the fire• department and police department would have a hard time getting in there. In fact, he continued that they could not get in there- that they would have to stay out on the street unless they would want to park on that sloping driveway. Mr. Cady said that the sloping driveway has been a problem which would have to be solved. Mr. Cady reviewed the history of the driveway when the house was originally built: the Smiths' driveway and Nancy's driveway were joined until the Smiths moved into the house; the driveway made a semi-circle between the two houses, and when the Smiths (who wrote one letter) moved in, they closed off that driveway; and up until that time, both houses could move around that driveway, in either direction. Chairman Austen asked if 215 was Mr. Cady's residence, and Mr. Cady answered that sometimes it was. Attorney.Barney and Mr. Frost oriented themselves with Mr. Cady as to the direction from which the photographs were taken and the view from the other property(ies) . Attorney Barney asked if there was some way in which the view could be less visible to the house to the north. Mr. Cady said that there are ways to extend the fence, and he also pointed out that he felt that the ones that were registered had every right to be parked there. Mr. Cady indicated the vehicles which are not currently registered and said that another section of the fence could be extended. He also indicated that one of the vehicles was Nancy's and that he could get a copy of the registration for it. Further discussion ensued relative to the vehicles. - Environmental Assessment Chairman Austen read Part II - Sections C.3. and C.4. and Part III - Staff Recommendation Determination of Significance of the Environmental Assessment Form. MOTION By Mr. Pete Scala, seconded by Mr. Harry Ellsworth: RESOLVED, that regarding the Appeal of Nancy Dickinson requesting a variance under Local Law #4 of 1979, requesting an allowance to maintain on the property, 215 Renwick Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 17-4-11, five automobiles that are not currently registered for use on the public highway, that the Board accepts the recommendation of the Town Planning Department Reviewer, Louise Raimando, that a negative determination of environmental significance be made. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Town of Ithaca 5 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 Ayes - Ellsworth, King, Scala, Austen. Nays - None. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. King said that he was still puzzled as to why the cars are located at this location, and his question to Mr. Cady was if he had a shop located there. Mr. Cady indicated that he did not. Mr. King wanted to know if and when Mr. Cady worked on the cars, where does he work on them, and Mr. Cady said that he works on them where they are parked or in the driveway or whatever. He also said that, at some point in the future, the cars may be moved to another location but that that location has not yet been determined. Mr. Scala inquired if Mr. Cady has been showing them to which Mr. Cady said that he was not yet doing so. Mr. Scala inquired if the cars were an investment, and Mr. Cady said that, like anything, it is an interest; he continued that he would not really say that it was an investment. Mr. Cady said that the vehicles were ones he owned through the years and kept because of his liking for them. Attorney Barney asked if his home is in Ithaca or in Maine, and Mr. Cady said his home was both in Ithaca and in Maine. Attorney Barney then asked where the majority of Mr. Cady's time was spent, and Mr. Cady answered that it differed, from time-to-time and from year-to-year. He said he also has family in other areas and sometimes he has to take care of things for them. Attorney Barney asked Mr. Cady where he votes, and Mr. Cady answered that he is not currently registered at the present time. Attorney Barney asked what kind of a driver's license he has, and Mr. Cady answered that it was a New York State driver's license. Discussion took place as to when he had Maine plates on the cars, he was notified about "this business" and since he was in the state of Maine, he registered them up there so that they would be legal. Attorney Barney said that at present Mr. Cady has a New York State driver's license and Maine registrations. Mr. Frost said that the Maine registrations have expired to which Mr. Cady said that the Maine registrations expired in December 1992. Mr. Scala said that the plates are on the vehicles but the registrations have expired, and Mr. Cady concurred. Mr. Frost offered a suggestion, that if a motion for this appeal was approved, that a condition would include that his office would be able to verify license plates by going on the property and that the stickers be on the window. Mr. Cady said that he provided him with copies of the stickers from Maine, and Mr. Frost said that it was to . Mr. Cady's benefit to be able to verify the registrations. Mr. Cady said that he wanted to let the Board know that they have tried to cooperate, but he thinks that Nancy wants her peace and quiet and to be left alone. Mr. Scala wanted to know from Mr. Cady when was the last time he moved some of the cars, drove them, had them on the road. Mr. Cady said the Maverick was within the period of time that it had the Maine plates on it. He said that the Volkswagen had been driven around and moved and the Falcon has moved on the property. Mr. Scala said that the Falcon has not left the property in quite a while. Mr. Cady agreed, but he said that it couldn't--he said it has been started and it runs. He said that it needs some work and anyone who knows what an older car is like, knows that. Mr. Cady said that he has had the Volkswagen up and down the driveway and has moved it around the property. Mr. Cady made the statement that they are not junk cars. Mr. Scala asked if Mr. Cady had something to recommend to get rid of the eyesore. Mr. Cady said that what he would say was that he supposed if it is the neighbors next door that are concerned about what it looks like, he would extend the fence up along the border there, extend it another section to cover the unregistered car there. Mr. King asked if Mr. Cady was speaking of along the north line, and Mr. Cady went to the photographs to show what he meant. Mr. Cady again reviewed the positions of the cars, and Ms. Raimando stated that there • 'Town of Ithaca 6 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 are actually four cars that are parked there, not three. Mr. Scala said that there were four cars side-by-side. Mr. Scala inquired as to what car Mr. Cady now drives, and Mr. Cady stated that sometimes the Volare. Mr. Scala then asked what car Mr. Cady drove to the meeting, and Mr. Cady answered that he drove Nancy's Mercury. Mr. King said to Mr. Cady that these cars are occupying approximately 40% of the front yard, and Mr. Cady said that he did not know because it was hard to say due to the bank. He continued that that is really the side yard due to the way the loop of the driveway used to be. Mr. King said that it was all along Renwick Drive with numerous cars in a very small space. Mr. King asked if the garage was in use as a garage, and Mr. Cady stated that it was not,' that it was used as storage. Mr. King reiterated that it was storage only, no cars to which Mr. Cady agreed. Mr. King said to Mr. Cady that he had suggested several times that if the neighbors had come to Mr. Cady that there would have been a solution. Mr. King said that he was curious to hear what the solution is. Mr. Cady said that he would have talked to them about the fence which might screen the view rather than having them go and spend $400.00 on bushes and then feeling resentment over it. Mr. King said that Mr. Cady suggested that maybe the cars would be moved someplace and that that sounds like a very good idea. Mr. Cady said that it might, but there is no place for them at the present time. Mr. Scala asked if he understood correctly that last year there were a total of five cars there and now there is a total of six? Mr. Cady said he -did not know where the figures come from. Mr. Scala asked Mr. Cady how long he had six cars, and Mr. Cady said that Tom has had a car since he was in high school and he comes and goes. Mr. Scala asked if Tom's car was one of those six, and Nancy. . . Attorney Barney asked what kind of a car Tom drove to which Mr. Cady said it is a Dodge Aspen which does not show up. Attorney Barney said that then makes seven cars. Mr. Frost said that several of these cars are registered. Mr. Frost and Mr. Cady reviewed the cars overthe years, going over the Falcon, the Comet, the Mercury, the blue VW, the Maverick, the Volare, the Pontiac_LeMans and the Ford Falcon. Mr. Frost stated that the only thing different that is there is the Volare now, as opposed to a year or two ago. Mr. Cady stated which cars are registered, and Mr. Frost said that there are no plates on them. Mr. Cady said that car has been registered but he has not reattached the plates. Attorney Barney inquired as to whether the plates are New York or Maine plates, and Mr. Cady said they were New York plates. Mr. Frost said that there are some legal vehicles. Chairman Austen said , there are then three vehicles which are not registered at the present time, and Mr. Cady concurred with this statement. Attorney, Barney said that there is a fourth car in question which is supposed to be registered but there is no evidence that it is registered at this point, as it sits there right now, there are no plates on it and no registration sticker on it. Mr. Cady said that he could get it, but he has not had the need to use it. He further stated that, frankly because of all the things that had been going on around there and his mother's health that he has not had the time to do it. He said that for most of the time he has been using the Mercury which is registered to Nancy. Mr. Scala asked if the Volare was the white car, and Mr. Cady indicated that it was, and Ms. Raimando said that was the vehicle that was parked on the grass. Mr. Frost stated that one of the difficulties the Town had years ago was that the Town was unable to establish communication with the property owner to determine what was and was not registered. Mr. Frost said that the whole thing has now gotten out of hand. He said that if there was a little cooperation two years ago, and Mr. Ellsworth interrupted with a question that since the letters went out was there any effort to do anything. Mr. Frost explained the history of the letters and the way in which the Town was unable to ascertain the other vehicles. He continued that, with perhaps more important business to attend to in the Town, the Town basically gave up at that point for a while. When the Town received the-second complaint in June, the Town reopened it. Town of Ithaca 7 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 Mr. Cady reviewed the copy of the ordinance that Nancy received, and Mr. Cady said that he then took care of them. He said he sent Nancy the plates. He said he kept the stickers with the documents in a safe place in Maine, and when Nancy sent the photocopies to Mr. Frost, everyone thought the matter was concluded. Mr. Scala and Mr. Cady again went over which cars belong to Nancy (2) and which are Mr. Cady's. Mr. Scala asked if Mr. Cady lives at 215 Renwick Drive. Mr. Cady said that he stays there sometimes. Chairman Austen said that was not relevant because Nancy, as the property owner, is responsible for what is parked in her yard. Mr. Frost said that what the Board is asking now, in trying to bring this to a conclusion, is what is Mr. Cady proposing to do, either by screening or removal of the vehicles. Mr. Cady repeated that that is the question, and he said that he would throw it back to the Board as to what would the Board want other than removing the vehicles. Mr. Frost said that the law would state that if they were not visible, such as being put in a garage, there is no violation, and Mr. Cady indicated that he understood. Mr. Scala said that the whole area where the cars are located is a front yard and the law states specifically that storage in a front yard, as defined in the ordinance, is forbidden. Mr. Cady said that the first thing he could think of is to bring the fence further down to cover the Volare that is not registered. Mr. King said that in his own view, the screening is not the answer, that removal of the cars is the answer because a front yard in the Renwick Heights residential neighborhood is not a storage place. Mr. King said that there is no question that there is a violation of this ordinance in at least three of the vehicles. Chairman Austen closed the hearing, and asked Mr. Cady to be seated when Mr. Cady wanted to continue to discuss what garaging would be appropriate. Mr. King told Mr. Cady that perhaps some other place in town where there is a barn or something in a location that would not offend immediate neighbors in a residential setting. Mr. Cady continued to ask if he was then correct in assuming that if the vehicles were registered that they would be legal, and he was told by Attorney Barney and Mr. Frost that that would be so. Mr. Cady also wanted to know if they could just be garaged over. Attorney Barney said that such a garage would have to otherwise be in compliance with the zoning ordinance, and Attorney Barney said there would be some front yard and side yard requirements. Mr. Cady said that he thought the Board could table this and get back to it at a later time, after some more possibilities would be considered. Attorney Barney . wanted to know what would be the chances of getting the cars out of there to some other location, and Mr. Cady said that at this point there would be no chance. He said that would place him in a situation of depriving him of the cars; he said he would have to get rid of them in some way. Mr. Scala asked why the cars were not stored in Maine, and Mr. Cady said that he did not want to do that. There was general discussion as to where Mr. Cady is living, and Mr. Cady said that he has been living in Ithaca for the last few months. Mr. Scala said to Mr. Cady that Mr. Cady knows what is needed to be done and that Mr. Cady understands what is needed, and Chairman Austen said that there are storage places around that are available that the vehicles can be stored at. Mr. Cady said there may be, but it costs additional money. Chairman Austen said that it is costing other people additional money in their property values. Mr. Cady said that he believes he made a couple of suggestions, one being that of a garage other than in another location because Mr. Cady believes he is being deprived of the vehicles. Chairman Austen again asked Mr. Cady to take his seat in order for the Board to make a motion. MOTION By Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mr. Harry Ellsworth: ' Town of Ithaca _ 8 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals deny the Appellant, Nancy Dickinson, the request of a variance under Local Law #4 - 1979 as amended April 12, 1993 at the location of 215 Renwick Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 17-4-11, to permit continued maintenance of storage of vehicles on the property which-are not currently in use on the highway by the residents of the property, with the following findings: 1) There being at least three of those cars that we find the storage and maintaining and accumulating of the cars on the property to be prohibitive acts under Local Law #4. ' 2) That the Board operate in the non-existing evidence or compelling reason as to why a variance should be given to permit a continued storage of vehicles in this location. 3) That the Board find the detriment to the neighborhood and the neighboring properties far outweighs the inconvenience to the owner of the vehicles and to the property to see that they are stored at a more appropriate location. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes - Ellsworth, King, Scala, Austen. Nays - None. The motion was carried unanimously. The variance was denied. Chairman Austen informed Mr. Cady that he could get with Mr. Frost if a garage was wanted to be built to see if it would be possible or permitted on the property. Chairman Austen further stated to Mr. Cady that the Board does not feel that the neighbors should have to put up with a used car lot or a storage lot. Chairman Austen said that Mr. Cady would have to remove the three vehicles that are not registered. Mr. Frost said removal would have to be done or the vehicles would have to be registered or a garage would have to be built. Mr. Frost said that he would discuss the alternatives with Mr. Cady. Attorney Barney told Mr. Cady that he could call Mr. Frost in the morning. The second Appeal to be heard by the Board was the following: APPEAL OF DELORES SAYET, APPELLANT, RICHARD KINNER, AGENT, REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, UNDER ARTICLE XII, SECTION 54, - OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE TO BE ALLOWED TO ENLARGE A NON-CONFORMING BUILDING/LOT BY MODIFYING A GARAGE AND CONSTRUCTING ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE AT 20 RENWICK HEIGHTS ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 17-3-30, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15. SAID GARAGE IS 7+ rti T FROM THE SOUTH SIDE LOT LINE, WHEREAS A 10 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED. THE PARCEL OF LAND HAS A LOT WIDTH OF 82.45 + iNET (100 FOOT WIDTH REQUIRED) AND A LOT DEPTH OF 143 + rh.a (150 FOOT DEPTH REQUIRED). A VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV, SECTION 14 MAY ALSO BE REQUESTED SINCE THE PROPOSED LIVING SPACE WILL BE 7+ LENT FROM THE SOUTH SIDE LOT LINE, WHEREAS A 15 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED FROM BUILDING LIVING SPACE TO A SIDE YARD LOT LINE. Chairman Austen requested Mr. Kinner explain what was proposed to be done and the reasons why. Mr. Kinner explained that in-the package is an explanation about what the request is for and Ms. Sayet is requesting the removal of the existing garage on the • property (the south side of the property) and putting up an addition in order for Ms. Town of Ithaca ,9 Zoning Board of Appeals October 13, 1993 - Sayet to allow Amelia, Ms. Sayet's 9 year old granddaughter with cerebral palsy, to come and visit. Mr. Kinner explained that a ramp is included in the plans because it is becoming increasingly difficult to get Amelia into the house and up the steps. He said that the general dimensions of the ramp are included on the footprint. Mr. Kinner added that, at the present-time, all of the bathrooms and bedrooms are located on the second floor, necessitating Amelia to be carried upstairs. Therefore, according to Mr. Kinner, what the addition would allow is for Amelia to be able to get into the house more safely by means of the ramp and then make an immediate left into the area in which she would be able to get into the house. Mr. King said that Amelia would then be able to get into the existing front door of the house to which Mr. Kinner indicated that was the case. Mr. Kinner said the actual home, itself, would not be altered with the exception of the south facade. Mr. Kinner said that when the new piece went on, new windows and entrance would have to be changed. Chairman Austen reviewed that the corner of the garage was 7 feet from the lot line to which Mr. Kinner agreed. Discussion followed as to how close the corner of the addition would be to the lot line, and Mr. Kinner said that it might be 5 feet, or 6 feet. Mr. Kinner referred to the drawings, indicating that the purple area is where the addition will be and the red is what is existing. Mr. Kinner said that the red area will be part of the addition itself. Mr. Kinner also passed around a copy of the contractor's blueprint to show the Board how the finished addition would-match the opposite side, the porch area. Mr. Kinner said the construction would mirror the other side, aesthetically and architecturally the same as the rest of the house. Mr. King asked Mr. Kinner if the addition was to be one story, and Mr. Kinner indicated that it was. Mr. Kinner said it will look different because it will be brought up to grade for the first story. Mr. Kinner indicated on the blueprint the area about which he was talking, looking at the south side of the house with the existing garage line and proposed new roof lines. Mr. Scala reviewed the way in which one would utilize the exterior changes: the ramp would bring you up to the main entrance front door, you will go from the front door into the apartment which is at the same level as the main floor of the house. Mr. Kinner indicated that was true. Mr. King asked Mr. Kinner if he prepared the drawings, and Mr. Kinner said that he did. Mr. King said that drawings were very clear and the Board appreciated their quality. Mr. Kinner said that the side of the house that will be facing the addition is owned by Richard Boyd who did provide a letter stating he was in support of the project. Mr. Kinner showed the Board the letter. Discussion followed relative to Mr. Boyd's living area as it relates to his garage and to the Sayet garage. Mr. Kinner explained the ramp: its grade, its length, and how it will meet the building code. Attorney Barney asked Mr. Kinner about the ramp and its relationship to the entry, the garage, and the porch. Mr. Kinner said that the porch might have to be extended slightly in order to accommodate a 4 foot wide ramp. He continued that the 4 feet is in order to make it easier if somebody has to pass by the wheelchair. Mr. Kinner said that it is more than code requires but felt it was more reasonable to do that. Mr. Kinner indicated that the porch area Attorney Barney referred to may come out slightly. Mr. King asked if it would come out towards the street, and Mr. Kinner indicated yes, and Mr. Kinner said that it is presently a deck. Mr. King asked if Mr. Kinner knew how far back from the street line it would be. Mr. Kinner said that, if it came out, he would suspect that it would be a foot or so. Therefore, Mr. Kinner said, looking down from the survey map, you would add a foot to that. Mr. Kinner said that the closest part of the sidewalk is approximately 18 feet, and therefore, he would guess 16 feet. Mr. Kinner, Mr. Scala and Mr. King discussed the distance to the property line and to the sidewalk. Chairman Austen asked if the ramp would be wood, not concrete. Mr. Kinner indicated that it would be wood. He said that the idea was to have all pressure treated decking, using piers to the frost line, to set it up using 4 X 4's and then putting matching shingles TOWN OF ITHACA FEE: $80:00 r� 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED: I / 14 I 93 Ithaca, New York 14850 Cam' CASH - ( (607) 273-1783 CHECK - ( A P PEA L ZONING: to the Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer For Office Use Only and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca, New York Having been denied permission to: /''1ai n-71a.1`r-1 Nee-A 1 c S f)o f c rre r- f j J E'' dr i/)?acfr4 at ,ZJ,S Rerw,rc/e Dr/ve. , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 5O3OFf 7 % 7_ 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: L_tL- �- -Ic11 c1 ==14- -, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordin e, 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. ) /D,_;„y it zp/ caul z re va.lu z bie LI-Se a I c/RSVc/!i:sta�^,'ca( veh s cl�s , - fl ei r Gvan•er -keu o » per-cogs; c.,,/ y zti�c� /`cs 1D' S¢preci d ¢ Sarre 1L�fe i r+ fhe *' 'u¢ure . • � Id b c , 'r+ s^2c¢rci/ end CzEuse, un,7e-cessa,- hart/sh,,, to Xce. Ise.where, -Cor >- �asans a•C\ zzcccsc a»d [�,., nccesszr,-� c os-f- 74e �s�& -rILA h ;s kl,-ez_dy '5c. By filing this application, I grant permission for members of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals or staff to enter my property to inspect in connection with my application. Signature of 0wner/Appellant..e:e� �G Cal at Y."L Date: Y /3 - �3 Signature of Appellant/Agent: Date: Home Telephone Number:( ) a 7 3 ~ 9� W k Telephone Number: NOTE: If construction of work in accordance with any variances given does not commence within 18 months, the variance will expire. PLOT PLAN I NFORM.ATI ON TO BE SHOWN: - 1., Dimensions of lot. 4. Dimensions and location of proposed structure(s) or 2. Distance of structures from: or addition(s). a. Road, 5. Nanes of neighbors Mc bound lot. b. Both side lot lines, 6. Setback of neighbors. c. Rear of lot. 7. Street name and number. 3. North arrow. 8. Show existing structures in contrasting lines. 110 //, -'77--1, --) z , ,7/7/ 7,/ ' / 1 •/l' /<I-/' 4 /' ,,''' / 11// 71/ / / I/ 7 ,/,/ //:4 i : , ,, , , / ' . I // ; . ' // , // 111/7 /7/// 1 ,f1 / // fk ,/. 7. / - / - fp, /, ' ,, /, , /' ,, , . , , / ,,,,,, ,, ' : / . , , „if/ „i ; i /7, , ,,,,,, , ,,, , , , ,/, , , ,,, / ,:,,, / ,, ,., , / 7, , „f _ P I 1 i 1 yO .),1 rg. j\ I� l - r7 t 1 i C. Z=Sr MI : Ii , , ,,400„,.. ./'-'--..---;I .11 A.)' �tt.. a r re 1i..1 f 1 lid / igair I ' /// /01, r I / At, D f I / : .�' �. Signature of Owner/Appel lant: c�No '' Date: 9.-13 -73 Signature of Appellant/Agent: Date: • I . [ J I MI I- I Town Assigned Project ID Number Rev. 10/90 Tovn of Ithaca Environmental Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Located in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County ONLY PART i — Project information (To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 1 . Applicant/Sponsor: 2. Project Name: 11i2,,-11.1,1en Urrreyi5.{E.!'611. �f'V% //ct i>'► Cz c/,, s 3. Precise Location (Street Address and Road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map): et/S' /fe h w;C/e Dr. r.h x c t/ Tax Parcel Number: 4. Is Proposed Action: NEW E EXPANSION n MODIFICATION/ALTERATION (/V; �. ) 5. Describe Project Briefly (Include project purpose, present land use, current and future construction plans,/and other relevant items): a,ry-fa., ' ve-h ; cI S ne. 7' ec-trrQ.a74'7, -� iS" r¢p Or- jh,gypeCr9c( (Attach separate sheet(s) if necessary to adequately describe the proposed project.) ti � I 6. Amount of Land Affected: Initially (0-5 yrs) "� 3 Acres (6-10 yrs) Acres (>10 yrs) Acres 7. How is the Land Zoned Presently? 8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? YES NO 2 If no, describe conflict briefly: v'2h;d e S r b 17, r-eS 54 -.' er- nSP e.d = • i 9. Will proposed action lead to a request for new: Public Road? YES El N07 Public Water? YES El NO,N Public Sewer? YES NO id, 10. What is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project? ® Residential El Commercial Industrial 0 Agriculture Park/Forest/Open Space El Other Please describe: 1 1 . Does proposed action involve a permit,approval, or funding, now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal, State, Local)? YES n NO If yes, list agency name and permit/approval/funding: 12. Does any aspect of the proposed action have a currentlu valid permit or approval? YES ❑ NO If yes, list agency name and permit/approval. Also, state whether that permit/approval will require modification. i CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/Sponsor Name (Print or Type): \A// //l y►r2 t!'.z��./acAityi ZS a eh��vy-Ha rice/ �J����� ✓ D i c%�'n S a n Signature -�e( D ate: •/3 -7.3 PART II - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by the Town; Use attachments as necessary.) A. Does proposed action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12 or Town Environmental Local Law? YES NO XX If yes, coordinate the review process and use the full EAF. B. Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6? YES NO XX If no, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any. C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) Cl. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production and disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: • See attached. - C2- Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources? Community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: See attached. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish, or wildlife species, significant habitats, unique natural areas, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: See attached. C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: _ • • See attached. C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: See attached. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1 - C5? Explain briefly: H. v See attached. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: See attached. D. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? YES XX NO If yes, explain briefly: The Town has received two complaints See attached. regarding these vehicles. E. Comments of staff XX , CAC , other attached. (Check as applicable.) PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca) instructions: Far each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it Is substantial, large, Important, or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (ie. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. _ Check here if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the full EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. XX Check here if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attachments as necessary the reasons supporting this d ermination. Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals tom- I . o•-i______Ao Name of Lead Agency Prep is Signature (If different from Responsible Officer) Edward Austen, Chairman Name & Title of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Contributing Preparer . Date: Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency PART II - Environmental Assessment - 215 Renwick Drive - Request to Maintain Vehicles Not Currently Registered or Inspected A. Action is Unlisted B. Action will not receive coordinated review C. Could action result in any adverse effects on, to or arising from the following: Cl. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? None anticipated. C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources, or community or neighborhood character? The surrounding neighborhood is single family homes. The potential for adversely affecting neighborhood character exists to a minor degree. The car storage area is for the most part screened from the public right of way and neighboring properties. There were five, (not four, as stated in the application) unregistered and uninspected vehicles parked in the driveway when Planning staff visited the site on 9/28/93. Assuming the residents of this property own at least one registered vehicle as well, at least six cars are normally parked in the driveway. Pedestrians can view four of the five unregistered cars from the street when they look up the driveway. The two neighboring properties, #221 and #227, can view 4 of the unregistered vehicles from windows on the south side of these houses, although they are partially screened by eight - six foot high evergreens (arborvitaes) planted by residents of #221. A redwood stockade fence effectively screens one of the unregistered cars from the street and neighboring properties. The Planning Department recommends that if the Board approves this proposal, that additional screening in the form of fencing or landscaping be required. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? None anticipated. C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? The front yard is currently being used for storage of five unregistered and uninspected vehicles in addition to an undetermined number of registered vehicles. This is beyond the normal, expected use of a single family residence's driveway for parking purposes. These vehicles are being stored there indefinitely, on both lawn, former lawn, and paved areas. The vehicles are in reasonably good condition, however, and are largely screened from the public right-of-way. They are partially screened from adjacent properties, and additional screening could minimize this change in use. C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? None anticipated. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-05? �r None anticipated. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? None anticipated. D. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? Controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts exists. The Town has received two complaints regarding storage of these vehicles in the front yard. PART III - Staff Recommendation, Determination of Significance Based on review of the materials submitted for the proposed action, the proposed scale of it, and the information above, a negative determination of environmental significance is recommended for the action as proposed. Lead Agency: Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Reviewer: Louise Raimondo, Planner 1 Review Date: October 1, 1993 (C\DEVREVS\ZBAREVS\215Renwick.eaf) \ o�.�9 )).,_, \,/,:),, soo ai5 ,, .).. _2— 10—l y • •z`0t " '" r440 pe• w, l a � zya z.,W .6 f •• ;, ,., •,, �_) yam 1' f7 y ..4,T 1 : . ✓ - r , S ______ ,... • -:...,_•••,_.• 1 , , ,..._ A_--.P. /Ma\ \ , ,___-_,_.Q._..,--/z, _-, iik ..,,,14., I. i • -�`-`> }r � . .`P,. - 1 4-• ,7 ,, f.0-'0 .iit'il 1 +9 4,..k.,-;,. --....N:iu_.,„.„.,, ; '„,,, ,, ._ ,., N6CL-rI., 1 • :. (c_c .t2, bf-ikiJ4) CbJ-1* ) :ry.4.•K ey+ - i (^ I ..... ....... ... . ... __. ,. _ _ _,.. . M� �, __. _.. w _..... ._ ,..r.o - - ..�. �.......... ,._,.._. v ....__._ ti,...,_...... �.__.,. �. r�..�