Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Area 3/9/1988 ti TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY; MARCH 9 , 1988 7:00 P.M. By direction of the Chairman ;of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings.; as appropriate, will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday, February 10, 1-988 , in Town hall, 126 East Scuepa Street, (FIRST Floor, REAR Entrance, - WEST Side) , Ithaca, N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7 :00 P.M. , on the following matters. - ; • ADJOURNED APPEAL (from February 10•, 1988) of Arthur G. and Mary A. Yaple, Appellants, from the decision of the Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer denying a building permit for the construction of a two-car garage, with a master bedroom and bath as a second story, proposed to be attached to the north side of an existing single family residence located at 151 Pine -Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1-35 , Residence District R-15 . The proposed addition would create a north side yard of nine feet, fifteen feet being required. Permit is denied under Article, IV, Section 14, of the Town of Ithaca •Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Margaret M. Rumsey, Appellant,:- requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the extension of a legal non-conforming use from a more restrictive use to ,a less restrictive use, located at 116 East Buttermilk Falls Road, ' Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-38-1-3 , Residence District 4-30 . The proposed use is to be known as "National Cable Craft" , a television cable system service center. The existing building was most recently used for a karate - instruction' school. The request for authorization is made under ' Article XII, Sections 54 and 55, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Orlando and Ralph Iacovel•li, Appellants, requesting area variance from the requirements of Article IV, Sections 14 and 16, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, for certain lots proposed as part of the "Klondike Manor" subdivision on Coddington Road, northwest of Juniper Drive, Town of Ithaca -Tax Parcels No. 6-53-1-17.1 , -17,2, -5, and -10 , Residence District R-15 , granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, with certain conditions, on February 2, 1988 .! ,Said proposed lots, numbered 2, 6, 7, and 8 , are in excess of 15,-000 square feet in area, however, have dimensions proposed as follows: Lot 2 -- westerly side lot depth of 110± feet; Lot 6 -- easterly side lot depth of 100± feet; Lot 7 -- easterly side lot depth of 110± feet, and, westerly side lot depth of 90± . feet; ' Lot 8 -- containing a pre-existing dwelling, with frontage at the street right of way.on -Coddington Road proposed at 63± feet, however, with frontage at the proposed front yard setback on Coddington Road of 65± feet and with a proposed frontage of 255± feet on the right of way line of the proposed new street forsaid subdivision, and farther, with said lot number 8 proposed to have a north side yard of 7± feet from said pre-existing dwelling to the right of way line of said new street. The Town Zoning Enforcement 'Officer requests a determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals as to the need for variance on proposed lot number 3 with frontage at th-e , street right of way proposed at 88± feet, however, with frontage -at the proposed front yard setback of 105± feet; on proposed lot number 4 with frontage at the street right of way proposed at 72± feet, • however, with frontage at the proposed front yard setback of 100 feet; and, on proposed lot number 9 with a southwesterly side lot depth ,of 100± feet. - Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7:00 p.m. , and said place, hear all persons in supportmof 'such matters or objections thereto, as appropriate. Persons may appear' by, agent -or in person. Andrew• S. Frost Building 'Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer r,( wn' of: Ithaca 213-1747 • - Dated: March 1 , 1988 - Publish: March 4, 1988 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date 40 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Ck1441/x )1f -hogell MARCH' 23-, 1988 The• Town .of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Wednesday, March 23 , 1988, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New Yorkat 7 :00 p.m. PRESENT: , Chairman Henry Aron, Edward Austen, Edward King, Joan Reuning, Town Planner Susan Beeners, Town Building Inspector - Andrew Frost, Town Attorney John C. Barney. ALSO PRESENT: ' Mary Yaple', Eva Hoffmann, Pamela Sackett, Louis W. Bonanni, Henry Theisen, Esq. , Thomas R. Salm, Alfred DiGiacomo. Chairman Aron declared the meeting duly opened at 7 :00 p.m. Chairman Aron stated that all posting and publication and service by mail of the Public Hearings had been completed and that proper affidavits of same were in order.' The first matter on the agenda was as follows: ADJOURNED APPEAL (FROM FEBRUARY 10 AND MARCH 9, 1988) OF ARTHUR G. AND MARY A. YAPLE, APPELLANTS, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR/ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO-CAR GARAGE, WITH A MASTER BEDROOM AND BATH AS A - SECOND STORY, PROPOSED TO BE ATTACHED TO THE NORTH SIDE OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 151 PINE TREE ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6-57-1-35 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-15 . THE PROPOSED ADDITION WOULD CREATE A NORTH SIDE YARD OF NINE FEET, FIFTEEN FEET BEING REQUIRED. PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV, SECTION 14 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. (THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THIS MATTER HAS BEEN CLOSED. ) ' ' ' Chairman Aron read aloud, for the record, a letter addressed to - the Zoning Board of Appeals, dated March 16 , 1988 , and received from Frank C. Baldwin and 'Blythe C. Baldwin. [Said letter attached hereto as Exhibit 1. ] ' At this time, Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Yaple if she were aware of the letter, and its contents. Mrs. Yaple answered, yes. Continuing, Chairman Aron noted that when the Day Care Center was before the Board for Special Approval, it was denied. Chairman Aron stated that the Doctor' s office was addressed as a home occupation, noting that Dr. Baldwin was not aware of the Zoning Laws. Chairman Aron indicated that this should be clarified to Dr. Baldwin, as the two issues are . completely different. ' Chairman Aron wondered if the 'garage could be constructed on the side toward the back, and the 'living quarters built on top of said garage,, commenting that it would lengthen the driveway. Mrs. Yaple responded that that was not possible, adding that she went to a lot of Zoning Board of Appeals -2- March 23 , 19$8- „t expense and hired an _ architect to verify- that the aesthetic lines of the house were - kept-.--- -Chairman Aron stated- that he was concerned with the zoning law. Mrs. Yaple; .stated that to locate the construction in the back would incur a major expense. Mr. King mentioned the fact that the roof of„the -house on the, wing- where construction is proposed ' slopes very 'steeply in the front,-.. and-wondered if it sloped- as steeply in the back. Mrs. Yaple answered, no,-. but,, the .whole roof has several steep peaks. Mrs. Yaple stated that an addition to the back porch, which is a kitchen, was, added ; on.; the north--side o,f: the house. The applicant,,noted ,that the ,kitchen, is., on a cement foundation and would - - not support a two-story 'addition.. -Mr, King --stated • that it was his understanding that' Mrs. Yaple modified the request to the Zoning Board of Appeals, noting that -the _present proposal is-to, build an extension which_ "would come., ,Within 9 - .feet of the north7"7 line. Mrs. Yaple answered, yes: -Mi. King' stated that he visited .the site, and noted the following: - 1. 'The slope Of-the roof of the house is extremely steep. 2 .- Aesthetically,. the '.;,drawing presented does show _a proposal in - keeping with the lines of the .house„ : , i ;, -, - ` ' 3 . The R-15 zoning requires a : 45-foot side yard; .however, a _ • one-story garage could be built within 10 feet of the north line. Mrs. Yaple,_ ;is - proposing ,;a ,two-story addition, _With ' living" .; quarters,, above a. garage, which would .come-.withiw'll or:12 -feet of • 4. .'The; adjacent- property to 'the', south, is owned. J.by Dr. •Baldwin+, and - there is undeveloped land to the east, :part, of which is the lot to -the `north upon ' which" Mrs .:,. Yaple ;'proposes to encroach on the' side yard. ,i . ,. Mr. ,King noted -that, ,the lot to :the, north, is 100' feet 'wide-,- and is a building lot: Mr. King offered that there ;is";a_�possibility in the -'future -for-- a road to-- be`- constructed "to—gain - access to Dr. - Baldwin's 22-acre, undeveloped- land. Also, Mr. -King commented that the ' cost cif, building ) 1.1 -to --be recognized, and. noted .that:. there is no _ - impact on n Tany of the neighbors, , except„ the, Baldwins, : and . they voice" no 'objection. Mr. King stated that he felt -there] wa's-:sufficient practical' difficulty regarding this issue. Chairman, Aron asked for any, ,other,_questions°_,or.fcomments . from: the Board. ' Board"Member Joan Reuning concurred_ with Mr., -King's -. remarks, along with Board' Member Edward Austen. - _ • , _ - Chairman Aron indicated to the Board that in 'order `to have the correct findings practical difficulties have to be determined, and . also the applicant has to prove that there. -is unnessary hardship. : Chairman Aron noted that ,Mrs. Yaple has 2,200 , square feet of-- living space for five people,, adding that the garage was• changed into living ,'quarters. , Chairman Aron stated that he was not, at 'this ,point, Zoning; Boa-rd of Appeals- :L`- -3- -• '- - • i•Mar-ch: 23; 1988 convinced that there . is .unnecessary hardship created by having 2 ,200 square'-;feet of; living -area for five people: Chairman Aron -noted that the Zoning Ordinance requires 15 feet; Mrs. Yaple is lacking 3- or 4 feet. There appearing to -be - no further questions - or -comments, ' Chairman Aron stated that•';,he.••would entertain- a- Motion. ._ - -J ;;MOTION••by7,Mr`. Edward.-King,: .seconded';by Mrs . - Joan Reuning WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals finds - that the applicant has demonstrated--- practical difficulties in constructing - 'the proposed addition to the house without a variance on the north side yard,- -and WHEREAS, the Board also finds that those practical ' difficulties, including destroying the charm of the existing house, and the unusual expense that. would -he ,entailed having' to destroy 'existing parts of the dwelling in order to construct an addition to the rear, and - WHEREAS, The Board also finds that the owners of the property to the north, east, and south have expressed in writing to the Board an agreement that a ;variance::be granted-,'i even though it- wi 1l"_impinge on their lot to the north; - cTHEREFORE, I•T ,,,RESOLVED that: e -Town- of Ithaca.' Zoning -Board ;,-•of:- Appeals grant -and•',.ihereby, doe"s•Vgrahtt, the requested area- variance subject,':,to1- the•;rfollowing.f,:conditibn"s: Ja% ' That the.,-new structure -not -=approach closer-, than 10, feet -to ' the north side ;of the: north `lot, line': "�- • .t. .J., . )-:-4..- •.12•S ! , 2 . That, as _a condition'',.'of ,the• issuance, -of • .a• -certificate of - •` - `ocCdparicy; the -applicant; upon having the foundation put in, have , - a-, su'rveyour) promptly: sur rey,` thelf premises "as-built"-- and certify the,;:distance from . the lot... line; r--and that'---such survey map' be presented to the Town of Ithaca Building Inspector/Zoning -• .-,Enforcement Officer-,-,within -a= reasonable time after' the foundation is in. ^._ rr ,, = •At_' this •point; Chairman-•,Aron. zeadt= aloud- from-=a =court`--decision, = Governdale vs. Board of- Appeals in Brookh'averi',•• which states that where • ; a , use ;;variance ,-••. is sought- _ Fthe- applicant must show'-' practical - -, difficulties and ,unnessary .hardship, • as follows: : 1.- The land cannot yield: a reasonable;-return if=used only -for the purpose allowed in that zone. ,- ;2.i, The plight, of;,.the; owner;•is- due to•. unique circumstances- and not to •,the_,general conditions yin=-,the_ neighborhood;-"which --may' reflect the .unreasonables:`•of. •the Zoning Ordinance -itself. 3 . That the use to - be authorized;•by: the-'-variance: will •no't\ -alter the essential character •-of-;the- locality. .Chairman Aron ,also•-•stated' that the decision noted that a use, ,variance _ may;-.not .be- ;granted merely to- ease - the personal -- difficulties . of•- ;the'- owner. ' Chai•rman- Aron stated- that if• the Board - , felt• all--the_=criteria -were .met ,in Mrs.-•Yaple-"s l case, - he would call for a vote; : , , , ,, Mr. King noted that the Board was .concerned with an area variance Zoning- Board of Appeals - -4- March 23 , 1988 t only and. not a use var'iance,- so the criteria should -not be quite as heavy ,as . it would,lbe in -changing the character of the use of' said Chairman Aron asked Mrs. Yaple if it were impossible to build the , structure ,,behind;, with Mrs'. Yaple answering; yes-, adding -that it would create a financial hardship; as- well as. other hardships. There b,eing,,no, further discussion,. Chairman Aron polled-• the Board members as to their vote. Edward .Austen,- Aye. Edward King:,- Aye.,. _- ' . ) r,. M �, • - - Joan Reuning - Aye. Chairman,,Aron:,- Aye. ; . ;c :. ',Jr :_ a ._ . ,F.rJ , The, MOTION_ was:declared to:,be= carried- 'unanimously.-• Chairman Aron - declared the matter of the Yaple Appeal duly closed., - ._ ,The ;second item-,on .the.agenda-,was as follows: =L APPEAL OF ITHACA COLLEGE, APPELLANT, ROBERT O'BRIEN AND •LAWRENCE HOFFMAN, ; HOLT' ARCHITECTS,- .AGENTS, REQUESTING-•:SPECIALi• APPROVAL UNDER ..ARTICLE_ I,V, ; , SECTION 11', PARAGRAPHS 4, OF THE -TOWN- OF ITHACA - ZONING ORDINANCE, WITH RESPECT TO A . PROPOSED ' .NEW ' RESIDENTIAL' HALL TO BE LOCATED ON THE ITHACA COLLEGE CAMPUS, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6-41-1-24 ,,• RESIDENCE DISTRICT.--R-15 , AND-,FURTHER, REQUEST FOR' VARIANCE OF THE 30-FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT. REQUIREMENT SET FORTH • IN- ARTICLE IV, SECTION 11, PARAGRAPH 10, OF SAID ORDINANCE, SAID NEW RESIDENTIAL HALL BEING: 'PROPOSED WITH A HEIGHT OF; 38 FEET. '.' '. . ' • ' • ' - - - ' - - Chairman Aron' stated-' that '_the:='Zoning", Board- of .Appeals-, was the Lead Agency in _the ,Environmental !Assessment of this- project..,:- .. - .Mr.:,,,Lawrence Hoffman;,. HOLT' Architects,-•addressed the -Board and appended maps to the bulletin board. L:.k - - : Mr -.Hoffman, pointed- ;.out_ on the appended:map' the location of the proposed, new, .residence tall ,-- building No•: 21. Mr:' Hoffman noted that the ,new building, - is'•: in, an - area . with other )•residential halls, _,,, „adding that .the proposed -site . 'is' an area •between ' the current access road into the-='site. .Mr. :Andrew 'S.: Frost, Town, 'Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer:, poi'nted, out ' that--there' is :grading quite a ' _,bit to the north -of the,,Garden ' Apartments.5 , Mr: Hoffman Stated that the proposed project is a three-.story structure of - approximately 70 ,000 square - feet containing _up to 153 double=occupancy student _ _rooms,,rooms, resident advisor';:-•living , areas, lounges, ,office' -and support , spaces. Mr. Hoffman noted that, the .project also proposes modification . to an existing parking lot and -creation of a' new 'service/parking area, adding that the proposed project- would create no burden. on ' any public service or facility. Mr. Hoffman stated that the building itself will , be of brick facade, and would be a little less than 30 feet •` - FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date 2/ / 3 TOWN OF ITHACA Clerk F ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS March 9, 1988 - A _ regular meeting of the- Town of Ithaca. Zoning Board of Appeals was held on March 9, = 1988 at the Ithaca Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York. • . ` -PRESENT: Chairman Henry Aron, Edward King, Edward Austen, -Building' ,Inspector Andrew, Frost, Town Planner Susan Beeners, and ' - Town Attorney-John C. -Barney ' • ALSO PRESENT: Peter Gergely,,. Che-Yu Li Ann Kugler, r Kincsa Gergely, - Susan Centini, _James- Gerard, P.E. Tubbs, Susan Fertik, Bob Horn,. - Joan Horn, Donnie Simpson, Ron Simpson, Aafke Steenhuis, ' Tammo Steenhuis, Mickey Herzing, Margie Rumsey, , ; Jarlath Hammorck, WHCU. The public meeting opened at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Aron stated that all posting and publication of the public hearings had been completed and that proper affidavits of same were in order. Photographs of the subject properties were passed around for the Board to review. The first item on the agenda for consideration was as follows: ADJOURNED APPEAL (from February 10, 1988) of Art G • Mar A. Appellants, from the decision o e Building nspec or/Zoning Enforcement Officer denying a building permit • for the ' construction of a two-car garage, with a master bedroom and bath as a second story, proposed to be attached to the north side of an existing single family residence located at 151 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1-35, Residence District R-15. The proposed addition would create a north side yard of nine feet, _ fifteen feet being required.._ Permit is denied under Article - IV, Section 14, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Aron declared the Zoning Board of Appeals as lead Mrs. Mary Yaple presented., to the Board a survey of her property which the Board had reqested at the last meeting. Mrs. Yaple said that since the Board thought the addition was too extravagant they had decided to cut the breezeway off therefore making the addition 25 feet instead of 29 feet, making the addition 12 feet from the boundary line, thus creating a deficiency of 3 feet. ,3hAs 2 Chaiuxuan Aron asked for the architect's plans presented atthe last meeting. Mrs. Yaple said she had not brought them to this meeting assuming they were not, necessary. The Board members referred to sketches of the proposed addition which were in their files but Edward-- King stated there were no dimensions on those sketches. Mrs. Yaple said the plans presented at the last meeting were not actually architectural renderings and also had no dimensions as they were only design plans. She continued that the addition would be approximately 25 - feet on the north side, based on the scale. - Chairman Aron asked what scale she was referring to as they had no scale to- look at., Attorney - Barney asked what the width of the addition they desiredto build was ',minus the breezeway and she responded it would be 25 feet. - , Mr. King ' said that that would make the . boundary line 12 feet instead of the required 15 feet in an R15 zone. Chairman Aron stated that if it was only a garage the requirement would be 10 feet but that Mrs. Yapie also would like to put on top of the garage a bedroom and - for that purpose she would need 15 feet. Chairman Aron 'stated that Mrs. Yapie had said she needed the bedroom because her daughters were growing up. He continued that Mrs. Yaple's daughters were teenagers and inquired how many• more years she thought her daughters would be living in the house. Mrs. Yaple responded that her youngest daughter was eight years old so she assumed she would be in the house another ten years. Chairman Aron referred to the minutes of the last meeting wherein Mrs. Yaple had stated that the house contained 2200 square feet of living space not counting the basement. Chairman Aron asked if that amount of living space did not contain enough room comfortably for her family. Mrs. Yapie said at this point that she was going to take pictures of all the surrounding houses in her neighborhood to show the Board that her house was the smallest house there. She continued that one house had an addition that was maybe three feet to the lot line. She reminded the Board that there was a vacant lot to the north. Mrs. Yaple said that she went to the expense of having a survey done and felt that if her plans were still too extravagant she was at a loss to know what to do next. - Chairman Aron said the Board must determine if the criteria of the variance was being adhered to, not whether she was extravagant, but in fact whether she qualified. Mr. King said he understood Mr. and Mrs. Baldwin owned the vacant lot to the north and it would encroach upon them to grant a variance to Mrs. Yaple for a smaller side yard. He inquired if Mrs. Yaple had spoken to the Baldwins about purchasing any part of that vacant lot. Mrs. Yaple responded that they did not want to sell any part of it because they owned all the land in back of J/q/SS hem, and they probably eventually would like a right of way road '-to the back so they did not want the land landlocked in case they wanted to sell it or develop it later on. Mr. King said ,that if - , they were willing to sell her an eight foot strip she would not ' need a variance and she could . build, the way she had originally proposed her ,addition Mrs. Yaple said - that would create a • . hardship for .them to buy an eight foot strip of land. Mr. King asked . :if the Baidwins also - owned to the south and Mrs. Yaple • 'responded the Baldwin house was to the south. Mr. King said that 4• 'therefore the vacant lot on the north was actually the access of _- , • : ,the Baidwins into their 'seven and one half acres bordering all • the properties on the east. • Mr- King inquired if 'there 'was anything in writing from' the Baidwins beyond their -signatures on- a' sketch which he felt told ' the Board nothing. Mrs. Yaple responded there was not but she thought that was taken- care of at the last meeting. She continued she thought the purpose' of this meeting was to get the survey completed and to the Board, Mr- King said he was not at the' last meeting but had read the minutes and said he thought there was an error on page 5, in the next to the last paragraph, stating what the deficiency of the side yard would be. Be continued that the response referred , to it as 9 or 11 feet but actually it appeared it was only a matter of 6 feet. Mr. King stated that in reading the minutes he frankly did not see where the hardship was that the Board was required to find in order to grant an area variance. Further, he said, there was nothing from the Baidwins in writing, nor did they appear personally, to indicate that the use of their adjacent land would not be jeopardized because when that much more sideyard was used it would impinge on the Baldwin property. Mrs. Yaple said she had talked with the Baidwins but did not obtain anything further from them as she thought that issue was discussed and decided on at the last meeting. - She said that she . - thought this meeting was only to present the survey requested. : Mr. King said that from the minutes he understood the Board had _ asked her to have a surveyor lay out exactly what the dimensionsof the proposed ' addition would be and where they would come on the lot. , Mrs. Yaple said the purpose of the survey was to get the exact lot line. Chairman Aron- interjected that the reason a survey was requested was that when the Board was considering an area variance they had to know exact dimensions before' they could make a final decision, and that at the last meeting the footage was vague, "9 or 11 feet". , Mrs. Yaple said that now she had it exactly and Mr. Aron responded that now that the Board knew how - many feet she was requesting hardship had to be established in' order to obtain an area variance. For instance, he continued, had she made a serious attempt to contact Mr. Baldwin asking him _o sell the footage on his land she required. Chairman Aron felt ‘3/9/g8 4 that had Mr. Baldwin refused Mrs. Yaple could have asked him to give her that decision in writing to present to the Board. Chairman Aron said that Mrs Yaple had not shown that she had made any serious attempt. - - Mrs. Yaple , , said that they had talked • to the Baldwins ' attempting". to buy' the property when they had first moved in and they had a verbal first option. But, she said, the Baldwins do . , not want to sell the property and she would not pester them again as she knows they just do not want to sell it to them. She did - not think this matter was even brought up at the last meeting and Chairman Aron said that was why they had adjourned the .matter to ' explore it further. Mrs. Yaple,, said all she "was asking for -was 'a simple three foot variance, she had gone to the expense of having a survey - done, and thought she had done everything required of her. She continued that as far as the hardship was concerned she thought that issue was settled at the last meeting. Chairman Aron said it was not settled at the last meeting as was borne out by the minutes. Chairman Aron referred to the section of the minutes where Mrs. Yaple had stated that they had no garage and that was a practical difficulty. Chairman Aron repeated what he had said at the previous meeting, that there were hundreds of people having homes with no garage thereby forcing them to leave their cars outside. He reiterated his position that this was not accepted by him as practical difficulty. Mr. King added that there was a garage originally and the Yaples had enclosed it and used- it for other purposes.. Mr. King felt the matter should be kept open to allow the Maples time to bring in written consent from the Baldwins to see if that would make any difference to the members of the Board. Attorney Barney felt the Board should indicate to Mrs. Yaple whether it would make a difference because if the Baldwins had any objections they would have notified the Board or been present at the meetings. He added that at the last meeting there was quite a bit of discussion on the fact that the Baldwins had signed the sketch plans so they were shown exactly what was going -_ to happen and how close it would be to their property. Attorney Barney continued that Mrs. Yaple had testified that there was no objection from the Baldwins Attorney Barney said that if it was just a matter of getting something in writing in the record that was alright, but it was his understanding that the problem was with locating the north line and seeing how close to the line the addition would be. He added that Mrs. Yaple had fulfilled that requirement, and the Board now knew the deficiency would be approximately 4 feet. Attorney Barney agreed with the Chairman though that no determination had been made at 'the last meeting with regard to practical difficulties. . 3/0 Edward Austen asked if the Yaples would be willing to go hack to the Baldwins and again offer to buy some of their lot. Kr. Austen maintained that if the Baldwins were planning on using that lot as a road right of way they would not need 100 feet. On the other hand, he continued, if it was to be a building lot, then they would need the entire lot._ Mrs. Yaple said that she cculd go back to the Baldwins but did not know whether they had any definitive plans for the property. Mr. King thought that the property had been offered for sale as a unit. Mr. King also .stated that if they were to sell off some of the lot in question . to the Yaples then they would have to come before the Board for a - . variance for a smaller lot if it was to be built upon° ' Mr. King felt that he would be in favor of a variance if he saw something in writing from the Baldwins to the effect that they would not sell off part of the lot to the Yapies but that they had no opposition to the Yaples adding on an addition to their house. Chairman Aron felt this would give the Board something substantial to base their decision on. Chairman Aron made a motion as follows: RESOLVED, that this Board adjourn this matter to April 13, 1988. Edward King seconded the motion. The voting was as follows: Aye - Austen, King, Aron Nay - None The motion was unanimously carried. The second item on the agenda was as follows: APPEAL of Margaret Me Rumsey, Appellant, requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the extension of a legal non-conforming use from a more restrictive use to a less restrictive use, located at 116 ` East Buttermilk Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-- ' 38-1-3, Residence District R-30. The proposed use is to be ' known as "National Cable Craft", a television cable system service center. The existing building was most recently used for a karate instruction school. The request for _ authorization is made under Article XII, Sections 54 and 55, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. Chairman -Aron declared the Zoning Board of Appeals the lead agency in this matter. " Mrs . Margaret Rumsey appeared before the Board. She stated 3/9/8 6 _mat the party who wished to lease her premises was a company That had, been working with the Community Cable Service in Ithaca since about 1983.. The cable service was removing all old cable in the area and installing new cable. The building on the tremmises would be used tocheck electrical capacity. Mrs. Rumsey added 'that the company had a two and one-half . year year contract to complete this so they would be renting from her for that length cf time. Mr. King asked what type of work they would be doing inside the building and Mrs. Rumsey responded, that they would bring in - the cable on a spool and check the electrical capacity to make certain it was alright before they put it up. Mr. King asked if there would be any "manufacturing, or any kind of noisy operation going on and Mrs. Rumsey responded there would not be.. Mr. King asked what the building had been used for in the past and a list presented by Mrs, Rumsey with her application gave a short history of the premises. Such list is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Mr. King thought that they would classify these operations as a Business C type which includes anything from retail stores to plumbing and electrical shops. Chairman. Aron asked Mrs. Rumsey what the traffic situation would be and Mrs. Rumsey said she expected less traffic with this tenant than with her last tenant. Mr. Austen inquired if six to eight trucks (mentioned in Exhibit 1) going in and out of the - premises each day were company trucks and she responded they were. Chairman Aron inquired if this company was a subcontractor to the cable company in Ithaca and Mrs. Rumsey responded this was correct. Mr. 'King asked if the dumpster was located behind the building on the west side and Mrs. Rumsey responded that it was to the north and presented pictures of the property showing where the dumpster was located. Chairman Aron inquired if the road in the picture was a Town road and it was determined that it was. The public hearing was then opened. No one appeared and the public hearing was closed. As to the environmental assessment, Ms. Beeners was asked to review her recommendation which she did. A copy of such recommendation entitled "Part II - Environmental Assessment- Ramsey Appeal° is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 .. Mre Frost asked if there was a representative of "National Cable Craft" and Mrs. Rumsey responded there was not. Mr. Frost asked if the dumpster was for just trash or yards and yards of cable being stored outside the building. Mrs. Rumsey responded it would be for the cable that would be taken down and when that f pster was filled it would be removed and a new one placed TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 10 , 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, February 10, 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. APPEAL of Tompkins County, Appellant, Frank R: Liguori, Commissioner of Planning, Agent, with respect to a request for, Special Approval, under Article V, Section 18 , Paragraph 4 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, of a nursery school use to be -known as the Tompkins County Employee Day- Care Center, proposed to be located at-the Biggs_ Center, - _ Building -A., 301 .Harris B. .Dates Dr.ive p-: Town of Ithaca Tax. Parcel_ No. 6-24-3-2.2 ,- in a - Special Land Use District (Limited Mixed Use) . Residence District R-30 regulations_•apply. APPEAL of Arthur G. and Mary A. Yaple, Appellants, from the decision of the Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer denying a building permit for the construction of a two-car garage, with a master bedroom and bath as a second story, proposed to be attached to the, north side of an existing single family residence located at 151 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1-35 , Residence District R-15 . The proposed addition would create a north side yard of nine feet, fifteen feet being required. Permit is denied under Article IV, Section 14, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Rebecca H. , Robin, and Robert E. Cofer III , Appellants, with respect to a request for Special Approval, under Article III, Section 4, Paragraph 10 , of the operation of a rooming house use, as a Bed and Breakfast Inn, proposed to be located at 355 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-39-1-27 , Residence District R9 . The occupancy of said Inn is proposed at four roomers. 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: February 2 , 1988 Publish: February 5 , 1988 • 2 Garrison Evans, Senior Planner of the Planning Department Staff of Tompkins County appeared before the Board. Chairman - - - Aron asked if he had anything further- he-'•wished to say and Mr. Evans stated that he was there mainly to answer any questions the Board had. - The public hearing , was opened. . No -one appeared and the public hearing was--closed. Chairman Aron then read the "ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Tompkins County Employee -Day Care Center., Biggs, Center, .Bui:lding A , 301 Harris B. Dates Drive, Planning Board, January-. 5, 1-988. " . Said " document is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 . • • Mr. Austen--asked if the day' care tenter-would be -available— - to other than 'County- employees and Mr.-'' 'Evans responded that first' . ' _priority would ',be given to the children of County employees as' that was the intent .of this day care . acility- but if -space was avail-able-- then children of non'-C;oun-ty, employees would be accepted. . ,Mr . Austen- inquired -if access :would bet-trot-the east side and Mr. Evans responded that it would- be-. Chairman Aron ' inquired how many--classrooms there' would be and Mr. Evans responded that there would be four classrooms with some support space and a kitchen. . • Chairman Aron asked Mr. Frost if t,the building- conformed to building code requirements and Mr. Frost said . that - he 'would not - be involved in this since it was up to the State of New York to set the requirements and see .that they-:were met.. As to the •envir_onmental assessment a -motion was made by Joan Reuning as follows: _ ,RESOLVED; that .this Board - finds a negative 'determination of environmental significance -in this :matter-. -- - • .The motion was seconded by :Edward 'Austen.- S • The .voting :'was as follows: - Aye Aron, Reuning, Austen - - Nay - None The motion was unanimously carried. - Joan .'Reuning compl-im-ent-ed Mr . Evans ' on' the excellent _ documentation submitted by the County with -regard:• to this application and stated that any questions she might. havehad were • � a , 3 answered by this documentation . The other Board members concurred. As to the Special Approval a motion was made by Edward Austen as follows: WHEREAS, the building is well adapted for this use and there will be no significant change to the health, safety and general well-being of the neighborhood except for the better, and WHEREAS, the proposed use is the same as other uses in the building; and WHEREAS, egress and. access are suitable for this type of use; -and - - - WHEREAS, there- is a definite need for the proposed use; and WHEREAS, no one appeared in opposition to this appeal; it is RESOLVED, that this Board grant Special Approval for the day care facility in Building A, Floor 2, X Wing, at 301 Harris B. Dates Drive. -- The motion was seconded by Joan Reuning. The voting was as follows: Aye - Reuning, Aron, Austen Nay - None - The motion was unanimously carried. The next item on the agenda was as follows: APPEAL of ur G. and Mar A Y , Appellants, from the decision of e ui ing Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer denying a building permit for the construction of a two-car garage, with a master bedroom and bath as a second story , proposed to be attached to the north side of an existing single . family residence located at 151 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1 -35 , Residence District R-15. The proposed addition would create a north side yard of nine feet, fifteen feet being required. Permit is denied under Article IV , Section 14 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. Arthur G. Yaple and Mary A. Yaple addressed the Board. They stated that they wished to construct a two-car garage with a breezeway connecting the house and build a master bedroom over the garage. Mr . Yaple stated that there was a vacant lot 4 adjacent to the proposed building site on the , north whereas• the _ ,south side was bounded by a house and there "vows no room to expand on that side. He -stated that at present they had no. garage and felt their design-- plans were aesthetically' sound: - : Chairman-Aron "inquired as to the nece'ssity' of adding another bedroom and Mr . Yaple responded that at :present two of, his daughters were sharing a bedroom and he felt they now needed separate bedrooms. Chairman Aron- inquired who-adjoined, their , property- on the north and Mr. Yaple responded that Frank and, Blythe. Baldwin _owned the vacant lot there. Mary Yaple explained that they had spoken ' with Mr. and_Mrs. Baldwin and they had no- disagreement with their - plans and in fact had signed 'a document called a "Plot Plan" • - outlining the information' of -the proposed, construction .' Said - - - - document- is -attached hereto as Exhibit 2':' Chairman Aron stated-,that verbal .cpmmunic.atior with , Mr.. ' and Mrs. Baldwin by the Yaples was not sufficient 'and that the document -signed by Mr. and •Mrs. Baldwin- in no way indicated their assent but in fact only had their , signatures on it. _Attorney Barney-.stated that they had- though signed what -,appeared-'to be all of the --information of the construction; and-Joan Reuriirig-stated- that • Mr. and Mrs. Baldwin were not 'at the meeting in opposition to the appeal. The public hearing was then opened. -_No one appeared- and the public -hearing -Was closed. _ Attorney 'Barney questioned the design of the 'garage and inquired if a breezeway was absolutely -necessary: Mr . Yaple explained that it was necessary for air space .between -the house and garage and would allow 'entrance to-the house through the back as entering the front of the house would necessitate -walking on oriental rugs they -had ' placed there. Without a breezeway, he continued, in order to gain entrance through- the back of the house they would have to walk all the , way around the garage to enter the house. -- Mr. Yaple felt that aesthetically it -would look better and not so much like an addition. Mr . Yaple presented sketch plans to the Board for their viewing: - - Chairman Aron' then 'stated that to' grant an area _variance .it was necessary for the Board to determine that practical difficulties -existed. Chairman Aron inquired what ,the, Yaples felt their practical difficulties were. Mrs. Yaple stated that practical difficulties existed because of the cramped space. Chairman Aron inquire& how much square feet of living space they now had and how many people were in the family. Mrs. Yaple responded that there were five people in the family and they had 22.00 square feet of living space . 5 Mrs. Yaple stated also that at present they had no garage and this was a practical difficulty. Mrs. Yaple continued that they also wished to incorporate into the construction a laundry room as their basement was non-functional because of dampness. She continued that they had three children, one eight years old and two teenagers . Mrs . Yaple stated that their two teenage daughters now shared a cottage-type bedroom and as they were getting taller they needed more space. Chairman Aron inquired how long they had owned the house and Mrs. Yaple responded that they had owned it for fourteen years. Chairman Aron asked when they bought the house did they not realize that the basement was damp, that it was small, and that there was no garage. Mrs. Yaple responded that there was a garage when they bought the house but since they needed more room - - ,�_ they converted. the garage into a family room. She stated 'that . this was _ the house they could afford. at the-time and they had looked at other properties but to buy another house or buy a lot and build would be quite costly. She .`stated that they liked ttie neighborhood and wished to stay there. Mrs. Yaple further stated that they had been without a garage for fourteen years. Chairman Aron stated that not having a garage was not a practical difficulty as many people do not have garages. He asked in what other way the Yaples felt there were practical difficulties. Mr. Yaple stated that his two teenage girls would probably be living at home for only five more years or so. He felt that they needed their own space and privacy after sharing a bedroom for so many years and he would like to provide the best home that he could for them while they were living there. Attorney Barney inquired at this point if the garage could not be designed to be a little smaller by perhaps eliminating the breezeway so as not to use up so much' of the side yard. Mr. Yaple stated that the architect had come up with the design of the garage and it was his idea to put the breezeway in. Mr. Austen asked at this time exactly what the deficiency of the sideyard would be and Mr. Yaple responded he was not exactly sure, that it might be 9 feet or it might be 11 feet, but they had made it 9 feet to be on the safe side in case it was over that by several inches . Mr. Austen stated that it made a difference to the Board what the exact deficiency would be and thought that some documentation might be in order such as a survey showing exactly what the boundaries would be. The Board concurred and it was suggested that a survey showing the north boundary line would be in order. It was suggested that this appeal be adjourned until such survey could r . , 5 . 6. 4 . .2/,® re 6 be presented at which time the Board` would have more information to deal with. A motion was made by Henry Aron as follows: RESOLVED, that this matter be adjourned until a survey- is . presented to the Board showing the - exact deficiency on the north side of the subject property that would' be -created by the proposed construction. , Edward Austen seconded the motion. ' The voting was as follows: ' Aye - Aron, Reuning, Austen -_ - - ,Nay - None - . - -_ - The -motion -was unanimously carried. ' - The matter was to be placed- on the March 9th calendar. - The last item on the agenda was the following: - - - - - = APPEAL_of Rebecca. H. , - Robin ;' and Robert E. CCffe.r III , -- Appellants, with respect to a request for Specia Approval, under Article III, Section 4, Paragraph 10, of the operation of -a rooming house use, as a 'Bed and Breakfast Inn, proposed to be located at 355 Stone-Quarry.- Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-39-1 -27, Residence District R9. The occupancy of said Inn is proposed_ at four roomers. - -- . - Chairman Aron declared the '.Zoriing Board of Appeals as the lead agency in this matter. Mrs. Rebecca Cofer addressed the Board. She stated that she wished to operate a Bed and Breakfast at her home because her job with Cornell had terminated -and it would -be income for her. She continued that her house had seventeen rooms and it. would help pay the taxes and utilities, ' etc.. -Mrs., Cofer stated that she had- no children living at home now .and felt that this would be a- good utilization of her hou-se to- help defray expense's. ' Chairman Aron read several endorsements from neighbors, the first from Frances P . Hull, attached hereto as Exhibit 3, the second from- Lindsay Goodloe and Marvin Berggen, attached hereto as Exhibit 4, and the third from Paul and Dortha Kelsey,- attached hereto as Exhibit 5. Mrs . Cofer said that her property- was across from the - cemetery and that, her closest neighbor was Marvin Berggen at 341 Stone Quarry Road. Chairman Aron then read the environmental assessment of 7 Susan Beeners entitled "Part II - Environmental Assessment- Cofer Bed and Breakfast". Said document is attached hereto as Exhibit 6. Mrs. Cofer asked exactly what kind of trimming had to be done to make the driveway safer and Mr . Austen explained by indicating on the pictures of the property what needed to be done. Chairman Aron stated that if special approval was granted the Town Engineer would tell her exactly what was required. Joan Reuning inquired as to the load capacity of the bridge on the property. Mrs. Cofer stated that the bridge had been redone several years ago with railroad ties and two years ago one side had been jacked up. She stated that many deliveries were made to the property and the bri-dge was sturdy enough to accommodate the heavy trucks and sh did not foresee a' problem. . . Andrew- Frost stated that he also had a concern about ' the stability. of the bridge. _ The public hearing was opened. No one appeared . and the public hearing was closed. As to the environmental assessment a motion was made—by- Edward Austen as follows: RESOLVED, that this Board finds a negative determination of environmental significance. Joan Reuning seconded the motion. The voting was as follows: Aye - Reuning, Aron, Austen Nay - None The motion was unanimously carried. Chairman Aron inquired how many rooms would be used and Mrs. Cofer stated that three rooms would be used for the Bed and Breakfast. She stated that she already had one student boarding there and so altogether she would have no more than four boarders. Mr. Austen inquired what building codes would have to be met and Mr. Frost stated that the building would qualify as a single family residence. Discussion followed regarding the safety of the bridge after which a motion was made by Henry Aron as follows: WHEREAS, the health, safety, morals and general welfare of POL1± °_— I 550' e/u/ 1 `E PINE TEE E e0 Ar() P a.ES EN T cE PAVE MEAT 1•1 Z Z3'E —� I r. \in IUo ' I• d N 1 • • N (N•T4) • b 379.7' �- 1 ,Ni I TO I .PIPE AT 5,\IV. CO2, OF COIF ELL \ en; I UNIv, Peaa 380 DEEo) 0,91- \ 0,H.UTIL. \d I , a ; \. ., I • r. . , ; fi , ' _- 36 4---- J r r i N z6.,4' 37.7 3 ---- - ' _ EaD Koer14 r o, 0 • O W LE4Ehtn 00 N }r; U1 V'Imo..- Q I- o I e04 PIPE N°D I Z fs.)9 coa"± I- tj 0 "' DI til •T 2 a a it I-POM P(N Set. . . I /`� t00� w . iii L....... ..r.- ..it4.1 JO- . • . O1 _ ,3 W- 4LA-LON4 Ft.IGE -- -- k X < 13ALDWIisi (2,o ) 587- 7 ,7 .557- I-7,Z Survey Mop of 151 Pine Tree Rood - Town of Ithoco Tompkins County - New York NOTE: ANY REVISIONS TO THIS MAP MUST COMPLY WITH SECTION 7209, 1 KEN E75nA. BAKER SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORKSTATE'EDUCATION LAW. I PRO EOAL.M'N SURVEYOR DATE / DRAWN KB-- - _ - Llr -( - ,,��tnigITttarr,. SURVEYED:5/4` e 8 i BY:_ SCALE 1 .56 `JOBNO.• ( I S� .� -VF[[ JYS�p'' , F•\ :-�°YN y' 1. I hereby certify to Arthur G. & Mary A A. Yap1 e a',� 1•c,,,a:=16.:n` 1:. that I am a licensed land surveyor, New York Stare License No. 049415 and that this ' =� r l p i .� o` map correctly delineates4an actual survey on the-ground,made byrme or tifider mydirect a 0 ��I �` .�..'1 --ar. supervision,that it was prepared in accordance'wit l-the current'code of p-racf1ce or land °o° b �.�,ai title surveys•adopted�by the New York State Association of'Profeasiorialrtanr '�-Stirrveyors; ��1��` `b•••.;.2...-6° ' and that I found no visible encroachinehtS either way across property lines except as ! B�"si co LAP::,�`�y� shown hereon. ' ---hiturtg, SIGNED: g--� • (, Sa FATED: 3/4/68 l , . . . ' •• , , , '''t 1• ''. P •'4,4 ..,' ' , • , . , . .,'. , . ..., . , p P P. . . , , ,, . , , , , 1 ',,,: ,, • ,.`+',- r ., . ' ' • ' • ''' A;". ' . P • . , , . , ..... , . ' , . P . ' P r . , •'. . , . , , . . .2',•••••%.'t •-'- • '. ' - , ' . . , , ' :,- "'' 'e.....,:••‘,.. t• .,—- • ' \ • , ' , , . ' . '• 4:I: ," •'• -• . ''''•'--::,.-..--. . ..3 ",...`..,-,-''''',' ; •:"`''' , • • .- , 4,.......- • . . . . ., .. - . , . .-, - . 1 •-7-. :".....,‘' ,.'..';','' ''' ','``-7,•'•'--4-- ••-.. -- , - . , :.. - - • • .f•Cr,,, ••• -'.. • '' ' .-,-,•:'••--•-1.2-.-- . //.\ ',_.,,*p,- -,:,',,-;:••••:-:'':, ",,--: ,-'..-: ::;,','t•-''---'.''''.-..,.- -1- . -- : /Z.' - . . . . / .. -- , / . • 1 , 'i-',"''' '',.'...' , i , . . - , , ' • ' '.'I i -• ' . . ' . ' - ' / _. ...:.-.I..:.4.,.......I,t( ',, ' ' \ =-4..1•- , • ' . / 1 ' . .,,' ....._,... _ _.. ' 1 . c--------_-....1 _ ...., - .II ILI I 1 / . / // --1 ! •• . .,11_,Tir__, . . itti.1_ , ,L 1- . 1,... i _--.-,,,., ,/, _ ...•. l'" —Is:\ _.,--,,-','X , . , • , r,„_____,1_, , ,. , , p ,.. , . , ,_......„...„_ , .... , _, _. .. . . _ -- -- • hri.1, ,, -: • -- - • 7 -- - .,.. ...„ ..,_ -7 '-----1::•'-;-- ., -- - --- -- -- • - ' , . _ __ ...., - - . .. . -...... • 7' ' ' - - _-.,-. -.-.....—.._ ..1..:___ _,r•••__..._ _:':., '.u..:-1 _____ -...--....--... ..... p -, . . - , ,i. ,__. , _ . _ .•,--- _.,,,,, . , pi .,......._• • - --v---r-- di I: r 1 -i I —\V--.7;4 ./(---I 7.---11 . 1 I -____-:--_ inlr— , . . • LI r -• 11-71 - -- -- - -, ---1, , _ , -•• ....., , . ,_______,, , 1 ----• -- --• .1 4 ,,,, ', ..... .- •1:-- _ . . . , . .,, .. .... , . --- . .,1 l .„: ,,, .---,:--_, , : .:•, , . , .., ,, ,. li. ________ _ . . _ . 1. ii, " . , ... 1 . . I-------; I .'"' . . 1- • 1_-____I I, -_ I -I I I=II i 7-....-.i..- I , - ---' I 1 II . ,lz. '- 1 i I . 1 i -• . . I . ----,--1 .:-.--,.. L __I L_ ___I ___J 1----• ' ,I.• I . . -----:. 1 i II II , [ ---- ---. --- . - - -- -- — _ . . ! -" ' • • ' 1 - `•'•L_:,...-..:.. - i L____[ I L7_1 __ _:._ , 1 ! i 1 11 1 7 ---..- ---.11.-------- 777:--.-.--- . ____ , . . - ... _ , - . ' . ' • ' ''' "'' ' * ''' f-, ,..?, i , • '',i, -' .`,..-1, ' ,' ' ., ':,-; ,r,' `.'..',, ' ;,•'-:' - 1 . ' ' . , „ '•" ---- ' " .'' '::'-,':, r,-'-'. '%,..,::' _ . • ' , ' ' , . ' ' , ; 7.- , , . . -. • ..,, . , . , •, . . .: • . , - , j 1,4 - . . , . , ' . , ,, i • ,, , . . • . . , • '; ii' ' ' , ,-'. , ; ', ' ' 9, 7. '',;• - . . . . • , • ., , , . , . 1 I ^'-'--"-! ‘/ I e; e 1 .---1 \IA--r! iii 1 :1 61 vii\)14-t.. trmt, %•Zto . . , . ,„ . • _ - 1._ \• • , ....: -... • •- I" • , ` WWIN Ur i irw..H 1-tt: ?lU.Uu 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED: ✓ Ithaca, New York 14850 CASH - C ) (607) 273-1747 CHECK - (ice)_, ZONING,: g/x APPEAL For Office Use Onl) 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 Construct a two car garage with a master bcdroam and bath attached to the North aide o_f our b. mP, at 151 Pine tree RA— • , Town of I t haci Tax Parcel No. C ' (- 3) , as shown on the accompanyini application and/or plans or other supporting documents, for the stated reason that th, -~•;. issuance of such permit would be in violation of: Articles) I 10 , Sections) /Li- , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and, in support of th, Appeal, affirms that strict observance of the Zoning Ordinance would impose PRACTICA DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows: • (Additional sheets may be attached as necessary.) The practical difficulties that necessitate this area variance are the existing driveway leads up to the proposed 2 car garage and 2nd story bedroom. There is also a vacant lot ad'acent to the proposed building site (nouthside) whereas the southside is bounded by a house with no additional room to expand. At present, our dwelling does not have a garage. The design plans asthecially keep the proportions of the house on the north side. GJ6 ,' 31" Wt1- 2 . 9//O/� Signature of Appellant/Agent. Date: • ' .. , "' - 1 (I °` $da t? - 1,t t� _. -.. ., :_ ,__ . ' I'' fi, ter' {_, . _ - _.. _ - - _. 1// / . , ' . a ...,.5,i. ",....",....2..,,,,......2 ,,.. ,„..,,,..,..,.,..,.....,,..,,, ! S 0 fe ...": ' .-7—• - •,.:if, -,1'-` , - ' . - / ' 7 • . 7 ' :-.1.• , - _, . ....„. , - . .• I - • --17-/ / /. ,-. --- , _ . � G'f}k�6 L.• z i / ,< /1 ,r - 3r. /, . / 1 r✓ c 511�?G / i ! A , / / / /., j -,, .. , , c,; / .• I` . ,r,,, 7z' 1E1 r�1N��TR = E <<D. rW-I'6.Itseti Ilia PNae 611/I WHOA u r r.su`II a Valio of Improvement Fee • ___ 1 - $ 5,000 - $ 5.00 • Application Date 5,001 - 10,000 - 10.00 10,001 - 20,000 - 20.00 Permit Number 20,001 - 30,000 - 30.00 30,001 - 40,000 - 40.00 Date of Permit 40,001 - 50,000 - 50.00 50,001 - 100,000 - 100.00 Parcel Number 6- 100,001 - 500,000 - 150.00 - 500,001 - 1,000,000 - 200.00 Zoning District 1,000,001 & Over - 300.00 - ake Checks Payable to the Town of Ithaca pplicition is hereby made to BUILD , EXTEND X , CONVERT , OR a structure or use land t 151 , Pine Tree Rd. , Town of Ithaca, New York. o be used for (iarage Additional Bedroom At a cost of $ Approx40 to 50,001 tructure is to be completed on or before , 19 . andowner Arthur,Mary Yaple Builder 'Telephone 277-0117 andowner's Mailing Address i c1 Pinptrpp Rd Telephone Samp he Structure(s) will be as follows: Square Feet of Floor Area: Type of Construction Wnnd Frame - Basement no Number of Stories 9 First Floor 1000 Garage -porch Number of Dwelling Units . 1 - ^ Second Floor -Ann bath-•nAilToom Over Second D a • ercentage of Lotto be Occupied by All Structures i n n Total Number of Rooms 1 • Total Number of Bedrooms 4 lot Plan on Back of Application or Attached y Owner Occupied x Yes No Leased Yes x No iE REQUIRED PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED AS FOLLOWS: From Tompkins County Health.Department -- Approval of Septic•System and/or Well Date Issued From New York State Workers' Compensation Board -- Workers' Compensation & Disability Benefits Insurance Certificate -- Req'd. Rec'd. Not Req'd. Workers' Compensation & Disability Benefits Insurance Certificate -- Req'd. , Rec'd. - Not Req'd. From Town Building Inspector -- Water Tap, Town of Ithaca Water District Date Issued ,Sewer Tap, Town of Ithaca Sewer District Date Issued . From Appropriate Highway Department -- Culverts Date Issued _ From Tarn Building Inspector -- Multiple Residence Building.Permit - Date Issued e Undersigned hereby applies for permission, to do the above in accordance with provisions of the Zoning Ordinance 4 other Laws and Regulations of the Town of Ithaca, New York, or others having jurisdiction, and affirms that all atements and information given herein are correct to the best of his/her knowledge and belief. te , 19 - Signature of Landowner or Authorized Agent ILDING PERMIT ( ) APPROVED by - ( ) DENIED under Art. , Sec. PROGRESS OF WORK -- Checked one of the Zoning Ordinance by - PEAL ACTION: Footings, prior to pouring concrete Date of Appeal Date of Hearing Framing, prior to sheet rocking Date of Advertising Board Members Notified Completion, on completion of all Work WING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION: Order to Refill Excavation Issued Date Order to Demolish Structure Issued PEAL FEE $10.00. P FORMATION TO BE SHOWN: Dimensions of lot. 4. Dimensions. and location of proposed structure(s) or 2. Distance of structures from: or addition(s). a. Road, 5., Nunes of neighbors who 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. 1. Lot size 100x 225 - 2.a.72 ft. setback from road b .26 ft south boundary 9ft. north boundary 113 ft back .east boundary 4. Addition dimension 29 ft X 40. ft 5. Frank and Blythe Baldwin 149 'Pine Tree Rd. (neighbors who ,bound lot) zCC C j 'c C C 'Y�/ . � s L ,rC / / /0 7 o • T:41%, „-(1.-. SJ . • - - 0Signature of Appellant/Agent: C Date: f I 1 ,,,„-., _,..te . leN / \I .. A \h.?,5,....‹.1 NINN. • • _ • . .J:a, 1►2 it• 211 4I OS I .1.17Sc-c'\.19:4'S Ndo,/ • zs9 \ �.ai �•. . • ►1 th1 4u2i0• "2io \ a f� J.• 51 / . s• r•::= SCS�yti. �. 1w 91 •-:\ - 0 Z'11 y ...L.....—....—. / � r 61 .1 3 d Mtl7_— •,L•. — ar O. .. - 1 eat°� .••. ' 1 a► 22 9 5_tl ...• . .{ 1. £►'8 ._:g••579 0 _4t_�=-1 s• • ;r .. j 1...../.---j • *v. -... .1- • 1 .z., 5, \J59 ri 108{49 ` Z9 b 1•: - � _ - -- - - —�resa 1 8g •M \ in. , liZ .A \•= /2.\`,.,\ 1r•.-till- - \�f 1� M 82 �A°�1 \ • •• t • 6L + x• a: 6t 1 . •:1• /` Z l • \ % Y ® . • 11\ - %/' 1- • ` K � \ % ,,A \ ' .31� ! i4 .11 s / t. J, ' . • {` •,\,•• lc • ,s>, ... *"\.. \\: ' ' •11 • .7,:iii 171,9 - , , ..• •re 2,2.??1, 00 1 . A . . l • rat.^ •,�14, ' , , \,� • 2 0 W 0111.E „� ' \ ` l , 11 „HI B B . ��' '. T� I • r Ffi �- �►�.� pad -,---- 1111\ ' il''',,,- s' .\',- .:-.1.!.:..1.-:.,,Alib.,',.' mad lit--____ 7-11' 4.'''... . % e ,nib ., ' prr+1 .1'.1 4,1,4".•1.0.• . r r'"• '. .. :f is_� r 1 , t' �1Q� \ - 8g-Qf - V92 15l 3` civA