Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 36.-2-3.30 Area Variance 11/26/2007 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2007 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 Monday, November 26, 2007, in Town Hall , 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca , NY , COMMENCING at 7 : 00 p .m . , on the following matters : APPEAL of Bonnie Mathers & Marilyn Patterson , Owners/Appellants , requesting an interpretation and possible variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article VII , Section 270-45 (A )( 1 )(b) [ 10] and Article XXV, Section 270-205 (A ) of the Town of Ithaca Code; to be permitted to construct two wooden pilings on the south side of an existing dock located at 909 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 -2-9, Lakefront Residential Zone ( LR) . The proposed pilings will support an existing metal boat lift located at the end of an existing dock . The LR regulations are not clear as to whether the two wooden pilings supporting the existing boatlift (attached to the dock ) are considered part of the dock and , as such , the proposed pilings located on the sides of the boatlifl will constitute an extension of the dock . If so; the proposed pilings are in violation of the 20- foot side yard setback from adjacent properties required for docks; piers; and wharves in the LR zone. The pilings may also be in violation of the provisions regarding the enlargement of existing, nonconforming structures . APPEAL of Boris Simkin , Owner/Appellant , Jon Albanese, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 2.70; Article VIII , Section 270-60( C) of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to construct a new home with garage and living space above it at 121 Larisa Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 26-2 -3 . 30. Low Density Residential (LDR) Zone . The proposed garage with second story living space will encroach into the required 40-foot side yard setback for structures in an LDR Zone. APPEAL of William B . Rady, Owner/Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article IX, Section 270- 68 (C) of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an accessory building in excess of 600 square feet in area located at 10 Chase Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 45 - 1 - 29 . Medium Density Residential Zone (MDR) . The MDR zone restricts the aggregate square footage of accessory buildings to a maximum of 600 square feet for parcels less than three acres in size. 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 . Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs, as appropriate, will be provided with assistance, as necessary, upon request . Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 607 -273 - 1747 Dated : November' 16, 2007 Published : November 19 , 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Motion made by Chairperson Sigel, Seconded by Mr. Krantz. RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals finds that freestanding pilings are not considered to be part of a . pier, dock, or wharf, and are therefore not subject to the setback requirement of 20 feet from adjacent property lines and in fact are not subject to any setback requirement. A freestanding piling is not attached to a pier, dock or wharf and not attached to another structure which is in turn attached to a pier, dock or wharf. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews, Mountin . NAYS: None . ABSENT: Ellsworth . Motion declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel — Okay , the next appeal this evening is that of: APPEAL of 'Boris Simkin , Owner/Appellant, Jon Albanese , Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article VIII , Section 270- 60 ( C ) of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to construct a new home with garage and living space above it at 121 Larisa Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 26-2- 3 . 30 , Low Density Residential ( LDR) Zone . The proposed garage with second story living space will encroach into the required 40 -foot side yard setback for structures in an LDR Zone , Chairperson Sigel — Please if you could , begin with your name and address . Jon Albanese , 40 Burdick Hill Road , Lansing Yeah , I ' m Jon Albanese . My address is 40 Burdick Hill Road in Lansing . I ' m here on behalf of Boris Simkin , the developer of this project , who happens to, be out of the country at the time otherwise he would be here himself, representing himself. I should also point out that the . purchasers of . this property that we are dealing with today, the Wang ' s , are also here . Chairperson Sigel — So basically the house was sited a little bit incorrectly. Mr. Albanese — That' s correct . Chairperson Sigel — And it would be legal .if there was no living space above the garage portion . Mr. Albanese- A single-family or a single-story garage would be legal . Chairperson Sigel — Right . Okay. 21 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Albanese - I should point out that . . . its in the record or in the appeal , Boris' s file , that this is the 7th house that he has put up along Larissa Lane and this is the first time that he has run into that problem and he owns the adjacent lot , which is empty at this point . Chairperson Sigel — I mean personally , I don 't . . . while it' s unfortunate that , you know, that this type of mistake happened , I don 't feel that it is a significant issue . Mr. Niefer — I don 't either . . . see any other significant issue . It' s a . . . from what it was described , maybe some contractor or other person working on or above the site moved the stakes , the property stakes and then stuck them back in the ground and the end result was the foundation got put in , in an incorrect spot by a foot or so . Mr. Mountin — I kind of have issue with that because as a builder , especially if you have built 7 homes and you are going to build a lot more homes and this person is a builder , you don 't make mistakes like that because it' s a costly mistake . You really have to be accurate as a builder and if a builder is experienced , I ' m kind of going , yikes , this is a really bad mistake . Somebody really wasn 't paying attention and double checking their lines and consequently he' s here asking us for a variance because of poor construction technique . It shouldn 't happen . I have an issue with that. Mr. Matthews — It' s a matter of 15 inches . Mr. Mountin — Yes . Mr. Matthews — That' s it. Mr. Mountin — 15 inches. Chairperson Sigel — Well , as I said , I wish it didn 't happen , but I . . . Mr. Matthews — We' ve had our share of them . Chairperson Sigel — Yeah , given the small encroachment , you know, I think it clearly meets the criteria . Mr. Krantz — Agreed . Chairperson Sigel — Chris , any , uh . . . let' s see . This does not require an environmental review. Ms . Brock — It' s an area variance for a single-family home . So it' s _type two and doesn 't require any SEQR review. Chairperson Sigel — Any comments from Planning staff? 22 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Mountin — I also have an issue with . . . it looks like construction didn 't stop when it was asked to be stopped and applied for this variance . People just went ahead and kept building . Chairperson Sigel — Yeah , the Town . . . Mr. Mountin - . . . a little lack of respect for the intention here . Mr. Matthews That' s a concern . Is there any explanation for that? Mr. Albanese — Boris had been working with the Town regarding that particular issue . Mr. Mountin — And the answer is? Mr. Matthews — But they kept building when they were given a stop order and . . . ? Mr. Albanese — They weren 't given a stop . : .they did stop building once they were given the stop order. Immediately . Mr. Mountin — I ' m reading here a letter in October by the Building Code Enforcement Officer, Kristie Rice , that at the time the owner was indeed notified that no framing was to occur on the property and then a month later she did the stop order. Mr. Albanese — She didn 't deliver a stop order to him . Once she delivered a stop order to him work order he stopped . Mr. Mountin — Versus the . . . Mr. Albanese — She says . . . apparently there was a question , apparently she says she had told him to stop via a message or some sort of email or voice mail , but not received . . . Mr. Walker -- What had had happened was she posted a stop work order on the building and did not hand it to Mr. Simkin directly . His subcontractors were working on the building and the next day she went up and the stop work order was invisible because they put something over it . At that time . it was made very clear that work was supposed to stop and Mr. Simkin was there and he did stop at that point other than some buttoning up and waterproofing stuff. Ms . Brock — David is actually . . . Mr. Albanese — He did stop and I had meetings with Dan , myself, and Mr. Simkin to resolve any particular issues so it didn 't go further. Ms . Brock — But David is actually referring to something else that Kristie Rice' s letter says that , dated October 31s' , which is the date of the stop work order, her letter states , 23 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved "several weeks ago I notified you by phone that the construction was in violation of the approved plans and the Town Code . At that time I informed you that no framing was to occur on the property until the violation was corrected or a variance obtained from the ZBA. " And then on October 31st she went to a site visit to a nearby property and noticed a significant amount of framing had occurred and so that' s why she issued a stop work order.. Mr. Walker — Then she issued the official stop work order. Ms . Brock — Right . So I think that' s the question David is asking a question about. Is why did he keep framing for several weeks after he was told verbally not to ? Mr. Walker — And we' ve asked him that question a number of times and it has been a problem with this contractor at times , not listening to us . Chairperson Sigel — Is it . . . I mean one question is , if the Town is determined that construction needs to cease , technically do we have to issue a stop work order or is notifying someone that they are in violation , telling them to stop is that sufficient? Mr. Walker — That should be sufficient. I think by law we probably have to post it and do it in writing to make it official . Chairperson Sigel — Okay . Mr. Walker — I mean verbally telling someone to stop , it' s my word against yours type of thing . So normally we would either normally do it in a certified mailing or actually post a document on the building itself. Mr. Matthews — In other words , legally he was within his rights to continue working until he had a piece of paper in his hand telling him to stop ? Mr. Walker — Technically , probably , but . . . Mr . Matthews — Legally. Ms . Brock — I ' m not sure I agree . Mr . Walker — I . . . most contractors when we tell them not to do something or to stop doing doing something , if they continue they red g it at their own risk because its not being condoned and technically when you have been told that they are stopping work , we are not doing any more inspections . That means they shouldn 't be doing any work on that building . Mr. Matthews — And in .your experience with this , most contactors take your advice and stop ? Out of what? Fear or courtesy? 24 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Walker — Most will stop out of courtesy , probably some stop out of fear. At the time , . . Mr . Matthews — Mr. Simkin has a problem stopping ? Ms . Balestra — Yes . Mr. Walker — He has a problem listening , yes . Mr. Matthews — What did you say? Mr. Walker — And hearing us . Mr. Matthews — That concerned me as soon as I saw this and read this that somebody kept working when they were told to stop . And now they come and ask us for favors , as it were . I have a problem with granting a positive response to your appeal . . .to your contractor' s appeal , the gentleman you represent . I have a serious problem with that. That is almost running into ethics . Mr. Albanese — If he were here , he could give more of an explanation as to what went on with that . I can 't speak on his behalf. Mr. Matthews — I think it would be spend , with no intent to insult the gentleman . I have a bit of a problem with somebody who has a little bit of a record in this regard . Chairperson Sigel — Well , I do agree that it is an issue or that it is a problem . Mr. Matthews — 15 inches doesn 't bother me . Chairperson Sigel — But when I look at the criteria , you know, that really . . . I ' m not sure how you could work that in to one of the criteria . Mr. Matthews — Whether the alleged difficulty is self- created . Mr. Krantz — Can we table it to for the next meeting and have him come back next month and give us an explanation ? Mr. Albanese — See the problem with that , sir, I don 't mean to interrupt is that the folks that need . . . who are purchasing this house need to move in and the house needs to be protected , sealed up and protected where it needs to be contingent whatever it is becoming damaged . [ Female from audience starts to speak . ] Chairperson Sigel — I ' m sorry . Could you come to the microphone , actually , if you want to speak? Could you start with your name and address? 25 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Wei Wang , 509 Lake St Wei Wang and I live in an apartment right , Ithaca , 509 Lake Street and we signed a contract with Boris a while ago . And he didn 't stop until he received the order. He stopped immediately and our house is sitting there right now, you know, in the cold . We really, really ask , you know, want to get a variance and continue with our house . Mr. Matthews — I can 't get into a builder' s head . I was brought up by a builder, but I couldn 't get into his head either . But if somebody wants to play the system , they keep working , get it up and say to themselves , they' re not going to make me bulldoze it down . I ' m a kid that was brought up in the streets and I know exactly how we played and I think. . . ) believe this contractor did this on purpose . Chairperson Sigel — Well . . Mr. Walker --- Well , I don 't think he put the building in the wrong place on purpose . Mr. Matthews — No . Mr. Walker — That was an error. Mr. Matthews — I ' m not saying he did . I ' m saying when he found out he just kept going . Mr. Mountin — Well , we don 't know. We can 't make judgments . We don 't need to make judgments . Chairperson Sigel — That could be true and it' s no doubt that the difficulty the violation itself created . I mean , that' s . . . whether intentional or not , you know, he put it into . . . he built the house into the required setback . So it is definitely self- created . That is , however, that is only one aspect of the test . Mr . Matthews — He could have come to us and asked for an appeal because the surveyor made a mistake and probably it would have gone through like greased lightening here . Mr . Mountin — He actually recognized , according to this letter , that he actually did make a mistake . He realized the problem and he was going to change the house . . . Mr. Matthews — But he kept going . Mr. Mountin - . . . design , but then actually wanted to appeal to the Wang ' s , here , to have it as they wanted it . So the variance coming to us is to appeal for the owners . Ms . Wang — Actually we asked him , to , if there . . . ( not audible ) . . . to not build on that part, but can do another part . We are very worried about the house . We put money down and everything and we live in an apartment and we cannot put a roof or anything so the whole thing is sitting in the rain and it is getting cold . 26 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Albanese — And you have given notice on your apartment? Ms . Wang — And I ' ve already given notice on our apartment and now we have to delay probably. Chairperson Sigel — Personally, I don 't see any point to delaying action on this appeal , which is delaying occupancy for a new owner when , you know, I think it clearly meets the criteria . Our job is to balance the benefit to the applicant with the detriment to the health , safety , and welfare of the community. Specifically , we should consider whether the benefit can be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant . You know, the benefit that they are seeking to achieve , which is living space above the garage , you know, given the state of the house at this point would be difficult to achieve , I think , another way. Whether an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties , I don 't think a foot and a half over . . . you know, into a 40 foot setback is going to affect that . Whether the request is substantial . I don 't believe it is so . Whether it will have adverse physical or environmental affects , I don 't believe that it will . Whether the alleged difficulty is self-created . Clearly it is , but there are often times cases where difficulties are self-created and yet the overall test is still met . Mr. Matthews — You are a very reasonable man , Kirk , you always have been . It seems to me that this contractor when he was notified that there was a problem could have done something with the Town telling them exactly what his case is today that the intended occupants were waiting to get into their home , etc. , etc. , etc. Now I ask these two folks in front of me here , who are on the Town Board with the Town , did Mr. Simkin come to you and say I got a problem here ; can you give me a break? Mr. Walker — Oh , yes . He asked for a break . Mr. Matthews — Oh , he did ? Ms . Brock — Sure . Mr. Walker — He asked for a lot of breaks. Mr. Matthews — Speak to me . Ms . Balestra — He often asks for breaks . Mr. Walker — One thing he asked was could I modify the lot line , a minor modification . Which I , as Town Engineer, I could shift the lot line over 2 feet if it wouldn 't impact the other lot . Ms . Balestra — But he still would have needed a variance . 27 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Walker — But I couldn 't do that because all the lots are the min . . . exactly the design width , the minimum width . They can 't be narrowed and he owned all the lots . He owned two more lots up to the Town Park . And I could not approve that lot line modification for those lots without taking property from the Town . So that I decided was not something that was a practical modification . The other thing he came in was a modification for the subdivision by putting a little blip in that drawing that you got there shows what each lot would have to be , but again that was a problem because it would mess up the side yard setback on the other lots . Another suggestion we made is if you consolidate those two lots you don 't have a side yard problem any more . Mr. Matthews — If . . . Mr. Walker — You consolidate that lot with the adjoining lot , you don 't have a problem any more because it is plenty wide , of course you lose a building lot then and that wasn 't acceptable to him financially. And then the other alternative we proposed was if he modified the design of the house so that it was just a garage and without living space over it , then he only needed a . 10 foot setback and he was not in violation of the setback rule . Ms . Balestra — 15 . Mr. Walker — Well , you know, that would have eliminated the violation because a garage can be within 15 feet of the side yard , but that did not meet the contract requirements that he had signed with his customers . But what he did do is he came back with a design to say okay , if I cannot build this house as a 2- story house over that garage , I can take part of the house apart and he gave us a set of plans to show that that would be a house , I think a 3 bedroom house instead of a 4 bedroom house or whatever , but the garage could be built as a single story garage . So his recourse at this point would be if you deny this variance would be to dismantle part of the house that makes it illegal and complete the house as a slightly smaller house or in a different design configuration . Unfortunately that doesn 't impact him as much as it impacts his clients . I mean it might . . . it would basically probably violate a contract , which it hurts a lot of other people here . Another excuse he gave us , which it was an excuse , was he had subcontractors that needed to feed their families so he wanted to keep them working , plus he wanted to button up the house for weather. Mr. Matthews — So he did visit you ? Mr . Walker — Oh , yeah , several times . We met with him and his attorney a couple of times . Mr. Matthews — Chris? Ms . Balestra — Yes . Mr. Krantz — That' s fair. 28 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Walker — But we were rnot in a position to say that this is a slam dunk for a variance so we can 't allow you to move ahead with it because you might not get the variance , is what we told him . Chairperson Sigel — I don 't think it was ever Mr. Simkin ' s intent to try to not get a variance . I think he clearly realized that the setback was deficient. He just wanted to keep working on the house before the variance was granted , which is not permitted and he finally did apparently stop when the stop work order. was issued . Obviously that is not model behavior by a contractor, but I also don 't think its justification to not grant the variance or to- delay the appeal:—It- is-a rather straight-forward- -appeal , I think . Mr. Krantz — So we really have no choice but to allow the variance and at least . . . there was concern and he went to some efforts . Mr. Matthews — Mr . Sigel , you are a role model for reasonableness . Chairperson Sigel — Thank you . Okay . I will open the public hearing (8 : 16 p . m . ) now for this case if anyone wishes to speak regarding this appeal . If not , we' ll close ( 8 : 16 p . m . ) the public hearing . Any further comment? Mr. Niefer — I think that it is of somewhat interest a few years ago up in Skaneateles there was a person that went doggedly ahead with a project in violation of the zoning . And he kept plugging away and plugging away and plugging away with the building project . The Town dug in their heals and that place eventually came down and the attorney , I think , went belly up out of town and so on and so forth . Chairperson Sigel — You can 't push too far. Mr. Niefer — You can 't push too far and it may be well if some builders push too much and expect too much are made aware of the purgatives that Town Boards and Zoning Boards do have . That' s all . I ' m not saying necessarily at this juncture , this situation got that far out of hand , but those things can happen and they do happen . Mr. Walker — I think that was much more of a willful type violation . I think in a way this started out as an error and . . . we are working with this contractor to really give him some guidance and really what we expect to see there and I think he understands that a little better now. Mr. Mountin — Are you expecting to see that in the next dozen or so — two dozen houses that are left in this development to be done? All these lots are owned by . . . Mr. Walker — He owns all the lots . Mr. Mountin — He ' s going to build a lot more houses? 29 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Albanese — Yes . Mr. Mountin — So is your relationship improving ? Mr . Walker — Yes . . . we . . . lets just say between phase I and phase II of the road and utility construction , he did a lot better on his second phase . Ms . Wang — Yeah . I ' m pretty sure he learned this lesson very seriously. Mr. - Walker — Sediment and erosion control he is doing much better on now and he ' s learning . Ms . Balestra — Once DEC got involved . Chairperson Sigel — Okay. All right . I will move to grant the appeal of Boris Simkin requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 Article Vill , Section 270- 60c of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to construct a new home with garage and living space above it at 121 Larisa Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Number 26 . -2- 3 . 30 , low density residential zone . With the following conditions : that the side yard setback be no less than 38 feet and that the house be constructed as indicated on what . . . can I say as indicated on plans submitted ? Ms . Balestra — To the building department . Chairperson Sigel — To the building department? Okay. And with the following findings : that the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety , and welfare of the community . Specifically , that the benefit that the applicant wishes to achieve which is to have living space over the garage and not have to remove that space or narrow the house somehow cannot be achieved by any other feasible means . That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that it is less than a 2 foot encroachment into a 40 foot setback . That the request is not substantial for the same reasons . That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental affects for the same reasons . And finally , that while the alleged difficulty was self- created by the applicant , nonetheless the benefit to the applicant is greater than any detriment to the health , safety , and welfare of the community. Mr. Niefer — Second . Chairperson Sigel — Second . All in favor? Board — Aye . Chairperson Sigel — Okay . Passes unanimously . Ms . Wang — Thank you very much . Thank you all . 30 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved Mr. Krantz — Enjoy your new house . ZB RESOLUTION NO 2007-054 : Area Variance — Side Yard Setback, Boris Simkin, 121 Larisa Lane, Tax Parcel No. 26. -2-3. 30 Motion made by Chairperson Sigel, Seconded by Mr. Niefer. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Boris Simkin, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article ViII, Section 270- 60c of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to construct a new home with garage and living space above it at 121 Larisa Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Number 26 - 2-3. 30, Low Density Residential Zone . Conditions : 1 . That the side yard setback be no less than 38 feet, and 2. That the house be constructed as indicated on the plans submitted to the Building Department. Findings : That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Specifically: 1 . That the benefit that the applicant wishes to achieve, which is to have living space over the garage and not have to remove that space or narrow the house somehow, cannot be achieved by any other feasible means, 2. That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that it is less than a 2 foot encroachment into a 40 foot setback, 3. That the request is not substantial for the same reasons, 4. That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects .for the same reasons, 5. While the alleged difficulty was self-created by the applicant, nonetheless; the benefit to the applicant is greater than any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community. 31 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes November 26 , 2007 Approved A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews, Mountin . NAYS: None . ABSENT: Ellsworth . Motion declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Sigel — The next appeal this evening is that of William Rady , Owner , requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article 9 , Section 270- 68C of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an accessory building in excess of 600 square feet in area located at 10 Chase Lane , Town of Ithaca tax parcel number 45 . - 1 -29 , medium density residential zone . The medium density residential zone restricts the aggregate square footage of accessory buildings to a maximum of 600 square feet for parcels less than 3 acres in size . Good evening , I ' m William Rady, 10 Chase Lane , I ' m the owner . Chairman Sigel — Okay. So , before we start , is there anything you want to add ? Mr . Rady — No , I think that pretty much covers my addition , that I put my shed this summer and found out when we went to get the certificate of occupancy that it was over the size . Chairman Sigel — Okay. So , has everyone seen this letter that we received this evening ? [no] . . . okay , I already had a chance to read it but I 'll . . Jet' s take a few minutes . . . Audience member — is that the ( inaudible) . . . Chairman Sigel — Yes . Audience member — It was probably stated . a bit stronger than I . . . I found out some things from Mr . Rady tonight , but I was really upset about this . . . so . . I Chairman Sigel — Okay , well , we ' ll have the public hearing portion when you can speak . Everyone reads the letter. Chairman Sigel — I guess first I would ask , Dan or Chris , are you aware of Steve Williams being notified by Ms. Galvin that she thought that the aggregate shed would be over 600 square feet and whether he took any action at that time? Ms . Balestra — I wouldn 't have been notified because the building permit process is completely separate from the Planning Department , so unless he was going through the 32 FILE DATE ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZB RESOLUTION NO , 2007-054 Area Variance — Side Yard Setback Boris Simkin 121 Larisa Lane Tax Parcel No . 26 . -2- 3 . 30 November 26 , 2007 Lotion made by Chairperson Sigel , Seconded by Mr. Niefer. RESOLVED , that this board grants the appeal of Boris Simkin , requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 , Article VIII , Section 270- 60c of the Town of Ithaca Code , to be permitted to construct a new home with garage and living space above it at 121 Larisa Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Number 26 . -2-3 . 30 , Low Density Residential Zone . Conditions : 1 . That the side yard setback be no less than 38 feet , and 2 . That the house be constructed as indicated on the plans submitted to the Building Department . Findings : That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety , and welfare of the community. Specifically : 1 . That the benefit that the applicant wishes to achieve , which is to have living space over the garage and not have to remove that space or narrow the house somehow, cannot be achieved by any other feasible means , 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that it is less than a 2 foot encroachment into a 40 foot setback, 3 . That the request is not substantial for the same reasons , 4 . That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects for the same reasons , 5 . While the alleged difficulty was self- created by the applicant , nonetheless , the benefit to the applicant is greater than any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community . ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2007-054 PAGE 2 A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Krantz , Niefer, Matthews , Mountin . NAYS : None . ABSENT : Ellsworth . Motion declared to be carried unanimously . STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA: I , Carrie Coates Whitmore , Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York , do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting on the 26th day of November 2007 , I da Deputy Town CI Vv l Town of Ithaca TONAIN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY . NOVEMBER 26, 2007 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 Monday, November 26 ; 2007 , in Town Hall . 215 North Tioga Street . Tioga Street Entrance, lthaca , NY , COMMENCING at 7 : 00 p .m . , on the following matters : APPEAL of Bonnie Mathers R Marilyn Patterson ; Owners/Appellants , requesting an interpretation and possible variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 ; Article \711 . Section 270-45 ( A ) ( 1 ) (b) [ 10] and Article X?XV , . Section 270- 205 ( A ) of the Town of Ithaca Code . to be permitted to construct two wooden pilings on the south side of an existing . dock located at 909 Taughannock Boulevard ; Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2 - 9 . Lakefront Residential Zone ( LR ) . The proposed pilings will support an existing metal boat lift located at the end of an existing dock . The LR regulations are not clear as to whether the two wooden pilings supporting the existing boatlifl ( attached to the dock ) are considered pan of the dock and , as such , the proposed pilings located on the sides of the boatlift will. constitute an extension of the dock . if so , the proposed pilings are in violation of the 20- foot side yard setback from - adjacent properties required for docks ; piers ; and wharves in the LR zone . The pilings may also be in violation of the provisions regarding the enlargement of existing, nonconforrrting structures . APPEAL of Boris Simkin . Owner/Appellant , Jon Albanese . Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article Vlll-, Section 270- 60( C) of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to construct a new home with garage and living space above it at 121 Larisa Lane . Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 26- 2 - 3 . 30, Low Density Residential ( LDR ) Zone . The proposed garage with second story living space will encroach into the required 40- foot side yard setback for structures in an LDR Zone . APPEAL of William B . Rad _y. Owner/Appellant . requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270 . Article IX , Section 270- 68 ( C ) of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to maintain an accessory building in excess of 600 square feet in area located at 10 Chase Lane ; Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 45 - 1 - 29 , Medium Density Residential Zone ( MDR ) . The MDR zone restricts the aggregate square footage of accessory buildings to a maximum of 600 square feet for parcels less than three acres in size. 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 . Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs , as appropriate, will be provided with assistance, as necessary, upon request . Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing . Jonathan Kanter. A1CP Director of Planning 607 -273 - 1747 Dated : November 16 , 2007 Published : November 19. 2007 � OFIT� - _ - _ cp� TOWN OF ITHACA �a zt 41� w � 04� 215 N . Tioga Street , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273 - 1721 HIGHWAY ( Roads, Parks, Trails, Water&Sewer) 273 - 1656 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 ZONING 273- 1783 FAX (607) 273- 1704 PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To : Zoning Board of Appeals Members From : Christine Balestra, Planner Date : November 16, 2007 RE : 121 Larisa Lane —Area Variance Enclosed please find materials related to a proposed area variance for 121 Larisa Lane, Tax Parcel No . 36-2 -3 . 30, Low Density Residential ( LDR) Zone. The proposal includes the construction of a new home with living space above the garage. The garage and living space encroach into the required 40-foot side yard setback for structures in an LDR Zone. The appellant is currently constructing a home at 121 Larisa Lane, located within the Westview Subdivision off of Danby Road (NYS Route 96B) . The home includes an attached garage with a second story master bedroom . According to the enclosed survey map for the property, the southern corner of the partially constructed garage is located approximately 38 . 7+/- feet from the eastern side property boundary, where Town Code requires a 40-foot side yard setback for structures in an LDR zone. The appellant seeks an area variance to allow the proposed two-story garage with living space above to encroach into the required setback by approximately 1 . 3 +/- feet . According to 6 NYCRR 617 ( State Environmental Quality Review Law), area variances for single, two, or three-family homes are considered Type I1 Actions . Therefore, the Zoning Board is not required to complete an environmental review for this project . Please contact me by phone at 273 - 1747 or by email at cbalestra(a),town . ithaca . ny.us with any questions you may have regarding this proposal . Att . 4 ' NQ �M L r.Q.aos�a r-1 p (44A.S/�Lkvv, C � TOWN OF ITHACA 215 N . Tioga Street, ITHACA, N . Y . 1. 4850 "TOWN CLERK 273- 1721 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 BUILDING AND ZONING 273- 1783 HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks & Trails, Water Br. Sewer) 273- 1636 FAX (607) 273- 1704 Application for Appearance in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals Fee $ 1. 00 Tvvri wY ?T mS rti1 x few >rr wss � � A r Cis $ 7rtr t ,1 C✓ . .aa c sst ut » zr'f �.ry € t r f Fcor Office Use'OnIV ` r a4 _ , Fo, Font, rr` tse off/ v x _ ; dT 't� "> b �` R-i" P - n � " v zI N ropert} ls'IoeatecLwrihui or a . gacenUld CHECK ALL THAT APPLY Zit fay 3 _, I�atc R�ceied a is Area Variance " � C utlt)Ab DjstFnct M. s � � �Cnsh or Checl ,No Use Variance h 1 r }U ,y EAaI xrA t eYxX T Yy. t a s Q ,j , tyfr.N. 5 ti rV 1 �F:nf„\'n, r}hfi yt Ot ail' fr .C- n\ h� .: .sYr"nc i1. � j: 1'tl S�ULt a e ` ✓ ' a < < , v P r .1 c4 'x k 7.Lyyw n t S � , 1r SignVariance . �GEA fq xa 2 d 2 a 4 N4, a ti 7 g ��� }J >� �a y� n� J% Z011l ❑ UlJtflet� Sprinkler VarianceForyest Hame HIS OFI cal Special Approval Requesting an appearance to be allowed to s U o o O1rC4 S Q e �iecQ / a�4 � e at 121 Q rc SO LC7 4 e . Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 3G '- 2 _ 3, 3 L 0 as shown on the accompan}ling application and/or plans or other supporting documents, under Article(s) Section(s) of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Application Form . A description of the practical difficulties and unnessary hardship and/or the Special Approval authorization request is as follows : (Additional sheets may be attached as necessaq- .) See Q re �c�. �c g c, c e cr, � '0'a�r t9 Gee dL 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 Owner/Appellant : 6Drl S C ' c 1Lj Date : ( � 26' O 7 Signature of Appellant/Agent - / Date : Print Name Here IJ/A © (21 ,( Mt N Home Telephone Number J v Work Telephone Number NOTE : If construction of work in accordance with any variances given dues not commence within 18 months, the variance will UlliM. Your attenda ce at the meeting is strongly advised. Oc( r >° a w a Y �'� /� er w e Se ('2 72-52 12) 04W We, c 4q o k wec Wa 11 Ctoeslonj erc) �72 I � W ? � OW U/ . % ee Revised 11 14 0 �� e re Sell J'7 ' G1 � S �� eg4Se oc, � � ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AREA VARIANCE CRITERIA - (completed by Applicant) Applicant: I3 © `'/ S c ' m let N tj e 4e Per a�► �� ZL Address of Property Concerning Appeal : 12 ( ZQ Zt:�;, Gt C Tax Map No. : 3 (�; -- 2 -- 3 , :30 TEST : No area variance will be granted without a consideration by the Board of the following factors: 1 . Whether undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties : Yes Nov / Reasons : I lit ere C �S O Bu S e L 2 . Whether benefit sought by applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance: Yes No V Re ons : 4e 04 Ae 04 (ve e c c ` / G � e. S 1 c ' c ` S 0 VL 16e!v Sc ' e c Ce5 re c ce PP V4 0,164 /c A e % 4 3 . Whether the request rd variance is su stS tantial : Yes No 1/ Reasons : e--ee? S e Iq /L e P4 f0 PC'(c C C 'r/ r ` Ye `O 4 w eo 1z Se �c A 77, c ` e `S 4:�? e527es Se /mot P� w�, 4V / Sc ` � dw� ` � pe4So (4 � � � S e QQ ��ee r QS /,�4 a4v-eS Se `4. o va i V e an adve4�tmpact on the ph�cal or erivironm�lal conditions in the / e 1 � neighborhood? : Yes No V Reasons : 5 . Whether the alleged difficulh, was self-created : Yes ' V No Reasons : Vf e Lv e �C! C '17 CZGC / 1� e 116?4�4 C� e c ' C eelc- 4Q s Of) e cv Grin e`- j" o� obi Q c w `o r re c ( e Z ► crre �'Se c0 �, G' •Gl� ` E . Revised 1 14 05 'zo S4001, a � /-�I 4 � '7 GilQ /Z C O /y �Q -e 6 o ` K4 d es /7 1 rhl Q s14el� -4//Po ter,, S W4 jc�,, 41 04 e S-el kc � wo 4x 4:�, we G�r �•L, ecO kI e A � se GZ SC ` 40 / 0`�J 44q !/e o4 (l � irg 47 C-e A14 /-r2 ;71 Ve? re, a,41 C 2 � P � � C va ^Vy I N co O ~ O I L 61 Z , � � � � l 1o9 NN O c� W N co kk Cr. 00 O o O Q Lo LO I LO cn I O � U ^ O Cp Cfl co Q o0 0 LO 0 LO ^ p •— co Z 9 0 Z -3 < < � �, l -Po90 N n Q I . v ww J N cn Q °� zNLo U Lo w Cr, � n LO o z z V - l �_ Ln Q (7 U N E0 to N q ° w Ul . 00 I °0 (n -r" O m Cl) m cr)z z Q J L 10 L 9 O .3 < < -P - t l tro90 N V � II � Q ^ O I of o O LO Lo LL N • co oo I rn � N ^ LO 1 Z .3 < < � 1 iVo90 N ° wy NOTES LEGEND 1.) THIS LOTS 6AXT TO ALL UMM a MMMAGE EASE)ANIS OF REMW, AND DEED COVENANTS SET FORM FOR THE 1/ESIVIEW SUBDMSION L415" z • EXISTING IRON PIPE 2) TM SKYEY 6 "ANT TO ANY SLATE OF FACTS AN UP W M1E AR 7WLT OF M E MAY SNOW, x IRON PIN TO BE SET A CALCULATED POINT _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 PVC STUB SEWER R WATER VALVE DaSTMO 20' WIDE ASPHALT PAVEMENT QA ELEC. 1RAAI�ORMER PAD � LARISA LANE- PHASE 2 W 0 3 0 � v:.• s}`s= CON . WALK " 20' WDE DLRY EASEMENT 5 5 S 63' 17'35" E 150.00' 20. 44 ' I FOUNDATION LOCATED / I 1011112007 -T Dti� 4.3• y O 1� 38.7't--�I nl C4 38 _ g „IN W 3 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 WESMEW PARTNERS, ;t V WESNIEW PARTNERS, LLC (R.O.) I 1 10 LLC (R.O.) 1492456-001 Z I I 1492456-001 N WESTVIEW PARTNERS, LLC PART OF INSTRUMENT NO. 492456-001 TAX MAP PARCEL NO. 36-2-3. 30 AREA = 0. 763 ACRES I I I I 29.20' N 63035006to W 1500000 LIMITS OF SUBDIVISION N 07'09J43".L LAWRENCE AND TRINNA WCOVEW (R. 0.) 27. 70 610 ELMIRA ROAD f lhArA N.Y. 14650 DEED BOOK, PG. 332 TAX MAP PARCEL No. 36-2-4.5 RE'FEREjVCE A(APS 1.) FINAL SUBDIVISION 1t4P ENli1LED 'WESMEW SVEW0 MMa DATED 6/22/2004 LAST REVISED 1111512004 BY T.G. MILLER PC Z) ENMLED 'WESMEW PLAN ROADS, SIDEWALKS, DRAIN4GE.. " CERTIFICATION t DATED 6119104 6Y PHILIP ERIK WHITNEY, P.E. j 1 hereby certify to Wf5rb'IeNO 1kRrovER5 ur- that I am a licensed land surveyor, New York State License �N°�B AranaoN of 1 rw Her No. LT50098 and ttwt this map correctly delineates an actual OauvaNC m srrnoN 7� survey on Ube ground made by me or under my direct S BOWSM a �" � sDDE and that I found no visible encroachments either way E ION LO r"RED across property lines except as shown hereon. HEREON ARE VALID FOR TN6 MAP j P PAY P AND COPIES THEREOF ONLY IF SAID NW OR COPIES WAR THE RIPRI=04 (Q� SEAL OF THE ACENSED LAND SURVEYOR SIGNED: - Cc//Zl64e OATED. 0 // Q WHOSE SMATURE APPEARS HEMM. TITLE : pYY1t111r1„ SURVEY MAP °''��E °F NEW "09',,,' NO, 121 LARISA LANE *' , T. G. MILLER P.C. TOWN OF M-1AC4, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK - I ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS U... '� 203 NORTH AURORA STREET ai ' �� ••• 0600 •' �� ITNACA. NEW YORK 14850 TEL (607) 272-6477 DATE 10/ 11 /200 SO4670B SCALE: 1 40, 'Ike, NEI MINSPId f ___ to U r_ / 1 �r U ' Q mom u 00O ro ti '� cn � D ➢ . v�'i ' iii---- . . 'R' rn D Z D � rn w N r rn z Or �D 2 gop VALL ffY D I 27 NORTH ChURCH 5TRE r CORTLAND , NEA Fax : 753- 1 547 valley design @oc1 121 Larisa Lane ZBA November 26, 2007 ! j - Tyvek TYvek k ilk lY q1 IU '11ffi L M ,I. r TYvek r.,�.4 loll 4 '1 T 'S 9 w �c Side yard setback variance for 121 Larisa Lane—partially constructed garage and second story living space located on the left side (within circle). Photo taken from Larisa Lane, over the property line. OFIp TOWN OF ITHACA 215 N. Tioga Street, ITHACA, N .Y. 14850 TOWN CLERK 273- 1721 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 BUILDING AND ZONING 273-1783 . HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks & Trails, Water & Sewer) 273- 1656 FAX (607) 273- 1704 October 31 , 2007 Westview Partners Boris Simkin 217 Buttermilk Lane Ithaca, NY 14580 . RE: 121 Larisa Lane Dear Mr. Simkin, Several weeks ago I notified you by phone that the construction at 121 Larisa Lane was in violation of the approved plans and of Section 270-60 of The Code of the Town of Ithaca. At that time I informed you that no framing was to occur on the _property until the violation was corrected or a variance obtained from the Zoning Board of Appeals. During a visit to a nearby property today, I noticed that a significant amount of framing has occurred and that work was ongoing today at the time of the visit. Due to this, I feel it necessary to issue an official Stop Work Order. Any work on the site will be considered a violation of the Stop Work Order and will result in a court appearance ticket. Attached is a copy of the Stop Work Order issued for 121 Larisa Lane. Please contact our office with any questions. incer9.1y, Kristie Rice Senior Code Enforcement Officer Enclosure CC : Cathy Valentino, Supervisor Dan Walker, Town Engineer Y J naKanier,�Direct ro of'P.lanmi�' Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Zoning Board of Appeals JM General, builder � OFIT� TOWN OF ITHACA 215 N. Tioga Street, ITHACA, N . Y: 14850 TOWN CLERK 273- 1721 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273-1747 BUILDING AND ZONING 273-1783 HIGHWAY (Roads, .Parks & Trails, Water & Sewer) 273- 1656 FAX (607) 273- 1704 Tax Parcel Number: 36 .-2-3 . 30 Town of Ithaca Tompkins County, New York STOP WORK ORDER YOU WILL PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that there exists violation of Section . 27MO of the Code of the Town of Ithaca at 121 Larisa Lane in that the side yard does not meet the minimum required . You are hereby Directed and Ordered to Stop Work, Comply with the law, and to remedy the conditions above mentioned immediately. Failure to remedy the condition aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable' by fine, imprisonment , or both. 10/31 /07 C orcement Officer Page 1 of 1 Chris Balestra From : Boris Simkin [bsimkin @twcny. rr. com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 1 :42 PM To : 'Chris Balestra' Cc: 'Jon Albanese' Subject: November 22nd meeting Hi Chris, Unfortunately I will not be able to attend the meeting because I will be out of the country from November 22nd till November 28th . Jon Albanese , my lawyer, will be present at the meeting along with my customer for 121 Larisa Lane house ( Mr. Wenchao Wang) . You have contacted phone numbers for both of them . As I understand both Jon and Wenchao are supposed to be at 7 p . m . because our case will go second (maybe even first). Thank you , Boris Simkin General Partner Westview Partners, LLC 217 Buttermilk Lane Ithaca , NY 14850 607-592-1592 bsimkin(a)twcny. rr. com bsimkin westviewpartnersllc. com www.westviewpartnersllc.com 10/29/2007