Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2024-05-28Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Tuesday May 28,2024 alt 6:00p Tloga I iss- olwne�rs of 527 Warre�n� ZBAA-24-6 Appeal of W01111"am Jr., and Efizabeth 131" Rdo,, 1thaca, NY, 11418501; are seeking relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 270-223 (Fences and walls; retaining walls). Town of Ithaca, Code section 2170 223 requires that the fencing installed shall have the finisihed side facing the street and abutting properties, where the, proposed fence would not complyi with these requirements, The property is, located in the Medlum-Density Residential Zone,1 Tax Parcel No., 70.-1-51.11 jj A A Jill W MIL Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals May,28,2024 M m6,s Present: Board Members David Squires, Chair,- Chris Jung, Stuart Friedman, Connor Terry, Kiim R-itter,. and, Matthew Minmg Marty Moseley,13irector of Codes; Paulette.Rosa, Town. Clerk; and Susan. Brock,, Attorney for the Town Mr., Squires opened,. the meeting at 6.-00 p.m. Item, 1. Z'BAA.-24-6 Appeal. of Wlilhiatn. Jr. and Elizabeth'Bliss; own.ers, 527 Warren'.R.d., MDR, TP,70.-I-51.1; seeking relief from Town. of Ithaca Code sections 270-223 (Fences and walls; retaining walls) which requires the finished side of fencing to be installed facing the street and abutting properties, where the proposed, fence would not comply. Mr. Bliss summarize*d, saying that there are wetlands in the back, and a neighbor at 529'Warren .Rd., but the f�nce would run. west to east around the back., and they would like to have the finished side facing the inside. Mr.Squires opened, the public heariing., Ms. Burkett spoke, saying she is the neighbor and if the fence is going to go around the whole property, she is against this. If it is just the backyard abutting the wetlands, that section. could have the finished side facing inward, but she does not want to see the unfinished side. She added that Mr. Bliss, does not live there 'I it is a rental. Mr. Squires closed thub i. hearing. Mr. Terry asked exactly where the fence is proposed,, as the app.tication. materials say the rear yard, but the photos show it going up the s,ides. Mr. Btiss responded that it wou . ld be were the of fence had been, to the comer of the garage. Mr. Terry said this sounds like it is not just the rear ya�rd, and you are asking for more than what is in the application. That would make it much more visible to other people and the public, from the street. Mr. Bliss was not interested.in a, min of pan.els facing inward on the rear and outward along the sides. ZBA Resolution ZBAA-24-6 Area Variance, 527 Warren Rd ,1 1 ZBA 2024-05-28 (Filed 6/11) Pg. 1 TP 70A-5 I. I * MDR Resolved that this Board, denies the appeal, of Willialii, and Elizabeth Bliss; seeking retieffrom, Town of.1thaca Code section 270-223 (Fences and walls; retain rig walls) wh,iich requ�ires, the finished side of fencing to be installed facing the street and abutting properties, where the proposed fence would not comply, with the following a= That the benefit to the applicant does not outweigh. any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community, specifically: L, That the bene-fit cannotbe achieved as the request is to have the unf,"ini, shed side of the fence fficing outwards, and 2. That there will be an. undesirable change inneighborhood character or to nearby properties as the request is to have the unfinished side of the fence facing outwards, and I That the request is substantial as its a, complete reversal of the requirement to have the finished side facing outwards, and That there willnot be any adverse physical or environmental. effects as evidenced by no SEAR determination being required,, and 5. That the alleged difficulty is, self-created in that the applicant wishes to have the finished side face inward and the Code requiring the finished. side to face outwards has been in. place for over a decade and this would be a new instal.led fence, not a replacement in in Moved: David, Squires Seconded: Connor Terry. ,res', I ngm n,,, Ritter rri, and, Vote: yes — Squ,ierry, Ju ed,a , ZBAA-24-8 Appeal off Scott D'Vileskis, owners of 144 Coy Glen Rd., Conservation Zone, TP 3L-1-112; seeking relief from Town of Ithaca Code sections 2,70-219,713, which requires, the dwelling snit be the principal res,ldence of at least one of to property owners tobe e'I'I',g'I',ble for an short terili, �rental, operating pernift and-270-219.7Bwhich, requires the owners of the! property to reside in the dwelling for at least 185 days per year to be considered a principal r 'dence where the owners do not meet the either of the requiremts but wish. to obtain a esi. .. I en short-ten'n rental operating permit. 0 "Mr. D'VIleskis gave an overvi4 , ew', sail, ng that, this was his wife's fani-.flyhome and they bought it 41 from her parents, and they plan, to corne, back after work.in.g in C. They visit II - 1. 5 times a, year, holidays and family times, and they spend tens of thousands, of dollars managing the invasive species and maintaining the land. ZBA 2024-051-28 (Filed 6/18) Page 2 of 6 He said they have done short terin rentals (STR) for the past 8, years, but with the new legislation, because it is not our primary residence, we cannot do that without this variance. Mr. D"Vilesk-is said they tried to offit as a, long tenan rental a few ttmes, but people that were interested did not want to deal, with. thon.g, Isteepgvedri'vewyndthe toght owing and traveling it in Upstate NY winters,. Long term rental would also hinder our ability to, stay there when working on the property., sometimes using heavy equipment and the ease of access we need, to work on the property on our schedule to continue fighting the invastve species, as well. as not belng able to use I , t to come ho�i-ne f6r holidays and other farely members using it when coming back to Ithaca to visit. He said the property is on Conservation and the rentals do riot bother the neighbors and the type ofpeople who rent enjoy the solitude and quiet that the natural setting provides, and, we are very careful, in the vetting, of renters, and, we have security, cameras, where we can ion for what .Is going o: t the property. 'We have submitted numerous excellent ratings from our renters. Questions Mr., Squire commented that he was ha RP , y to see that they had been pays room taxes since the begin,ning of the STD use because there are others that have not. Mr. DVileskis responded that they generally rent 15-20 weekends, and it is large enough to host full fiamilies in one location, resulting in $20430K a year, which pays f6r the taxes and 4 i , nsurance on, the property and cleaners and,. landscapers. They can, afford to keep the property without rentalincom e, but itis good to have people using the house too and support the staff they do use as, well as the in.come the visitors to Ithaca, they host bring to the surrounding areas. He added that the County reports they tools in about $12M in STR taxes compared to $,5 M in hotel room taxes, and, that again does not count the tourist money spent a1l around,. That money is now gorng to go to other count -lies and, municiipali I ties., He said he understands the legislation. was, meant to protect neighborhoods and certain areas from "Problem"' rental. scenarios and those few have ruined the whole. Public Hearing Mr. Squires opened the Public hearing. Cathy Cook Scotts, neighbor across the street., spoke in favor of the variance saying that she grew up in the house and, left and cameback and,. this 'I's the best example of the appropriateness of a variance. She said she does not think ofthe D'Vflesl is' as absent landlords because they are there so often. and that is what makes this, work.. They use the house a lot, as do their extended family members, and she could not ask for better neighbors. I I ZBA 2024-05-28 (Filed 6/11) pg. 3 She said she also does STRs and the new legislation did not affect her because she lives there, but she knows, the word: Involved, in Dire STRs and the D'Vileskis do a wonderful job and are amaz,l , rig stewards of the property. Ms. Scotts said that she had never had an instance where a rental, there has been a nuisance. They are far enough away from any otherhomes, and they have security systems that allows them to watch carefully. She sald she would ti , ke to keep them as neighbors and looks forward to the ti.tne in their tives when they move back. pennanently. Seth re el spo�ke, saying that he does not live near this property but lives on The Byway, which. i,s avery short,, narrow private road, and, they, recently, had two neighbors get variances in a coordinated way wIth the first, coming in and being granted a variance and then the second one who used the "precedent" of the first one to bolster their request, which was granted. Once granted, one neighbor proceeded to convert a, garage into an accessory dwelling unit. A garage that is in the front yard, and very close to my home. We now have an entire new IN I househoi ld right n rront of our house and, the impact to our qualay of life has been horrible. He said right now it is a long tertm rental, but they can do'STR at any point and he was very worried about the possibility of People.parking wherever they wanted and blocking emergency access to the road and people coming and going at all times. He said, 'that peopleb-Lty a property expecting a q,,Ll,ie't res,idential, neighborhood to enjoy, their homes peacefully and then, over time In . 'rentals, bec,aie common and now 'STRs and, you can basically have a hotel. ne.t door to you. Mr. Bensel said that lie understood this was a rural property with a lot of acreage, but he was concerned, that a variance, here could contribute to creeping to smaller and, smaller properties and the removal, ofthe owner occupancy requirement. He felt this was a slippery slope that should, not be started. There was no one else wishing to speak. and the public hearing was closed. Di*,scus,s,io,n,/D�eterml*,nati*,on Mr. Squires asked Ms. Brock. to explain, what happened to current STR operations after the le, gi.slation. was enacted and whether the effects on. current operators or grandfathering them is was discussed. "Ms. Brock responded, that the Town, put a delay 'in, the effective date of the legislatl'on to allow people to come in and obtai�ti operating permits and a var,tance proce�ss to meet certai , ti crite�,.ria to continue for a period of time to essentially amortize the investment they may have had in the ta property. A financial analysis, is needed, but they could get a variance, to continue until thk. determined investment was recouped. She added that the variance process is not for a Use variance, but an Area variance and some commeits that were submitted were based upon, the ZBA 2024-051-28 (Filed 6/18) Page 4 of 6 criteria for a Use variance and that is incorrect. Use variances do have a financial impact aspect and, that was probably where the confusion came inl but an, Area variancels det',ined in Town law as the use of ],and, in, a manner, whichis not allowed, by the dimensional or physical requirements of the applicall ezoning. Short term rentals are an allowed use, but they must meet the special. provisions in. the law and one of those is, that the property has to be your principal, residence, which means, you must live there a certain number of days. That is, the physical requirement, and that, is why this is, an application for an Area variance., This, appeal is not fior the amortization variance,which includes financial, hardship,, they took, the other path of asking for anArea variance to be able to not meet the residency requ�,irements of 1, iving there a minim.um of 1.85 days. She added that any variance granted would run with the property andif the property changes o 'he Board, cou,ld,. -use the stated Purposes in the leg*slation wnership, the variance remains,,, ana t 1, 1 in weighing the appeal. M.T.D"Vileski spoke, saying that he could argue that they only rent the house a third of the year and the rest is family occupancy. . He added that when this, legislation. was being drafted, the I*m*t*ng STRs to 30 or 90 days depend* 'I n I premise was i i i ing on the size of the property a, d he didn't pay attenhon, then suddenly the occupancy restriction was, added, at the end, and, there was not grandfather clause unless there was a financial hardship. That is di.scri.mtnatory to those who do have the means to do STRs and I could have claimed that, but.1 am an honest person., and.1, didn't want to do that or fight this in court and get buried in legal fees. He added that the other change of not was that in this beginning, the Conservation zones were supposed to be exenipt, and then, they were added, and I spoke to Mr. Moseley who told me there III I were on.ly 90 Properties zoned Conservatmn and less than. five app.Ltcations for operating permits in the zone and should have been exempted like the Lakefront Residential. zone was. Mr.Friedman said he wasn't interested, in revisiting the legislation drafting process., A lot of and, yo y *n bout, trying to rel'itigate what the leglslation is as ado ted, ur particular our testt i,ony Is a p relatlonship and care of the property, whi'ch while that is al.l. well and good, you can sellthe property tomorrow and the variance stands. We as a Board cannot consider subjective details such as what you are describing, we do not 0 have alit of flexibility on, this.The intent is to, u,sethe property for STR,s without the requ,tred, owner occupancy and it is clear that the intent of the lislation was to ensure that STRs, were overseen by the owner who, lived there. Mr. Terry asked about the affordable housing aspect of the Purposes secti.0111. "Ms. Brock responded, that accessory dwelling uni,ts and, rentals, allow, people to continue owning their homes, but that doesn"t com,elnto play here as the applicant has stated he doe&n't rely on, thaioShggsd thhe Bord go rugh raricrm by item.t ncme.e sueteat tathothe Aeavanecriteiaite Mr., D'Vileski stated that this request would not impact affordably housing stock as they have tried In term, rentalto no avall. They',have a camera on the driveway to know who is coming I I ZBA 2024-05-28 (Filed 6/11) pg. 5 and tor ,going and moniTor' ' any disturbance to the "heap hl safety and welfare of the community" and, there will be no "undestrable change to the neighborhood," given, the size of, the property, and, 'it being, h,i'dden, from the road, and the net , ghbor. He also said that they currently allow seasonal hunting to select hunters and the Town and Cornell. access for their deer man.agement programs which they would not be able to do even. if they were able to get a long term renter. Some discussion followed on ways to compromise such ow ring the number of days to live there to be con&I dered a primary residence to increasing the number off' days permit ted unhosted, or a fime Itmitatton or sunset clause, but the findings cannot be specfflc to the appttcant's personal Situation. Mr. Squires explained the options of withdrawing the appeal, adjourning the appea L or moving on to a vote which looked like a denial. VIT. D"Vileskis requested an ad' journment. Mr. Squires moved to adjoum the appeal for up, to 90 days to allow the applicant to present additional information to support his request, seconded by Mr.Terry, unanimous. PULLED - ZAA-24-10 Appeal Davi'd and Donna Wexler, Owners of 209 Roat S. Meet*n I imou's. I g adjoumed upon a, mot"on and, a second, unan* asamm Paulette Rosa Town. Clerk, ZBA 2024-051-28 (Filed 6/18) Page 6 of 6 and, going and monitor for any disturbance to the "health, safety and wel'i,,are Of the community an " S d there *111'be.'no "unctwire changy,Q tothe neighborhood" give'n thesize m the property and oeing hidden from the road and the neighbors. H also said .that they currently, allow seasonal hunting to select hunters and the Town and, Cornell access'For their deer Managen.end ''programs which they Would, not be able to do even if they.were able to get a long term renter. Som e cuscussi on. follow'ed on ways to compromise such 'as lowering the iiumber of days to live there to be co' nsWered a primary residence to increasing the number of days permitted unhosted, or a tim- e limitation or sunset ciause but, the findings cannot be specific to the ap. 1 pl,'can�ts" personal, situation. th rawing Me al, ad ourm Squires explained e options, of withd )peal ng.the 4p ing peal, or niov* on to a, vote which looked like a dehial. PULLED - ZRAA-24'"0A,ppead Da,V'l*d and Donna WeAer, Ow 09. Roa,t StO Meeting adjoumed'upon a mot -ion and a second, unaniinous. Submi aulette Rosa Town Clerk ZBA 2024-05-28 (Filed 6/18).