Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA History Combined (84) Zoning Board of Appeals History as of 16.-1-4 520 East Shore Drive Tax Parcels involved, with address if known: 520 East Shore Drive 16.-1-4 with readdressing from 518 East Shore Drive. History: 1995 – Area Variance for new home – Granted 1995 – Area Variance to move and replace existing home - Granted TOWN OF ITHACA FILED ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS T OWN OFI7HACA WEDNESDAY , JUNE 14 , 1995 9 U Clerk L ' The following appeals were heard by the Board on June 14 , 1995 : APPEAL of Elizabeth B . and Ernest Wm . Terwilliger , Appellants , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 to be permitted to construct a 14 ' 7 " x 13 ' 6 " building addition on a non- conforming building / lot at 620 Elm Street Extension , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 29 - 4 - 12 , Residence District R- 15 . The building lot is non- conforming since the property does not front on a Town , County , or State highway . A variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 13 and 14 may also be requested since the proposed addition will have a 10 ' + north side yard building setback ( 15 ' setback required ) . A small storage shed is also located . 7 from the east side property line ( 3 ' setback required ) . GRANTED WITH A CONDITION . Appeal of Dr . Janusz Sendek , Appellant / Owner , Ken Poyer , Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a single - family residence with a building height of 34 ' + ( 30 ' maximum height permitted ) at 5 Evergreen Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 22 - 1 - 1 . 29 , Residence District R- 30 . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Appeal of Russell A . Poyer , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to replace and relocate a non- conforming single - family residence on a non- conforming building lot located at 518 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 16 - 1 - 4 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it contains 2 residential buildings ( only 1 building on a parcel permitted ) . The existing building is 3 ' + from the south side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) , but the new relocated building will have a 15 ' setback . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Appeal of Douglas Ford , Appellant /Owner , Bradford A . Wellstead , Agent , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a 300 square foot exterior wood deck on a non- conforming building / lot located at 909 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2 - 9 , Residence District R- 15 . The building / lot is nonconforming since the parcel is 36 ' + wide ( 100 foot width required ) and the building is 11 . 8 ' from the north side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) . The proposed deck will be terminated at or just over the north side property line . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Town of Ithaca 6 Zoning Board of Appeals June 14 , 1995 2 ) It also appears that the house will be in conformity as to height in all other respects . Chairman austen asked for a vote on the motion , which resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala . NAYS - None The motion was carried unanimously . Chairman Austen then asked for a motion on the appeal . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Edward King . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a variance for the appeal of Dr . Janusz Sendek for the property at 5 Evergreen Lane , Tax Parcel 22 - 1 - 1 . 29 , to construct a residence with a building height of approximately 34 ' in order to have an exit from the basement , with the following findings and conditions : 1 ) This is based on the fact that this property with this . basement and height is in harmony with the neighborhood . 2 ) It is difficult to see from any other adjacent properties . 3 . The variance is limited to the approximately 8 ' width at the south wall for the walk- out basement . 4 . The height will not exceed 35 ' . Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion , which resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . The third appeal to be heard by the Board was as follows : Appeal of Russell A . Poyer , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article %II , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to replace and relocate a non- conforming single - family residence on a non- conforming building lot located at 518 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 16- 1- 4 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non-conforming because it contains 2 residential buildings ( only 1 building on a parcel permitted ) . The existing building is 3 ' ± from the south side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) , but the new relocated building will have a 15 ' setback . Mr . Frost indicated to the Board that they would be taking down a building and putting up a new modular building that would be relocated and have a new setback of 15 ' . The setback is fine but the two buildings makes the property non- conforming . Mr . Frost asked Mrs . Shirley Poyer ( Russell ' s mother - - Russell is in the hospital ) if she will be living in the new house and if the existing house is vacant . Mrs . Poyer answered yes on both counts . Town of Ithaca 7 Zoning Board of Appeals June 14 , 1995 Mr . King asked Mrs . Poyer what use the house has been used for recently . Mrs . Poyer answered by saying that her son bought the property two years ago . At that time , there was a woman that had rented it from the former owners . When Mr . Poyer took it over , the woman moved out . He didn ' t want anyone there , so it was good she moved out . Mostly , it has been used for storage . It ' s in very poor shape and no one would want to live in it . Mr . King asked how long it has been vacant . Mrs . Poyer said it has been vacant almost two years . Attorney Barney asked Mrs . Poyer if she knows what the dimensions of the house are . Mrs . Poyer did not know . Attorney Barney said that what he is leading up to is the square footage of the new house - - will it be the same , less or more than the existing house . mfrs . Poyer said the new house will be 27 ' X 40 ' and will be sitting in the opposite direction from the present House . Mr . Frost stated the new house will be 23 . 9 ' X 44 ' . It will be a single - story house . Mr . King noted that they would be talking , then , about 1 , 000 square feet . Mr . Scala asked if the house is in the flood plane . Mrs . Poyer replied that it is not . She said that it does not flood there . Mr . King noted that there ' s a drainage ditch to the left of the property . Mr . Frost said there was a flood two years ago and it flooded the baseball fields on Cayuga Street . Mr . Scala indicated that the worst one was 10 - 12 years ago , during the winter when the high school was flooded . There was water all the way up over East Shore Drive . The ice caused the creek to back up . Mr . Frost asked if there is a basement . Mrs . Poyer replied negatively . He then indicated that if they are in a flood plane , the first floor will be elevated above that level . Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . With no one present to speak , the public hearing was closed . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen noted that Mrs . Cornish , Town Planner II , was the reviewer on this matter . Mrs . Cornish stated that she had visited the site and found the existing structure to be somewhat run down . She did not go inside , but it appeared to be in a state of disrepair . She said that , concerning the property itself , they are the only two residences in that area . On one side is the High School and there ' s a Town right- of-way directly attached to the property . Mrs . Poyer added that there ' s a cemetery in front . Mrs . Cornish continued : It ' s a very steep , vegetated slope . As you are looking from the property to the cemetery , you see mostly vegetation . Mrs . Cornish said the houses are out of character with the area , which is interesting . To replace the structure that is there with another house is not going to further impede the character of that neighborhood since it ' s questionable as to how much of a neighborhood character there is at present . The lot itself is very small ; it ' s probably not much more than 15 , 000 square feet . It is squeezing two structures on a fairly small lot . 14r . Scala asked if it will be a prefabricated house . Mrs . Poyer said that it is a modular . Mrs . Cornish added that it will be turned so that there will be more of a setback than there is presently . She does not believe it will make anymore of an impact than what is already there . Mr . Frost asked if there are any plans to redo the garage . Mrs . Poyer did not know . Chairman Austen asked if there are just the three buildings there : Deeb ' s and these two houses . Mrs . Cornish said that is correct . Mrs . Cornish proposes a negative determination of environmental significance . 1 Town of Ithaca 8 Zoning Board of Appeals June 14 , 1995 Chairman Austen asked for a motion on the environmental assessment form . MOTION By Mr . Pete Scala , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that , with respect to the property at 518 East Shore Drive , the Board accept the environmental impact statement from JoAnn Cornish and make a negative determination of environmental significance . Chairman Austen then asked for a vote on the motion , which resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . Chairman Austen noted that the Board has a letter from the Tompkins County Department of Planning . The letter was signed by James Hanson , Jr . , on June 1 , 1995 . Chairman Austen stated that is the only letter the Board has on this matter . Chairman Austen asked for a motion on the appeal . MOTION By 1•Ir , Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a special approval for the appeal of Russell Poyer for the property at 518 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 16 - 1 - 4 , Article XII , Section 54 of the Zoning Ordinance , to remove the south existing building and replace it with a new building , with the following conditions and finding : 1 . The new building will have no basement . 2 . It will be limited to two bedrooms . 36 It will be less than 1 , 000 square feet of finished area . 4 . One of the two buildings must be owner- occupied , meaning the owner must live there . 5 . This location is unique in that there are no adjacent residences . They are surrounded by a school and a cemetary . 6 . The new relocated building will have a 15 ' setback from the south side . 7 . The new building will be located to conform with the requirements of the R- 15 zone . 8 . A survey will be required to show that it complies with the requirements of the R- 15 zone . 9 . The floor plan will be adjusted and resubmitted to the Code Enforcement Officer . Before the motion was completed , the following discussion ensued : Town of Ithaca 9 Zoning Board of Appeals June 14 , 1995 Mr . Scala recommended an addition to the motion : This would be a second building , plus a garage , which would make it a non - conforming property . Attorney Barney noted that it ' s non - conforming at present . Ilr . Scala said that it would then remain non- conforming because it has two buildings . There are two buildings plus the garage . Chairman Austen noted that the front yard setback may or may not meet the present code . Attorney Barney stated that the Board ' s decision maybe be conditioned on the house being conformed to the Building Code , Attorney Barney said that there are a couple of other things the Board may rant to consider . One is that right now there really is no idea of whether the building that will be going on the property is bigger in overall size than the building that exists . Mr . Scala noted that it clearly is bigger . It ' s two bedrooms versus one . Attorney Barney said the other thing he ' d like to throw out for the Board to consider is : He ' s sympathetic to the situation of the applicant . But , there has been recently enacted legislation in the Town of Ithaca to have elder cottages which allow a variance from the normal one principle building on a lot in order to allow for an elder cottage for exactly this purpose , which is to provide a place for somebody ' s relative who wants to live close by . This is a more permanent case and 14r . Scala added that it ' s a two - bedroom place . Mr . Frost said that the elder cottage law was written for one building being originally on a parcel . Attorney Barney said the other possibility , which they might want to consider , is if they choose to grant a variance , the fear would be a rental property at some point . The Board may want to insist on an owner- occupancy requirement , that one of the two houses be occupied by the owner . Mr . Scala addressed Mrs . Poyer and asked her if the building is being put up for her . She replied that it is . Ilr . Scala then asked her why there needs to be three bedrooms . Mrs . Poyer said one would be a guest room and the other would be used as a sewing / quilting room . Mr . Frost asked Mrs . Poyer how a reduction in the size of the building would affect her . Mrs . Poyer replied that it would be OK . Mr . Scala stated that his guess is that the new building is three times the size of the present house . Mr . King asked Mrs . Poyer if she is saying that she could not settle for a smaller building . Mrs . Poyer stated that she said she could settle for a smaller building . It gets down to the point of : If the Board wants two bedrooms instead of three , there ' s no problem as far as she is concerned . Mr . Scala noted that the real problem is not having two bedrooms and a study , which is basically what Mrs . Poyer is saying . The real problem is that the major argument is that they are replacing an old building with a new building that is twice the size of the building being removed . If this was the only house , there would be no problem . However , this is the second house plus a garage . He then noted that there is no other property in that area with which to compare it . Mr . King asked what is the nature of an elder cottage . Is it portable ? Attorney Barney said that it is semi - portable . It can be set on a permanent foundation , but it is designed to be able to move from one location to another . Mr . King asked if there is some special building available for that . Attorney Barney said he believes so . Mr . Scala said that it ' s not really a matter of size . It ' s a matter of portability . The elder cottage law is to allow for a second residence on an existing lot , a residence that is temporary . Tbwn of Ithaca 10 Zoning Board of -Appeals June 14 , 1995 Mr . Frost noted that the Town issued a permit to BOCES for their VoPro course . That essentially looks very much like the single - story small modular homes . He doesn ' t think you can tell the difference between the two once they are on a foundation . Mr . King said that the only logical justification for permitting the larger building on this site is the unique character of this particular land location . It is not truly a highly residential area . In fact the owner of the property is the only resident in that immediate vicinity . Mr . Scala would see a justification if one argued that one could foresee a caretaker living in the same house with Mrs . Poyer . There ' s a stage at which that is an accepted procedure , to have an extra room for a caretaker . One could justify the extra bedroom by not calling it a bedroom but a utility room . In that sense , he sees it as a reasonable plan . Chairman Austen said that perhaps an authorization could be limited to , as the attorney said , o;-mer- occupied ( at least one building ) . They could not both become rental properties . Mr . King noted that the plans from Penn Lycn Homes Corporation calls this model a Richmond Home . It indicates stairs . firs . Poyer stated that the stairs are not for the home she will have because there is no basement . Instead of the stairs , there is room for a kitchen- dining room area . They are not having a basement . Mr . King noted that the plans also indicate that there are three bedrooms , a living room , a dining room , storage and 1 - 1 / 2' baths . Mrs . Poyer agreed with that assessment . Chairman Austen assumes that the storage room would have to become a utility for furnace , hot water heater , etc . Mr . King asked if the Board should say it should be limited to a two - bedroom to make it smaller than 1 , 000 square feet . Mr . Scala said that the problem may be getting a modular home made with that kind of modification . He believes not . It may come without the stairwell , but it will have the same total overall configuration . Mr . King said he is sure that they make taro bedroom models . It does appear that the request is going from a 500 square foot unit to something over 1 , 000 square feet . He feels it should be limited to two bedrooms at most , not exceeding 1 , 000 square feet . Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion , which resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . The last appeal to be heard by the Board Was as follows : Appeal of Douglas Ford , Appellant/Owner , Bradford A . Wellstead , Agent , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article %II , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a 300 square foot exterior wood deck on a non- conforming building/ lot located at 909 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2- 9 , Residence District R- 15 . The building/ lot is nonconforming since the parcel is 36 ' + wide ( 100 foot width required ) and the building is 11 . 8 ' from the north side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) . The proposed deck will be terminated at or just over the north side property line . Mr . Frost noted that the Board could see in the pictures that the deck is existing . There was some degree of work on the house and deck without a building permit . Mr . King asked if they now have a building permit . Mr . Frost said they did not . • Pr 1p _`• ` "F '1 h _y i�• 'E TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY , JUNE 14 , 1995 7 . 00 P . M . By direction of the Chairman or the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday , June 14 , 1995 , 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 Elizabeth B . and Ernest Wm . Terwilliger , Appellants , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 to be permitted to construct a 14 ' 7 " x 13 ' 6 " building addition on a non- conforming building / lot at 620 Elm Street Extension , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 29 - 4 - 12 , Residence District R- 15 . The building lot is non - conforming since the property does not front on a Town , County , or State highway . A variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 13 and 14 may also be requested since the proposed addition will have a 10 ' + north side yard building setback ( 15 ' setback required ) . . A small storage shed is also located . 7 ' from the east side property line ( 3 ' setback required ) . Appeal of Dr . Janusz Sendek , Appellant / Owner , Ken Poyer , Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a single - family residence with a building height of 34 ' + ( 30 ' maximum height permitted ) at 5 Evergreen Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 22 - 1 - 1 . 29 , Residence District R- 301 Appeal of Russell A . Payer , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to replace and relocate a non-conforming single - family residence on a non- conforming building lot located at 518 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 16 - 1 - 4 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it contains 2 residential buildings ( only 1 building on a parcel permitted ) . The existing building is 3 + from the south side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) , but the new relocated building will have a 15 ' setback . Appeal of Douglas Ford , Appellant /Owner , Bradford A . Wellstead , Agent , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a 300 square foot exterior wood deck on a non-conforming building / lot located at 909 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2- 9 , Residence District R- 15 . The building / lot is nonconforming since the parcel is 36 ' + wide ( 100 foot width required ) and the building is 11 . 8 ' from the north side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) . The proposed deck will be terminated at or just over the north side property line . 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 . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer 273 - 1783 Dated : June 6 , 1995 Publish : June 9 , 1995 i Town Assigned Project 1D Number Rev . 10 / 90 Town of Ithaca Environmental Review 1 SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Located in the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County ONLY PART I - Project Information ( To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor ) 1 . Applicant /Sponsor 2. Project Name : - 3 . Precise Location (Street Address and Road Intersections , prominent landmarks , etc . or provide map) : Tax Parcel Number : F4 . 1s Proposed Action : F NEW EXPANSION MODIFICATION / ALTERATION escribe Project Brieflnclude project purpose, present land use , current and future construction plans , and other relevant items) : "fear 641 sin q n L ac t S�r n cy //00.w- ti of l p-1 cL 254/4 e a F v Poor � Q ,nc� r� ion Ctn� ptircc{� �� fCr7j/lUL Sc� v� 4. i {-4 G ,flew be:-4�er gva� i�� y�-l � v lovkr � � No � ye of lv\cet„(ar 47eaC � a �+�( ✓ w ; f l nod Gkc� n� e a � y� erc �.� ti ha � ai � l.we c .in , Fly and n � �+� I Ale"// rs�St ..';i( �� usedL !u 5hzEfer M�� q�, M y + o . ✓ } ti. wlh �r i � - 3 ( Attach separate sheet(s) if necessary to adequately describe the proposed project .) 6 . Amount of Land Affected : Initially (0-5 yrs) ?S Acres (6- 10 rs) . .2 � I y Acres ( > 10 yrs) Acres 7 . How is the Land Zoned Presently ? 8 . Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions ? YES ® NO rV If no , describe conflict briefly : p(a pDsecQ a o , . cc-J ovivQ lr-s� l ti S1n9Le �� .-., . L! C.�i�c /% -r �5 �n -��i .� o .cR.. _ /ot �Of C✓rrcri-Ff� eloe� /lgvt J/o ✓ SeA o „/ 9 . Will proposed action lead to a request for new : I I i Public Road ? YES ® NO E Public Water ? YES ❑ NO Public Sewer ? YES NO 10 . What is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project ? Residential Commercial Q Industrial © Agriculture Q Park /Forest /Open Space Other Please describe : © EE13s 27 +,gkA 14xGd �yc�oa [ � ., o -?oi4e- -%+e,6 ,Ac 5 ;46 - i zp i n 01C load APX 30X ✓o o ! 1 1 . Does proposed action involve a permit , approval , or funding , now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal , State , Local) ? YES NO If yes , list agency name and permit /approval /funding : r12 . Does any aspect of the proposed action have a currently valid permit or approval ? YES NO If yes , list agency name and permit /approval . Also , state whether that permit /approval will require modification . I CERTIFY THAT THE 114F0RMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant /Sponsor Name (Print or Type) : Signature : t ``s` Date : of �Pr' qs I • 318 S20 (±2z T 517c cp [Jggut PART II - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT o be completed by the Town; Use attachments as necessary.) A. Does proposed action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCiRFi , Part 617. 12 or Town Environmental Local Law? 1 YECS NO XX If yes. coordinate the review process and use the full EAF. S. Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR , Part 617, 6? YES NO If no , a necative declaration may be sucerseded by another involved agency, if anv. C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: (Answers may be handwritten, It legible) CZ . Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production and disposal , potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems ? Explain briefly: See attached . C2- Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources ? Community or neighborhood character? 'Explain briefly: See attached . C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish , shellfish, or wildlife species , significant habitats , unique natural areas, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species? Explain 'briefly: See attached , C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources ? Explain briefly: See attached . CS. Growth , subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action ? Explain briefly : See attached . C64 Long term , short terra , cumulative , or other effects not identified in C1 - CS ? Explain briefly: See attached , C7. Other impacts (incfuding changes in use of either quantity or type of energy) ? Explain briefly: See attached . D. Is there , or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? YES NO XX If yes, explain briefly: E. Comments of staff , CAC , other attached. (Check as =olicable. ) PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGMFICANCE (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca) Instructions: For each adverse affect IdentlAed above, determine whether It 1s substantial, large, Important, or otherwise significant` Each affect should be assessed In connection with its (a) setting (la, urban or rural) ; (b) probabillty of occurring; (c) duration; (d) Irreversibility: (e) geographic scope, and (f) magnitude, It necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that axplanatlans contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse Impacts have been Identifled and adequately addressed. Check here if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY l occur, Then proceed directly to the full EAF andlor prepare a positive declaration.. XX Check here if you have determined , based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation , that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attachments as necessary the reasons supporting this determination. Town of Ithaca 2oninq Board of Appeals �b Name of Lead Agency Prep s Signature (if different from ResportsNe Officer Edward Austen , Chairman WS12natura of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency nature of Contributing Preparer Date : f Res onsi le Officer in Lead A en i PART 11 - Environmental Assessment Russell A. Foyer, Appellant 518 East Shore Drive Request for Authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals to be permitted to replace and relocate a non-conforming single family residence on a non-conforming building lot. A. Action is Unlisted B . Action will not receive coordinated review C. Could action result in any adverse effects on to or arising from the following C1 . Existing air quality, surface or groundwater Quality or quantity, noise levels existing traffic -patterns solid waste production or disposal potential for erosion drainage or flooding problems? No significant impacts to air quality, water quality or quantity, noise , existing traffic patterns, solid waste production/disposal, potential for erosion, or flooding problems are anticipated. Proposed action is the request for authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII, Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to replace and relocate a non-conforming single family residence on a non-conforming building lot located at 518 East Shore Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax parcel No . 16- 1 -4, Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it presently contains 2 residential buildings (only one building on a parcel is permitted) . The existing building is +/- 3 ' from the south side property line ( 15 ' setback required). The new relocated building will have a +/- 15 ' setback. C24 Aesthetic, agricultural, archeological historic or other natural or cultural resources or community or neighborhood character? No significant impacts to aesthetic, agricultural, archeological, historic, natural or cultural resources, community or neighborhood character are anticipated. To the south of the property line is located a parking lot which services a portion of Ithaca High School, to the west is Ithaca High School property, to the north is DEEBS Service Station and north of that is additional Ithaca City School District property, and to the east is Lakeview Cemetery which is not visible from the proposed project due to steep slopes and heavy vegetation. This residential property, which predates many of the surrounding land uses, is now out of character with its surroundings. Since residences currently exist on the site, the demolition and construction of a new residence will not significantly alter the character of the neighborhood. C3 . Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species - significant-habitats, or threatened or endangered species? No known rare, threatened, or endangered species, or significant habitats exist at the site. 3 518 East Shore Drive Page 2 C4. A community ' s existing plans or goals as officially adopted or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? This project presents no significant impacts to the Town ' s existing plans, nor signifies a significant change or intensity in use from what presently exists on the site. It should be noted however, that the purpose of limiting lots in residential districts to no more than one principal building (Article XIII, Section 68) is to protect neighborhoods from over concentrations of development in order to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the community at large. In addition, this particular lot does not exceed the R- 15 minimum lot size requirement ( 15 ,000 sq. ft.) by very much. Therefore, staff cautions the Zoning Board of Appeals that granting a variance for this proposal could set an undesirable precedent for the Town . C5 . Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? The applicant has indicated that the proposed residence will be for his aging parent and that it will not be used as a rental property. C60 Long term, short term, cumulative or other effects not identified in Cl -05 ? None anticipated. C7 : Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? None anticipated. D . Is there, or is there likely to be controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts ? No controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts is anticipated. PART III - Staff Recommendation Determination of Significance Based on review of the materials submitted for the proposed action , the proposed scale of it, and the information above, a negative determination of environmental significance is recommended for the action as proposed. Lead Agency: Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Reviewer: JoAnn Cornish , Planner II Review Date: June 7 , 1995 TOWN OF ITHACA FEE : $ 100000 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED : Ithaca , New York 14850 CASH ( 607 ) 273- 1783 CHECK S P E C I A L A P P R O V A L ZONING : A P P E A L For Office Use Only to the Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca , New York Having been informed that authorization is required to : �e p& c e R C'_x � ,��ti � . in paor Neti.. ha;.iL Apx _ at Shore C� r. Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 16 as shown on the accompanying application and / or plans or other supporting documents . The Special Approval authorization is requested pursuant to : Article ( s ) k Section ( s ) s of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this request for Special Approval authorization . ( Additional sheets may be attached as necessary . ) 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 . i Signature of Owner/Appellant : Date : 674/ Signature of Appellant/Agent : Date : Print Name Here : e Ru sse/l 14 lPo y e T Home Telephone Number : 60 ? - .? 77 -9.z 93 Work Telephone Number : NOTE : If construction of work in accordance with any approvals given does not commence within 18 months , the approval will expire , PLO INFORMATION TO BE SFIOWN : 1ce-� Dimensions of lot . 4 . �Dimensions and location of proposed structure( s ) or 2 . � Distance of structures from : or addition (s) . ' a . Road, 5 . '�Nanes of neighbors who bound lot . b . "Both side lot lines, 60 ,­--o-'Setback of neighbors . ce ' Rear of lot . 76 "Street name and nurber . 3 . � North arrow . 8 . :�-Show existing structures in contrasting lines . y , d J\1 ��, M D rn a, � Q* �. - o z c o u. .n PV Aom0000 r • - d 70 9. V y X - rypased �° = a P� d��� war h P A' S 10 }, Signature of Owner/AppelI ant : iJ Date : o? /�4z Signature of Appellant /Agent : Date : psi =✓: -- .... '�^t _. _ . _ _ _ K9 _ L ' _CITY OF ITHACA rI TOWN OF '•°' ITHACA Lp i 1 i J i ^ N � II � II 1 r - - - - , l a II w V �•P + of + _- z / i Easy ° I IYi - "epswic� � afeienrs ,.. �Tgoap,, r ro 9 i• � 7���N/ W r a womPoso/ O N �3nino ,•�a VIP a% TOWN _ OF ITHACA VILLAGE O� `UGA HEIGH Tompkrns County DEPARTMENTOF PLANNING 121,East-Coart� treet Ithaca; New York 14850` James W. Hanson, Jr. Telephone (607) 274-5560 Commissioner of Planning FAX (607) 274-5578 RECEI VED June 1 , 1995 JUN 2 1995 Mr. Andy Frost TOWN OF 1THACA Town of Ithaca BUILDING/ZONING 126 E . Seneca Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Re : Zoning Review Pursuant to 5239 - 1 and - m of the New York State General Municipal Law Action : Special Approval , 518 East Snore Drive , IRUSSCll Payer Dear Mr. Frost: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department pursuant to 5239 - 1 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law. The proposal , as submitted , will have no significant deleterious impact on intercommunity , County, or State interests. Therefore , no recommendation is indicated by the Tompkins County Planning Department, and you are free to act without prejudice . Please inform us of your decision so that we can mike it a part of the record . Sincerely , �. l � /'r James Hanson , Jr. Commissioner of Planning f. Recycled paper ► TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY , JUNE 14 , 1995 7 : 00 P . H . By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday , June 14 , 1995 , 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 Elizabeth B . and Ernest Wm . Terwilliger , Appellants , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 to be permitted to construct a 14 ' 7 " x 13 ' 6 " building addition on a non- conforming building / lot at 620 Elm Street Extension , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 29- 4 - 12 , Residence District R - 15 . The building lot is non - conforming since the property does not front on a Town , County , or State highway . A variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 13 and 14 may also be requested since the proposed addition will have a 10 ' + north side yard building setback ( 15 ' setback required ) . A small storage shed is also located . 7 ' from the east side property line ( 3 ' setback required ) . Appeal of Dr . Janusz Sendek , Appellant / Owner , Ken Poyer , Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a single - family residence with a building height of 34 ' ± ( 30 ' maximum height permitted ) at 5 Evergreen Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 22 - 1 - 1 . 29 , Residence District R- 30 . Appeal of Russell A . Poyer , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to replace and relocate a non- conforming single - family residence on a non-conforming building lot located at 518 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 16 - 1 - 4 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it contains 2 residential buildings ( only 1 building on a parcel permitted ) . The existing building is 3 ' + from the south side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) , but the new relocated building will have a 15 ' setback . Appeal of Douglas Ford , Appellant / Owner , Bradford A . Wellstead , Agent , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct a 300 square foot exterior wood deck on a non-conforming building/ lot located at 909 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2- 9 , Residence District R- 15 . The building / lot is nonconforming since the parcel is 36 ' ± wide ( 100 foot width required ) and the building is 11 . 8 ' from the north side property line ( 15 ' setback required ) . The proposed deck will be terminated at or just over the north side property line . 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 . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer 273 - 1783 Dated : June 6 , 1995 Publish : June 9 , 1995 � I TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I , Dani L . Holford , being duly sworn , depose and say that I am the Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department Secretary , Tompkins County , New York ; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper , The Ithaca Journal . Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals in Town Hall 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca New York on Wednesday , June 14p1995 , commencing at 7 : 00 P . M . as per attached . Location of Sign Board used for Posting : Bulletin Board . Front Entrance of Town Hall . Date of Posting : June S . 1995 Date of Publication : June 9 . 1995 Dani L . Holford , Buildi g and Zoning Department Secretary , Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS . : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9th day of June , 1995 , BETTY F POOLE NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF NEW YORK N ary P b l i # 4646 427 i .......tux:. i •�•7•; ,^^ r f •., w, .l YJ1 _ i i 1 ' t• h. H< !tier t .. 1'Pa U -.• / 1 f lot jar 6M Elm lso�reotA EM@rr,ts uvedLand`jrhe"buildingliv. cel�F`Jo2,9 4I12QR s�dan a prloperfyline`+(15setbackk�rda DistrlctfR',1;5 ryTheibulldmg Iol Fquired�'4Tha ' proposed,ydeck non4onfgrming since +the rwEll ba�termmatad=;ator (ust f rope doesrnot, front�onfra overtherriortlit"da"'propery N't Townoun}Y,aar3Stgte;haghline"+.+ ?� y + j�i y ; a way. A .=varnance,lifrom t et SaEdf Zoning Board. ofMp• FrequErementsr+"of yArticleIV, 'peals'rwil! tit `saEd ;time� 700" tR Sectionti 3and�l4Tmaytalsos»p m � yandi saEd ip3oc @; fflear. pp, ' pbase@dpdddidion �w II thave' a (maRers osob�echonstfhe eto Y ?p10 �'north'sside ydrdibuEldingj„Persons ;imay, "appear,lubyr; wetback ' 15' f+s tliack re ' j a � („ �, , e.• �, �;aggen}� orinperspn �,lndwEdu;�' iquired) fA°smcllys�otage shed}"bls wErh' visual or`henring ,frrt r yts°also (oeated T,� from the paErmentstit,W othar speetal 4 I east'lsEdeitproperlyhne4+(3 s ..needs'"� ash appropriates wtll ?Setbacklr s Ulredj`r slot r'` ;7 it { ' c ' - = r , "''f eeqq .�^r , , + fr, wprovided„wtthyasslstance„* Appeal of,'Dr�JanuszJSendek, as necessary,! upon request: I'AppeIfa,nf/,Ownear 5kKaWr;Persons? desiring"sassIstonca'st P,oyer,�bAgenq; requesting a rnwoo imakehucp�gIrequesttnor r4;a r,E a`nfc o f r,o;m7,y at h e+ less thd'nt hours�p'�ior ro the ; (r @gUlremerlt9 k3iOfd ArtECIe''LV `•time°(oF the" ubhcfheoring`� tfi;�a� Secti on 41;8foftheown� "o� a 't tendrew S + Fr r y �, ost irhacaf,Zoni,n�g OrdEnaneero BuildinInspactor%Zoning ermttleQp }ONC6nStrUCtlar m s ;' Enfowc@ment Offieerb tsmgg efamily"residenee"wdh o a? 1; 4 4 4 q , y273 1, buEldmg height of;3,,d [3I I Jun@ 9 19,.95 + 1 t � maximum heEght peri EM6 ( at a rq 11 Ith y A Jn .; 1, ' ;ws i Pvergreen�an @; ;Towno "SEr oca j';TaX3Pare �; No 4221x1 295 R Diskri�ct �Appeah+,ofRussaJAa Payer, ' App @Ilanr;'' requastin 'tt a"u; . thorizatlort"�from�the��on ink `Baaid 'ofsAppeals n'darld I cle"7Xll',� Section' 54"?ofthe} ;Town f�lnc�ca�ZoningOrdi� ' nonceto'Kbe permitted ro re 's PI POI lt.plac@ ands relocgte" atf+non-% conf ..orming} sin gla•family' { ast`donces n5p?�o?�"'nonY�1 conforming,: buEldmg� lot to ;_ er¢• " li .� :' �vYmy'v ity'COted mat¢ 51 B+ EOSt $hare r'} fTOWNNN OF ITHAGA� , ^Di1va,Tow of'IthacaTaiiPar I ,Z©bF APPEALS D � c jst�lctw r l.b 14'4; Residencal ,, t� =+��FNOTICErOF;�at s ��' ' :nonconforming beaus @ �11 fee c trPUBLIC HEARINGS eontaid"s 2q�reiiilan K, AWED , JUNE s14;, .1,995 =,r , bu1ldmg3 n"g onl, � �� �" `"Lu + 7 OOtPM` ?�x�s''1",r���'�gr�parcel�permEtted(G�The sex`' iBy°duechon'of the.,Chavmanjtfisiing ,buEldtngfis 3't' froWho fI Ii the Zoning ' Boar�dirofrA !.0 o�th�side proparty�rlihe' " I peals," NOTICEIS� HEREB�f,Ce}bdc uired but �the�? Ask twill Eli!}heldbyl thel`I�,ZomnB�r�havea Setbackld gplraa, Board of Ap'p @al's• ofifhe,,To`wnre ealofDou "Ia5Ford �of lthtacn 4.4on Wadnesdar,, 'APpa I' I/Own" 9 �Bradf©rc} luretTr4,41995; miTowh' )H' 1;P, +A,�Wallstecd ;A" entst gar'" X126 East,? S6Aicp rStej6f], uest.,I,Urfionzat&ionvfrom` s lIFIRST+!door,Y,REAR En�tranc� ,i0 111 ardrof ;4pp @als EST< Sidel n� tfiaca;?TN iinda 9ArtEcl @6XIl 'Sectign�t541- COMMEN ' ,AGl�iATr °7 00 df'the ,Tow oF�It�cca7Zo in + Pii!1 Cori ptfieFollowing, mare 'p�dtnanciobesper'mirted>to' rers of srsr,� =. y�i' conshuct7a 300 a 9"are� foot `Appaclof `Elizabeth ` B` +and r `^„ 3ex}erwr wood deck on a non IErrtesti� Wm+ TervvElliger,i >Ap 'conform�ngbuildine%iot�la'• ppellants �requestin"g; saucatad �o�'�909'Taugriannock th'orEZahon Eroms�the„` onm av "r 1 Boardfof;'A�pp eals underyArt,$ •' BoulevardTownof lrhoca cleXllSecrion 54fto;beam snce" Dl�ls" ICfThe milled to .'conshuol al'4 7°rbriElding%lots noneonforrrr �4ano t nuild�ig add Ildirto/ 'In"'ggaEnceffie.pafcal� lss36't. r . '� P g �w(de f100� foot"'wlilth, r're �