Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2005-04-18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY,APRIL 18, 2005 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Kirk Sigel, Chairperson; Harry Ellsworth, Board Member; Jim Niefer, Board Member; Dick Matthews, Board Member; Andy Frost, Director of Building/Zoning; David Dubow, Attorney for the Town; Christine Balestra, Planner. ABSENT: None EXCUSED: Ronald Krantz, Board Member OTHERS PRESENT: Todd Roswech and Melisa Anthony, 102 Drew Rd; Paula Solat, 103 Drew Rd; Mark Utter, 109 Drew Rd; Don Miller, 5830 Seneca Rd, Trumansburg; David Mountin, 275 Gray Rd; 3 students. Chairperson Sigel opens the meeting at 7:00 p.m. ADJOURNED APPEAL FROM MARCH 21, 2005 of Todd Roswech and Melisa Anthony,Appellants, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-60E and Article XXVII, Section 270-223 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to have an accessory building/greenhouse located in the front and/or side yard, rather than the required rear yard and a fence over six feet in height(for deer control) at 102 Drew Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-34.29, Low Density Residential Zone. Chairperson Sigel—Could you please come to the table? Mr. Roswech - Good evening. Chairperson Sigel—Hi. And we did receive your letter, and if you could just give us a brief description of what you now want to do, that would be great. Mr. Roswech - Thank you again for continuing our appeal. From last time, as you remember, we were requesting a front and side yard setback for an eight foot fence for deer control of our market garden. At the time we were also requesting a front and side yard variance for a greenhouse, also located in the side yard, which we have withdrawn for this meeting. So right now, we're only requesting the eight-foot fence for the market garden. Since last time, we also were able to invite Andy Frost up to the site to take a look to see what he could see and offer any comments or suggestions. And he was able to take a look, and saw that it was quite a reasonable request, and gave us his support at that time. There are some questions about what this site looks like from last time. I did print out two larger photos that I'd like to share so that you can begin to see what the site looks like. TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—So you are requesting the fence to be 5 feet from the front lot line. Mr. Roswech - From the front lot line, it's also about 10 or 15 feet from the paved road section, of course the road right of way extends somewhat onto the property and across there... There's a swale or a gully in the front there. Five feet in from that. Chairperson Sigel—OK. And then how far from the side? Mr. Roswech - The side I believe was 20 feet from the side yard property line. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Frost—I have a picture from last month as well that we took for the zoning board last month if you want to see it. Quite a bit of snow on the ground. Mr. Roswech - It's been a very kind April. Mr. Niefer—What are the total dimensions of the area that you're asking to fence off or planning to fence off? Mr. Roswech - It's about 80 feet in the front, 80 feet of road frontage and about 100 feet back. Mr. Niefer—How many feet back? Mr. Roswech - 100. Mr. Frost—If this fence is proposed, what is set back from the road with the 25-foot setback, it could actually be 30 feet high according to our ordinance. It's when a fence encroaches within a setback area that it's limited to 6 foot. Chairperson Sigel—What's the side yard requirement? Mr. Frost—Well, once you get to the backyard, a fence is considered a structure and can be as close as 5 foot I believe. Chairperson Sigel—OK. But in the sort of front or side, where this is? Mr. Frost—Side I believe is 40 foot still. Although this is an Ag zone, correct? Chairperson Sigel—No, this is an LDR. Mr. Matthews —I'm a little slow on the uptake, tonight here, Andy, you said that it could be 30 feet? 2 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Frost—The way the ordinance reads is if the fence is within the setback area, within the setback, it has to be limited to 6 foot. Anything that's not within the setback, the ordinance would allow anything that's an accessory structure to have a 30-foot height. This is a concern that I've posed, I don't think we'll ever see anyone coming in with a 30-foot high fence. Mr. Matthews —Does that translate to, if he comes closer than the setback, it has to be less than 30 feet? Mr. Frost—No, as long as, as in the front yard, where you have to have a minimum, I think it's 25 foot, as long as he's set back from the road right of way line, where on a 50 foot wide road, it would be essentially 50 foot back from the center line of the road, assuming the centerline was placed in the center, as it should be, and that's not always the case when they put roads in. As long as it stays behind that setback, it can be up to 30 foot. I'm not sure if I'm following your question, or if I've answered your question. Mr. Matthews —And I'm not sure I'm following your answer, I'm sorry. He wants it five feet from the line. Mr. Frost—Yeah, he's going to be encroaching in the setback area. Mr. Matthews —So his restriction then is 6 feet maximum. Mr. Frost—Six feet, right. Mr. Ellsworth—Across the front, Mr. Matthews —Yes, across the front. Mr. Ellsworth - most of the side length is... Mr. Matthews —I understand that. Chairperson Sigel—The fence along the side also is too close to the side lot. Mr. Matthews —Is that restricted? Mr. Frost—Until the point that it reaches the backyard, which is that line behind the principal building, and then it can go within three feet, I believe. Mr. Matthews —Is the side yard height of the fence limited to...? Mr. Frost—Six foot, as long as it's in that 15-foot setback, from the road right of way line to the back line of the house. 3 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —So in other words, the highest he can go is six foot... because the deer are going to know that they can go over the six foot jump. Mr. Frost—We've issued similar variances, Dick, before you came on the board, for deer fencing. I guess some of the powers to be at Cornell feel that eight foot is the minimum. Mr. Roswech -Yeah, anything less than eight foot is sort of like a gate. Mr. Matthews —So, it's probably not within my realm of consideration, but, if Cornell in its esteemed educated outlook, say a deer, to prevent a deer from coming into crops, it has to be eight foot tall... Mr. Frost—I don't think that's a guarantee that all deer won't make it over eight foot. Mr. Matthews —So these folks are going to build a fence that's six feet high. Mr. Frost—No. Chairperson Sigel—They're requesting eight foot. Mr. Frost—Otherwise they wouldn't be here. Mr. Matthews —Ah, OK, I'm finally clear. I'm a little slow tonight. Mr. Roswech -Yes, after some consultation with Paul Curtis at Cornell, his recommendation was that anything less than an eight foot fence is, you might as well not even put up a fence. Eight feet will keep ninety percent or more of the deer out. Of course, nothing is... Mr. Frost—This board may be seeing Cornell for a ten-foot high fence... Chairperson Sigel—According to your drawing, it's going to be wooden posts with wire mesh. Ms. Anthony - Wire mesh, yes. Chairperson Sigel—Any other questions, right now? OK, let's open the public hearing, does anyone wish to speak. Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—Yes, ma'am? If you could come to the end if you don't mind, and please just begin with your name and address for the record. 4 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mrs. Solat- OK, I'm Paula Solat, I live At 103 Drew Rd, which is right across from their property. My husband couldn't make it, but because we were here a month ago, I felt it was important to comeback, but we do not have any objections to their variance. I just wanted to make that clear. Mr. Ellsworth—Good, thanks. Chairperson Sigel—Thank you very much. Sir,please? Mr. Utter- My name is Mark Utter, I live at 109 Drew Rd, which is directly across from Todd and Melissa. I have no objections. I would like to see the ... garden and everything else continue that Katie Stearns had started over there. I just wanted to say that I have no objections and I think it's a great thing. Chairperson Sigel—Thank you very much. Anyone else? OK, if not, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—And I do not think we need to do a SEQR for this one. So, if there are no further questions or comments? Mr. Niefer—So, we're voting on an eight-foot fence, that's going to be how many feet back from the road right of way? Chairperson Sigel—Five feet back from the road right of way. Mr. Matthews —Which is 15 feet from the edge of the pavement approximately? Ms. Anthony - Approximately. Mr. Roswech - Approximately, yes. Mr. Frost—If this was, again Jim, if this was a six-foot high fence, other than telling the people that the Town could plow it down if they wanted to,people often put it right up to the edge of the property, even though it's in the right of way. And the town actually tries to exercise care when they plow. Chairperson Sigel—OK. I will move to grant the appeal of Todd Roswech and Melisa Anthony, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXVII, Section 270-223 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to have a fence no greater than eight feet in height at 102 Drew Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-34.29, Low Density Residential Zone. With the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied, and with the following conditions, that the fence be no closer than five feet 5 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES from the front lot line, be no closer than 20 feet from the side lot line, that the fence run no longer than 80 feet along the front lot line. Any others? Mr. Niefer—The 100 feet depth? Chairperson Sigel—I'm not really that concerned about the depth. Mr. Niefer—OK, could we specify, as it's worded right now, it's a fence, no definition of the nature of the fence. Chairperson Sigel—OK, with the requirement that the fence be substantially as drawn be the applicant with wooden posts and wire mesh. Mr. Niefer—And that if the area not be use for growing of produce for over a year, that the fence be removed. Mr. Frost—What if they wanted to plant flowers not vegetables? I mean, we've had applicants come in because they wanted to plant flowers not vegetables. Mr. Niefer—OK. Mr. Frost—It was just a suggestion. Mr. Matthews —Deer like flowers, too. Chairperson Sigel—I think it would be a little bit hard to... I agree with your sentiment, but... Mr. Niefer—You go past some other fenced in areas that haven't been used, and there's dilapidated fences fallen partially down, and I don't think it's necessarily conducive to the interests of the neighborhood to have a poorly maintained fence around an area that's no longer used for its intended purpose, but if there's no second to my amendment, why, it'll die. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, I'm not... I don't see the need myself. OK. Second, to the motion? Mr. Matthews —Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 018: Todd Roswech and Melisa Anthony, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-34.29 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Dick Matthews. 6 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Todd Roswech and Melisa Anthony, Appellants, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXVII, Section 270-223 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to have a fence no greater than eight feet in height at 102 Drew Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-34.29, Low Density Residential Zone FINDINGS: The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS: 1. The fence shall be no closer than five feet from the front lot line. 2. The fence shall be no closer than twenty feet from the side lot line. 3. The fence shall run no longer than eighty feet along the front lot line. 4. The fence shall be substantially as drawn by the applicant with wooden posts and wire mesh. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Mr. Frost—I'll just read the section of the ordinance for the board for the future. This used to be old section 65 under our old ordinance. This new section says "the provision of the chapter,"which is the zoning ordinance chapter of the new Town Code, "shall not apply to fences, walls, not over six feet high above natural grade, terraces, steps,porches, patios et cetera." So, all the requirements of the ordinance, if it's no higher than six foot, they can do what they want. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Roswech - Thank you. Chairperson Sigel—You're all set. APPEAL of Rocco Lucente, Appellant, requesting variances from the requirements of Article XXV, Section 207-205 and Article XII, Section 270-106 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to modify existing non-conforming multiple residences with the construction of new front porch roofs located at Winston Court/Sprucewood Apartments, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70-3-9, —14, 70-4-1, -6, 70-5-1 and -6, 7 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Multiple Residential Zone. Said properties were created in 1959 in Agricultural zones, later to be rezoned Residential and then Multiple residential. Among other items the building's front yard setbacks are less than the required 50 feet. Mr. Frost—We kind of advertised this two ways just to be careful that we didn't omit anything. So, it could be a variance for something non-conforming essentially. Chairperson Sigel—Or an area variance for the setback? OK. Good evening, sir. Please start with your name and address. Mr. Miller- My name is Don Miller, I'm representing Rocco Lucente, I live at 5830 Seneca Road, Trumansburg, NY. Chairperson Sigel—Could you give us a brief overview of what Mr. Lucente is proposing to do? Mr. Miller- These buildings have existing Concrete Front steps with a slab at the top approximately five feet out from the building, and there are constant problems keeping snow and ice off these slabs. You have to throw so much salt up there, we have a hard time trying to keep them clear. The peaked porch roof would keep the ice and snow off these front slabs, and sometimes the water splashes into the entry door if they leave the door open. The will be designed to look like balconies, although they would not have any access to them. There will be a railing on the top of the roof. Mr. Frost—That has been before the planning board as well, and you have a copy of that in your packet. Chairperson Sigel—How far out will the roof project? Mr. Miller- Five feet. Chairperson Sigel—Five feet? Mr. Matthews —Five feet from? Mr. Miller- From the building. Mr. Matthews —From the building? Mr. Miller- Essentially, we're just putting a roof over top of the front slabs, not over the steps, and then we can divert the water to the sides instead of... the roof above three stories, we have to go around every week and knock down icicles, because the roof slopes towards the slabs. So we have a problem keeping the icicles down. This roof would go to the sides and take that water and ice to the sides away from the steps. 8 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—It's not going to cover the steps, though, right,just the landing? Mr. Miller- Just the landing at the top. Mr. Matthews —And that will keep the ice off the landing, being just over the landing, not taking into account the wind or the driving rain or snow? Mr. Miller- Well, if we have a blowing snowstorm, we have to shovel the snow off, basically the ice melting off the roof drips down and it builds up and you just can't keep enough salt on there to keep it clear. We've really had problems with this. Chairperson Sigel—Seems pretty straightforward. Mr. Ellsworth—Yeah. Chairperson Sigel—Looks like the planning board acted as lead agency so we shouldn't have to do anything with that I believe. OK, open the public hearing at this point. Does anyone wish to speak in this case? Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—If not, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—And we need to decide how we're going to grant this. [pause] Chairperson Sigel—Well, I imagine the setbacks are going to vary somewhat. Mr. Miller- It's approximately 30 feet, for each building to the porch roof will be approximately 30 feet. Mr. Ellsworth—That's the closes one, they vary all over. Ms. Balestra- They do vary. Chairperson Sigel—We could just grant a variance under section 205, non-conforming structures to do what they want to do now, and nothing else. Rather than just some kind of blanket setback variance which would permit other modifications potentially. Mr. Dubow- You could do it that way, or you could grant the setback variance but it would be specific just to the structures. 9 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Just to allow the... Mr. Dubow - Each one of these technically is a separate lot, so you would have to grant whatever approvals you are going to grant individually with respect to all eighteen of them. You can make your action collectively, but it would apply to each of the eighteen, and you theoretically have the right to differ your approvals with respect to each one of those if you felt that was appropriate. They are all separate tax parcels. Chairperson Sigel—They're not all... it doesn't look like Andy listed them all. Mr. Miller- I have all the building numbers right here if you need them. Ms. Balestra- Thank you. They're also listed on the plans, too. Each tax parcel number. Mr. Dubow - And actually on the SEQR, or on the Planning Board resolution, they are sort of abbreviated, but they've made 70-3-9 to 14 and then 70-4-1 to 6. They total, I think, the aggregate number. Chairperson Sigel—OK. OK, I will move to grant the appeal of Rocco Lucente, requesting variances from the requirements of article XXV, Section 207-205 and Article XII, Section 270-106 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to modify existing non-conforming multiple residences with the construction of new front porch roofs located at Winston Court/Sprucewood Apartments, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70-3-9 through 14, 70-4- 1 through 6, 70-5-1 through 6, Multiple Residence Zone. With the finding that the requirement for an area variance have been satisfied, with the condition that only the porch roofs as drawn on the applicant's plans be permitted to be attached to each of these eighteen buildings. Second? Mr. Matthews —Second. ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 019: Rocco Lucente, Appellant, Winston Court/Sprucewood Apartments, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70-3-9, —14, 70-4-1, -6, 70-5-1 and -6 MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Dick Matthews. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Rocco Lucente, Appellant, requesting variances from the requirements of Article XXV, Section 207-205 and Article XII, Section 270-106 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to modify existing non- conforming multiple residences with the construction of new front porch roofs located at Winston Court/Sprucewood Apartments, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70-3-9, —14, 70-4-1, -6, 70-5-1 and -6, Multiple Residential Zone. FINDINGS: The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. 10 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES CONDITIONS: 1. Only the porch roofs as drawn on the applicant's plans shall be permitted to be attached to these eighteen buildings. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Miller- Thank you very much. Chairperson Sigel—Thanks. APPEAL of David Mountin,Appellant, requesting an approval under Article IX, Section 270-69 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to build a detached garage with a dwelling unit(in addition to the primary dwelling unit) at 738 Elm Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.222, Medium Density Residential Zone. A variance from the requirements of Section 270-70 is also being requested to construct said garage/apartment with a building height of 22 +feet(15 foot height limit). Chairperson Sigel—Good evening. Mr. Mountin - Good evening. Dave Mountin. Is this on? Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, it's just mainly recording. Mr. Mountin - 274 Gray Rd, Ithaca, NY. Tonight I'm seeking a special approval for a detached garage and a variance for 21 feet. My wife and I are planning to build a home here in the Town of Ithaca this summer. We are also hoping to build a detached 24 by 32 foot garage, single level garage with a 10/12 pitch which would have apartments upstairs with an outside entrance, but it would be a single level garage, 8 foot ceiling with a 10/12 pitch and the top of the 10/12 pitch is 21 feet. The house is detached by 10 feet from the house, excuse me the garage is 10 feet from the house. 11 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Dubow - I would point out that the application indicates that the variance being sought is a use variance, and I believe the only variance in addition to the special approval they are looking for, is for the height variation, which would make that an area variance so the standards to be applied would be the area variance standards and not the use variance standards. I think Andy agrees with that. Mr. Frost—Yeah, when we were talking about this earlier, I was thinking of a different case that's not here right now. Chairperson Sigel—So you, what's the square footage of the apartment? Mr. Mountin - 24 by 32. Same as the footing for the garage. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so it will occupy pretty much that entire space. Mr. Mountin -Peaked roof with slant walls. Chairperson Sigel—What's the square footage of the main house? Mr. Mountin - Two floors, it's a story and a half house, 2132. Mr. Frost—For the board's information, under the new zoning ordinance. Past zoning ordinances for people like Jim and Harry, I guess Ron isn't here, is our old ordinance didn't allow a dwelling unit in a separate building. Our new ordinance does. But it allows a separate dwelling unit by special approval or special permit. Mr. Ellsworth—And there are some limitations. Mr. Frost—So the apartment is a special approval because that's what the ordinance requires for a detached apartment. And the variance for the height, because an accessory structure is limited to 15 foot in height. They need a variance for that since he's proposing 22-foot height. Chairperson Sigel—There's still a requirement for the accessory building being 50%. Mr. Frost—Yes, good point. Chairperson Sigel—Which this appears to meet. So it appears to be well under 50% of the main unit. Mr. Ellsworth—There has to be adequate parking for both buildings. Chairperson Sigel—I would presume. It's a pretty big lot. 12 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Mountin - It's a 2.7 acre lot, and we're doing a circle drive. We're planning on it being a one-bedroom apartment, so there won't be more than one or two renters for sure. Chairperson Sigel—OK, looks pretty straightforward. Any questions or comments? Mr. Niefer—As I recall, the roads into this area are private roads, is that correct? Mr. Mountin - Yes, sir. Mr. Frost—This has gone through the planning and zoning boards in the past. Chairperson Sigel—It's essentially a long shared driveway. Mr. Dubow - I believe these are the conditions that apply under 270-69, that ahs a whole set of conditions that are attached to the accessory structure, and then there are the general conditions that you have that are also, I think you would have to agree with as well with respect to general special approvals. Chairperson Sigel—OK, we'll open the public hearing at this time. Anyone wish to speak? Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—If not, we'll close the public hearing. And we do have an environmental assessment form for this. Christine, anything you'd like to add? Ms. Balestra-Nope,planning staff had no concerns with this. Mr. Matthews —Pretty simple. Chairperson Sigel—I'll move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of David Mountin. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second it. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 020 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : David Mountin, 738 Elm Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1- 28.222, Medium Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. 13 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of David Mountin. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK. And, I will move to grant the appeal of David Mountin requesting approval under Article IX, Section 270-69 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to build a detached garage with a dwelling unit (in addition to the primary dwelling unit) at 738 Elm Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.222, Medium Density Residential Zone. And in addition, grant a variance from the requirements of Section 270-70 to construct said garage/apartment with a building height not to exceed 22 feet where there is a 15-foot height limit. With the finding that in the case of the second dwelling unit, the requirements under 270-69C have been satisfied as well as the general requirements for special approval and in the case of the height variance, the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied by the applicant. And with the condition that the garage and apartment unit be constructed as indicated on the applicant's plans, and sited where the applicant has indicated on his property. Second? Mr. Niefer—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 021: David Mountin, 738 Elm Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.222, Medium Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Jim Niefer. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of David Mountin, Appellant, requesting an approval under Article IX, Section 270-69 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to build a detached garage with a dwelling unit (in addition to the primary dwelling unit) at 738 Elm Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.222, Medium Density Residential Zone. And in addition, grant a variance from the requirements of Section 270-70 to construct said garage/apartment with a building height not to exceed 22 feet where there is a 15-foot height limit. FINDINGS: 14 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 18, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES 1. In the case of the second dwelling unit, the requirements under 270-69C have been satisfied, as well as the requirements for special approval. 2. In the case of the height variance, the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied by the applicant. CONDITIONS: The garage and apartment unit shall be constructed as indicated on the applicant's plans, and sited where the applicant has indicated on his property. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Mountin - Thank you. Good night. General comments ensue. Chairperson Sigel adjourns the meeting at 7:35 p.m. Kirk Sigel, Chairperson John Coakley, Deputy Town Clerk 15