Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2005-07-18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, JULY 18, 2005 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Kirk Sigel, Chairperson; Harry Ellsworth, Board Member; Dick Matthews, Board Member; Ronald Krantz, Board Member; Andy Frost, Director of Building/Zoning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town. ABSENT: Jim Niefer, Board Member; Christine Balestra, Planner. OTHERS PRESENT: Peter Massicci, 422 Troy Rd; Steve Lucente, 110 Willow Creek Pt. Rd.; M. Rocco Lucente, 110 Willow Creek Pt. Rd.; David Tyler, 6396 Rice Rd, Trumansburg. Chairperson Sigel opened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Chairperson Sigel — Good evening, welcome to the July meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of appeals. Tonight, we only have two appeals, that of Stephen Lucente, and that of Peter Massicci, and we will be taking them in that order. APPEAL of Stephen Lucente, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to allow an existing two-family home to be maintained with a front yard building setback of 24 feet 3 inches (25 feet required) and a west side yard building setback of 9 feet 6 inches (15 feet required) located at 12 Sanctuary Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 73-1-9.7, Medium Density Residential Zone. Chairperson Sigel — Mr. Lucente? And if you could [interrupted by brief discussion of the lighting]... if you could just begin with your name and address for the record. Mr. Lucente - Steve Lucente, 110 Willow Creek Point Road, Ithaca. Chairperson Sigel—And, an overview, oh, I'm sorry, go ahead. Mr. Tyler- I'm David Tyler, attorney, 6396 Rice Road, Trumansburg. Chairperson Sigel —And if you could just give us a brief overview of how the house got to be where it was on the lot, and why you're requesting these variances. Mr. Tyler-Perhaps, maybe, I can address this and Mr. Lucente can chime in. Chairperson Sigel—Sure. Mr. Tyler - The problem came to light a little over a month ago, when, in the process of marketing this, we had a survey done, and the surveyor came back and said you've got a TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES couple of minor setback problems here which you need to have addressed, so based on that, the application is here before you. I guess the question I have, would you like, there are two separate setback problems, would you like to have us address them separately or together? Chairperson Sigel—Together is fine. Mr. Tyler- What I'm going to do is address first the one in front, and maybe Mr. Lucente will bring some photographs up so can see what it looks like in the flesh if you are not familiar with the property. The front setback is supposed to be 25 feet and we missed that by six inches, when the road right of way was located, it's something that was not picked up when the property was constructed. I guess I will briefly address the issues required under the statute. I think I would submit to this particular variation is de minimus, really doesn't affect the character of the neighborhood in any way whatsoever, as Mr. Lucente explained in his application, the alternate method would change the appearance of the building and be quite expensive. I think I would argue that this is not a substantial variation and certainly has no adverse environmental impact. I guess the only thing that goes against us is it's self-created, because we built the building, and put it improperly located on the lot. I think that's all I have to say about that. Steve, do you want to add anything in there about? I guess I would add one other thing, you each have a survey there, the property, which I actually just received this morning, the surveyor has been ill and was able to get it to me this morning. Given the existing public utility easements that run through the property, the buildable area on this lot is pretty restricted as you can see, and it was a tight fit. So, that's I guess with respect to that. Are there any questions on this particular request? Chairperson Sigel—You were just addressing the front yard setback at this point? Mr. Tyler- I'm just addressing the front yard at this point. Chairperson Sigel —No, I don't. Anyone have any comments on the front? No, I don't have any comments on the front. Mr. Tyler - OK, then let me address the second, which is the side yard setback, and quite frankly, but for one major factor, I would probably have told my client to get a chain saw out and take the deck off. The deck, if it was less than four feet above the ground, the setbacks wouldn't apply, but it does here, and I guess maybe you might want to distribute copies of those photographs. Again, addressing the factors, I don't think it has any undesirable change in the neighborhood. I suppose there is a method which as I say, we could destroy the deck and re-do it. I would be not candid if I didn't say that a third of the setback is not possibly substantial, but I will address an issue that I think maybe mitigates that and maybe even negates it. And finally I don't think there is much adverse environmental impact, and again, it was self-created. The saving grace, and I will argue, no harm, no foul. You have a copy of the survey, and attached to it, I've taken a copy of the subdivision map and laid out the 20-foot wide easements for sewer that abut the building which you see on the first part of the main map of the lot. And the purpose as I 2 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES understand setbacks in law, is you are to avoid having buildings too close to each other on separate lots. And that's the primary purpose of them in terms of having a feeling of things being really jammed together. Given the location of those easements, it's not going to be possible to locate a structure anywhere near the one that's got the problem with the setback and in fact, this afternoon, I spoke with the owner of the abutting property, and he indicated to me he had no problem with the application. He had received notice of it, and had no problems with the application. So, my argument on the second one is no harm, no foul, because the property immediately adjacent is not going to be buildable except outside the restrictions of the sewer easements that were granted to the town a number of years ago. Steve, do you have anything to add,just general, how this came about or whatever? Mr. Lucente - Construction happened some years ago, and I can't honestly recall what happened, but it looks like a combination of errors, misinterpretation of side-yard setback or just the, it was a mistake. We have no rightful explanation for it, what's happened. Mr. Barney—If you look, this water main on the west side, David, where is the centerline of the easement? Mr. Tyler- The water line or the sewer line? Mr. Barney—On the west side, the water main. Mr. Tyler- The water main behind the... Mr. Barney —It shows the water main running north south right adjacent to the Westside of the property line on the survey. Do you know where the centerline of that easement is? Mr. Tyler - I do not. I would — given that the easements that the town took in the past, they were usually 20 feet, so it would be 10 feet on either side, so the easement would run right very close to the edge of the property there. Mr. Barney - And you think it's a twenty foot easement? Mr. Tyler - I have the easements —that was —the water easements which were done back in 95 I believe were 20 foot in width. Mr. Barney — It's 20 foot construction, and then 10 foot permanent isn't it, or is it my, is it 20 foot easement. Mr. Tyler - It says easement 20 feet in width, centerline which is described, and then describes the centerline as being the pipe. That was not actually this one. That was the one on Lucente's, I don't have the one on Rocco's. Let me look a little further. Yes, I do, and it's also 20 foot in width. So actually, technically Mr. Lucente should have 3 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES joined in that easement because it comes in over on his land, but we acknowledge it's 20 foot wide. Mr. Matthews —Correct me if I'm wrong, this is the picture of the property, 12 Sanctuary drive, is that correct? Mr. Frost—That will have been taken by my office. Mr. Matthews —That's it? Mr. Frost—Yes. Mr. Matthews —And this is a new home, newly constructed home? Mr. Lucente - It's about 7 or 8 years old. Mr. Matthews —And the deck was put on 7 or 8 years ago? Mr. Lucente - Yes. Mr. Matthews — And it's been in the neighborhood since then, people have lived there, it's been occupied before this? Mr. Tyler- It's been occupied for 8 years. Seven or 8 years. Mr. Matthews —And do you know if the previous owner put that deck on? Mr. Lucente - I am the builder. Mr. Matthews —You are the builder, you are the gentleman that put the deck on? Mr. Lucente - Yes. It was done by my contractor, but, I was the owner. Mr. Matthews —You were the one responsible for having that deck put on? Mr. Lucente - Yes. Mr. Matthews —May I ask, did you inquire about the setback at that time? Mr. Lucente - I thought I was careful, I can't honestly recall the situation. Mr. Matthews —It's a six-foot mistake, I just wonder why. Mr. Frost—If I may just jump in here, I think Mr. Lucente may have been relying on his contractor. I think the unique thing about the parcel is that it is at end of the cul-de-sac and there is basically green space beyond that as indicated in the picture, and I'm not 4 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES making any excuses for anybody in this case, but you know, often times if you've got a property line and construction going on next door, I think people tend to be a little bit more conscious of the other building. Again, I'm not making any excuses for anyone. Mr. Matthews —Yeah, I wouldn't want you to go into that area. Mr. Lucente is the one who is the contractor, so he is the one who is ultimately responsible. Mr. Frost—Yes. Mr. Matthews —Just for the record. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Chairperson Sigel —Any other questions, comments? In this case I feel a little frustrated because I feel that clearly I would not have granted this variance had you requested it before the house was built. I mean it's, I suspect you would agree that it is perfectly reasonable in this case to stay within the setbacks on this lot. But on the other hand I believe that it was an honest mistake, and I personally I think you do meet the criteria for a variance in this case given the history of the situation. So, that's my... Mr. Matthews —I'm more than frustrated. I don't want to point any fingers, I just don't like what I see, and I for one am not going to be in favor of granting a variance in this case, because I think responsible people should have seen this, and I think we're being taken advantage of, that's my assessment. Chairperson Sigel—Did you build any of the other homes along this road? Mr. Lucente - Yes, I did, I built them all. Chairperson Sigel—All of them? Mr. Lucente - Yes. Chairperson Sigel — And to your knowledge, none of the other ones have any deficiencies? Mr. Lucente - That is correct, I don't believe they do. I think I have an excellent record with the Town of Ithaca, I built a lot of homes there, and this one unfortunately... Chairperson Sigel — Well, I think, to me, at least, the applicant having built the other homes on the road, and I don't see any reason to believe that he deliberately tried to take advantage of this setback. Mr. Frost—I would actually vouch for that. I am not going to vouch for the mistake, but I don't think it was done intentionally. Mr. Matthews — I would buy that argument, had this been the first or second home he built. But he's had sufficient experience over the years building houses and knowing the 5 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES codes, that I just can't understand how this slipped by him. I've made mistakes in my life, I'm not saying I haven't, but with the experience that this gentleman have, I just don't see how this happened. Chairperson Sigel — Any other questions or comments? We have no environmental assessment for this, so, thank you John, we will open the public hearing at this point. Anyone wish to speak? If not, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opened and closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. Mr. Krantz—You know, the deck would not have to be entirely replaced would it? Mr. Tyler-Pardon? Mr. Krantz—The deck would not have to be entirely replaced. Mr. Tyler- Can you address that? Mr. Lucente - Yeah. Yes, if we were to reconfigure the deck in order for the form to meet setback, the deck would have to be destroyed. Mr. Frost—I met with Mr. Lucente out there and offered him the alternative of removing the deck rather than going to the board. And looking at it, even in an attempt to lower it to bring it into compliance, if a portion of it were within three foot of the ground surface, so that any portion of the deck would be 15 feet from the property line and no higher than three foot, it would be difficult. He would have to take it down. I'm not saying he shouldn't have to do that, I'm saying that to try and mitigate this, he would essentially have to take it down. Because when you come out of the door that accesses that deck, you're pretty high right off the ground and other than a couple of steps, then you are beyond the side of the house. Mr. Tyler - I should add that this came to light when the survey was done and the property is under contract for sale at present, so that your decision obviously impacts that contract. Mr. Lucente - I should also add that this deck is the main entry to the house, and if we were to drop it down to the 30 inches, to the 36 inches it would put a step right at the entry, and that wouldn't be desirable. It wouldn't be as safe as it is now, with the steps further removed from the entrance, now we have a nice flat approach to the entrance, and I think that is a better situation for the occupant. Mr. Frost—It's your father that owns the adjoining land? Mr. Lucente - Yes. 6 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Frost—He's not responded, I'm not aware that he's responded yet. Have you talked to him about this at all? Mr. Tyler - What's that? Mr. Frost—Have you talked to Rocco about this at all? Mr. Tyler - I spoke with Rocco this afternoon, he said he had no objection to the application. I gave him a copy of the map that you have there. Mr. Barney — May I ask a slightly unrelated question? In the back it looks like there is something from this property that is over the sewer main? Mr. Tyler- Those are a set of steps, yes. Mr. Barney—Is there any license or anything in existence for that? Mr. Tyler - No there's not. Basically if you have to come in there, the steps are going to be gone. Mr. Lucente - They can be easily removed. Mr. Barney — Typically what we have done in situations like this in the past is you have the Town, for title purposes... Mr. Tyler-Pardon? Mr. Barney — I said, typically what we've done in the past is the town has granted a license to maintain the encroachment, because it's clearly an encroachment, I'm not sure but what the building encroaches too, because there are steps. And I assume the sewer main is a 20-foot easement again, centered on the main? Mr. Tyler- That's a question. Mr. Barney — So probably the building itself encroaches somewhat into the easement area. Chairperson Sigel—Certainly on the west side it looks like. So, while you're moving the house, you might as well move the step, the deck over. I mean, it's pretty minor at that point, right? [laughter] Actually, you'd have to reduce the depth of the house, because you can't come forward any. Mr. Barney—The title person has not raised this for the buyer? Or hasn't see it yet? Mr. Tyler- Not that I'm aware of, nope. 7 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—He hasn't seen the survey yet, has he? Mr. Tyler - He hasn't seen this, no he hasn't, that's correct, the map just arrived in my office this morning. Mr. Barney—He may raise it, or she may raise it as the case may be. Mr. Matthews —Excuse me John, I didn't catch it, are you suggesting that the piece over the sewer line is in violation, too? Mr. Barney — There's an easement, that usually, I haven't seen, obviously, the paperwork, but I am assuming that it is similar to what our other easements are. And we have either ten or twenty foot wide easements centered on the pipeline, which means we would have ten feet on each side of that sewer line that should not have anything in it. Mr. Matthews —But there has been no easement granted, is that what you're saying? Mr. Barney — Well, no there has been an easement granted, I assume for the sewer line, but there has been nothing granted to have the encroachment on it. But this is not an uncommon situation in the Town, this happens from time to time, and what the Town Board has almost uniformly done, at the request of the landowner found in that position is give them what we call a license, which is basically permission to keep it there until the town tells him to take it off, for all intents and purposes. Mr. Matthews —So again, has that been done? Mr. Barney —No, I don't think so here, yet. I have a feeling that we're just discovering these little problems as a result of a current survey, today. Or, survey in the last few weeks. And that's typically how they come to light. We get a survey done and it shows an encroachment that nobody really was aware of before then. Chairperson Sigel—That's something the Town Board does, not? Mr. Barney— Something the Town Board does, but if you were of a mind to consider the request in a favorable light, I would probably request that it be conditioned on entering into a license agreement with the Town for the maintenance of the piece that sticks across the sewer main. Just to clean the tile up for the next time around. Mr. Matthews — So to recap what you're saying, along with this 15-foot problem, there are two violations here. Mr. Barney—Violation is not a word I would use, it's an encroachment. Mr. Matthews —OK, soften it up. Mr. Barney—Yeah. 8 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —And the person responsible for those quote violations is the builder, the gentleman before us tonight, is that correct? Mr. Barney — That's correct, but, and I'm not in the business of defending, or pushing one way, but this is an interesting lot to build on because, presumably, the sewer main was there, the water main was there, to the north of it, the water main to the west of it was there, it's probably somewhat difficult to place a house of roughly comparable size to what the rest of the neighborhood has on that lot with these physical constraints. So, in a way, this is a lot better than it could have been. We could have found the house running across the sewer main or something like that. Mr. Matthews —But nevertheless, it was violated. Mr. Barney — Nevertheless, there is no right at the moment to have that encroachment, that is correct. Mr. Matthews — I'm concerned about that. There's two of them, and we have an experienced builder on our hands here. Don't know why that is, I mean, you're an experienced builder sir, how did this happen? May I ask you that? Mr. Lucente - Well, I have been very straight with you that we have made a mistake. I wasn't aware of this particular one until you were. Chairperson Sigel—He did get the east side of the house right. Mr. Matthews —Pardon? Chairperson Sigel—He did get the east side of the house right. Mr. Barney—With 2/10 of a foot to spare. Mr. Matthews — [laughter] One out of three's OK, right? Chairperson Sigel —One out of four. OK, any other comments or questions? All right, I will move to grant the appeal of Stephen Lucente requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to allow an existing two-family home to be maintained with a front yard building setback of no less than 24 and a west side building setback of no less than 9 feet located at 12 Sanctuary Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 73-1-9.7, Medium Density Residential Zone. With the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied by the applicant, and with the following conditions: The first that no further structure be built within either of the setbacks requires, that only the current side deck and current —is that a front deck area that encroaches? Mr. Tyler- That's a front entrance, is that a front entrance? 9 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Lucente - Yeah. Chairperson Sigel—OK. And only the current front entrance way be allowed to encroach within the required setbacks; and, second, that this approval, or this motion is conditioned upon the applicant receiving, how would you phrase it? Mr. Barney —Entering into a license agreement with the town for the maintenance of the rear steps, and is that a deck on the back there? Mr. Lucente - Yes. Mr. Barney —Rear steps and a deck in what appears to be the sewer main easement area running east and west across the property. Chairperson Sigel—What about the house being within the ten feet? Mr. Barney — I don't think the house is within ten feet, I'd have to scale it. I think it's really that little nose created by the... Mr. Ellsworth—Northwest corner. Mr. Barney—The northwest corner, you think that's within ten feet? Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, the northwest corner looks shorter than the 9.5 on the side. Mr. Frost—I have a question for John Barney. When guys do a survey, are they plotting the sewer lines by way of a survey or a map that a construction of the sewer that is on file, or do they actually know where it is placed? My question being, how do you know the sewer line is there, and is the survey typically showing the exact location of the survey or the location of the line on paper? Mr. Barney — It depends, I think, on what kind of machinery they have. Some of them have metal detectors so they can pick up some of these mains. Now some of these mains aren't metal anymore, but, I think a sewer main is still cast iron, but a water main may be PVC or something. Otherwise they're probably doing it based on the survey that went with the easement originally. Mr. Frost — I know a lot of road right of ways, assuming the centerline of the road is actually the centerline of the road right of way. Mr. Barney—And it's not. Mr. Frost—Right. 10 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel — We could just say any portion of the house that might encroach within the easement. Mr. Barney—Yup. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Second? Mr. Krantz—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? Opposed? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 038: Stephen Lucente, 12 Sanctuary Dr., Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 73-1-9.7, Medium Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ron Krantz. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Stephen Lucente, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to allow an existing two-family home to be maintained with a front yard building setback of no less than 24 feet and a west side yard building setback of not less than 9 feet, located at 12 Sanctuary Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 73-1-9.7, Medium Density Residential Zone. FINDINGS: The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied by the applicant. CONDITIONS- 1. ONDITIONS:1. No further structure shall be built within either of the setbacks required; only the current side deck and only the current front entrance way shall be allowed to encroach within the required setbacks. 2. The applicant shall enter into a license agreement with the Town of Ithaca for the maintenance of the rear steps and deck, and any portion of house that might encroach, in the sewer main easement area running east and west across the property. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz NAYS: Matthews The MOTION was declared to be carried. Mr. Tyler- Thank you very much. Mr. Lucente - Thank you very much. 11 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Tyler- We'll be back before the Town Board. Mr. Barney—They meet August 2nd, August first, the first Monday of August. Mr. Tyler- And How much lead time do we need for our application? Mr. Barney —Probably, I would write the letter in the next couple days, and if you give me a call David, I can give you the form we've used in the past. Mr. Tyler- I appreciate it, thank you. APPEAL of Peter Massicci, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-70 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to permit the construction of a single-family residence with a building height of 41 + feet (36 foot height limitation) located at 18 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-9, Medium Density Residential Zone. Chairperson Sigel—If you could begin with your name and address please? Mr. Massicci -Pete Massicci, 422 Troy Rd. Chairperson Sigel — and I guess I would ask you maybe right off whether your proposed house is within the criteria set forth in this letter we have from the design committee for Saunders Road? They've requested that the house not be any higher than 3 feet above either of your neighbors. Mr. Massicci - Well, the way we set it up is my one neighbor, who I have a letter from, Paul Lucente, his house is a little bit higher, so we were going to go off of his house, and what we're trying to do is get my main roof line, I don't know if from that picture there, the front view of it, the main roof line wasn't going to be more than 3 feet over the top of his main roof line. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Barney—You say was not, or was? Mr. Massicci - It's not to exceed that three foot, so if we were to go right off of his foundation, my house should be probably approximately 2 feet above his roof line. Chairperson Sigel—So the main roof, so you're not counting then, the little portion? Mr. Massicci - That little peak? No, no, we're talking about that main roof line, the long roof line. 12 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel — And the design committee, I'm sure, I assume has seen your exact plans, and are aware that there's that portion that sticks up higher? Mr. Massicci - And that's what I tried to make clear, that that little peak, it's only a little three foot air that has that little point, but that was one of the issues I wanted to make sure they understood, that the main roof line, and we talked about that, and that's the line we're going to go off of. Mr. Matthews —This is across from Chase Farms development, is that correct? Mr. Massicci - That's correct. Mr. Matthews —If my memory serves me, we had a similar request on Saunders Road, I believe its number 6 on this last page, and the builder was, I believe, Heritage Builders, and he was seeking a variance 4 feet beyond the variance as I recall. Chairperson Sigel—That could be. Mr. Matthews — And this board agreed to that they stay level with the houses on either side. Mr. Frost — I think that situation among others, if my memory serves me, the design committee wasn't approving the design of that house, so there is more involved... Mr. Matthews —They were concerned about the height of the house? Mr. Frost—But they were also not approving the design of the house and the builder felt he had the right to build what he wanted anyhow, so there was a little bit more that was going on. Mr. Matthews —OK, the dispute came down to the height of the house, and they kept it at the height of the other houses. Chairperson Sigel—I don't recall. I do remember discussions about the height relative to either neighbor. Mr. Matthews — So then my follow-up question is, if the neighbors disputed the higher house, as it were, at that time, why now, are they relenting? Mr. Massicci - Well, I was part of that, I put money in for that, for the lawyer fees, to fight that Heritage, and it's like you were saying, he didn't show them his plans or anything to the committee, and I've been upfront with the committee right from the start in trying to get this whole thing approved, and his roof line is higher, but the issue was his foundation in the front was fully exposed, and so what they made him do was, he had a walkout door in the front of his house, and also a walkout in the back. The design committee didn't like people driving down the road and seeing this door in the basement 13 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES exposed right to the road. So what they did was make him put up a retaining wall, because at the time we couldn't do anything about the height because the house was already built. So what they made him do was put this retaining wall up around the exit door on the front of the house so it didn't look so, Mr. Matthews —That's number 8, the third house from Troy Rd, East King Road? Mr. Massicci -No, I think that's the far one. Mr. Matthews —You're talking about the far one. Mr. Massicci - The far one. Mr. Matthews —Right, but the one I'm talking about is number 8, which is the third one from East King Road, and they were disputing that one and it was too high in relation to the other houses, and that was four feet. Now, they're saying three feet's OK, but then they pursued it be level with the houses on either side. Now, my question is again, why are they relenting and allowing per this letter here, three feet's OK? Mr. Massicci - Well, I think because I've gone to them and talked with them and I've gotten approval from both neighbors on both sides, and... Mr. Frost — I suspect again that there was more going on than just — I think the cooperation of the builder with the committee that... Mr. Massicci - He didn't submit plans, and he was just fighting tooth and nail, he wouldn't submit plans to the committee, so he basically built the house without showing them anything, and finally they took him to court at their last leg. Mr. Barney—That also a heritage home? Mr. Massicci - Yes, that was two heritage houses that were built, and he was just not cooperating with the committee. Mr. Frost—Does he have two or three up on Saunders now? Mr. Massicci - He has two now, and I think he has one more lot. Mr. Frost—I think so, too. Mr. Massicci - My lot is one of the last. Mr. Matthews — It's Heritage Builders. Is this your own home, or are you building this house? Mr. Massicci -No, this is my own home. 14 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel — How much higher is the highest portion? How much higher is that from the main roof line. Mr. Massicci - We're going to try to stay within that three feet. You know, it could be two feet. If we were planning to shoot off of Paul Lucente's house, which is right next door, his foundation will be even with my foundation, so it will approximately be maybe two feet. Chairperson Sigel —No I mean on, I'm talking strictly only on your house, the portion of your roof, the little peak that sticks up, how much higher is that than the main roof line? Mr. Massicci - Than the main roof line? Two foot, I think six. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Barney—What's the purpose of that? Mr. Massicci - I think it's like just a little... Mr. Matthews — I didn't follow you, what you were saying, I'm sorry if I interrupted anybody. Chairperson Sigel — I was asking how much higher the front gable is than the main roof line. If you look at this page... Mr. Matthews —Where is the main roof line? Chairperson Sigel—This is the main roof line going across, and then this... Mr. Matthews —Oh, OK, that little ledge... Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, I wondered how much higher... Mr. Massicci - [inaudible comment] Mr. Matthews —That little ledge looks about half the size of one of the windows. Mr. Massicci - It's just a little small piece that's above there. Chairperson Sigel—You say you think it's about two and a half feet? Mr. Barney—But what's it do, what's its function? Mr. Ellsworth—Well, it's the peak of that roof in there that runs back. 15 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—I'm sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding. Chairperson Sigel—Here this, it's that, this is from the rear. Mr. Barney—This is going to intersect with the... Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, it's just a gable in the front. [several comments made at once] Mr. Massicci - You have those plans, there? These plans? Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, we do, we do. Mr. Krantz—So the overall height would be less than 39 feet. Chairperson Sigel—Right— Mr. Massicci - It's just the back of the house, that we're... Chairperson Sigel - so it's this added gable that's driving the height variance, it's the main roof line that you were more negotiating with the design committee with. Mr. Massicci - See the front of the house is only 30 feet. Chairperson Sigel—Right. Mr. Massicci - So it's by having that walkout basement is where I have this issue. Mr. Matthews —Ahhh. Mr. Massicci - So the front of the house is OK. Mr. Matthews —Do you know how high it is from the front of the house? Mr. Massicci - Yeah, the front of the house is only 30 feet. Mr. Matthews- 30 feet? Mr. Massicci - Yeah. Mr. Matthews —So the back of your house is...? Mr. Massicci - On the plans, it's... Mr. Matthews —On the back of the house, it's over the ordinance? 16 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Massicci - Yeah. Mr. Barney—40 feet, 6 and a half inches to the top of the vent, or that peak. Mr. Massicci - To that little peak, that little extra peak. Mr. Frost—We advertised it as 41, to give them a little extra room. Chairperson Sigel—Right. So a small portion of the roof is 30 feet... Mr. Matthews —It says 40 feet right? Chairperson Sigel - 40 feet six and a half. Mr. Matthews —From this back? Chairperson Sigel—From the back, from the bottom of the rear door it looks like. Mr. Matthews —and that little peak is 40 feet? Chairperson Sigel—And if that's an extra 2 and a half then you're down to 38. Mr. Massicci - It could be 3 feet, it's somewhere in there, it's between... Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Matthews —And the ordinance is 35? Mr. Massicci - 36. Chairperson Sigel—36 exterior, 38 interior. Mr. Matthews —So both of them are over? Chairperson Sigel—Right, but the main roof is obviously less over. Some were more like 38, which by our, obviously every situation is unique, but we have often granted variances of 41. Mr. Krantz — And basically you just have the back of the house is a small gable that's a couple of feet higher than it should be. Mr. Ellsworth — And most of them we've granted have had these walkout basements, which causes these problems. [many comments made at once] 17 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —It's a South Hill problem, apparently. Mr. Massicci - Well, the way this lot is kind of designed, it does fall off in the back, and the ground is pretty tough up there. Mr. Matthews —Sitting right on top of it. Chairperson Sigel—Any other questions, comments? Mr. Frost—This isn't a modular home is it? Mr. Massicci -No, it's stick built. Mr. Frost—Fine Line Homes, then, is that, this is not panelized either then? Mr. Massicci -No, it's all stick-built. Mr. Frost—So the Fine Line is just a design, or are they also supplying materials? Mr. Massicci - Yeah, they're doing the whole thing, materials and everything. Mr. Barney—Who is Fine Line Homes? Mr. Massicci - They're based out of Pennsylvania, Sayre, PA. They've built about 450 houses... Mr. Frost—Almost like Barden homes? Mr. Massicci - Yeah, kind of like Barden, they have like four locations there, they own a lumber company also, I think that's how they can afford to do what they do. They're doing, actually, a spec house in Southwoods, which is right down the street, which they got a height variance for that. Which was back in May I think. Mr. Barney—Is there a dealer or a representative here that you're dealing with. Mr. Massicci -Now the gentleman I'm working with is John West in Sayre. Mr. Matthews — Can I ask one further question? I'll use up my quota here if I keep this up, right John? Mr. Barney—Unlimited. Mr. Matthews —I didn't want to disappoint you. Mr. Barney—Unlimited quote. 18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews — Saunders Road design committee, is that a self-described group of people that get together, or is that an official thing, or does it have any rule of law? Mr. Barney — I think I can probably answer that. There is a series of restrictive covenants, that relate to the Saunders Road subdivision, the entire subdivision. And one of those covenants has set up a design committee that must approve all of the designs for any house that is constructed within that subdivision. So, it's not self-directed, it's created, initially by the developer, who has now since moved to North Carolina, I think. But, it perpetuates itself. It is set up as a result of that restrictive covenant. Any new house has to meet that requirement and have that design approved. Mr. Matthews —So it has a certain force of law. Mr. Barney — Oh, it has a legal status, yeah. If you don't get the approval, theoretically you can have a lawsuit against you restraining you for building a house. Mr. Matthews —OK, this is not just a group of people who got together and said we are a committee. Mr. Barney—No, no, it's created by Mr.... Mr. Matthews —That's fine. Thank you. Chairperson Sigel —OK, we'll open the public hearing, and with no one here, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opened and closed the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. Chairperson Sigel — And I will move to grant the appeal of Peter Massicci, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-70 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to permit the construction of a single-family residence with a building height not to exceed 41 feet located at 18 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-9, Medium Density Residential Zone. With the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied, and is it appropriate to incorporate the design committee's requirement in our...? Mr. Barney —You could, but I was going to suggest that maybe you want to include as a condition that any house built on the lot be substantially in accordance with the plan that was submitted as the basis of this application. Chairperson Sigel — Yes, thank you. And what about the design committee requirement about the main roof line height? It doesn't really seem like it's the town's position to enforce that? Mr. Barney — Well, except that in the other areas, setbacks for example, we use the setbacks of houses, I mean, we have a range sometimes, the setback shall be the same as 19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES the setback around a house but may not exceed 50 feet. That's for setbacks, but what I'm saying is you could probably analogize and use that if you wanted to here, and say that the main roof line should not be greater than three feet higher than property next. Chairperson Sigel—To either property. Mr. Barney — Either property on either side, or is it, that might be more of a problem, I think you want to tie it to the higher of the two properties. Mr. Massicci - We measured off of, and that's the way we all talked about this, was off of Paul's house, and his house is higher. Chairperson Sigel —Well, not any more than three feet higher than the maximum height of the neighboring houses, so whichever one is higher. OK, all right, so we'll include that as a condition that the main roof line, which is the roof line running parallel to the road, and not the gable that comes out perpendicular to the road, be not more than three feet higher than the maximum height of the roof of either neighboring house. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 039: Peter Massicci, 18 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-9, Medium Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Peter Massicci, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-70 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to permit the construction of a single-family residence with a building height not to exceed 41 feet located at 18 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-9, Medium Density Residential Zone. FINDINGS: The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS- 1. ONDITIONS:1. Any house built on the lot shall be built substantially in accordance with the plans submitted with this application. 2. The main roof line, which is the roof line running parallel to the road and not the gable that is perpendicular to the road, shall be not more than three feet higher than the maximum height of the roof of the higher of the two neighboring houses. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: 20 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 18,2005 APPROVED MINUTES AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Massicci - OK, thank you. Mr. Frost—I just want to say, it seems like you've been very, very diligent, more diligent than many people I've seen going through this process, and I personally appreciate that. Mr. Massicci - It's been, it's funny how a lot of those houses up there, a lot of people never submitted plans and they really didn't have a committee formed, and then there's like about three lots left and they got this committee together. And I was right up front with them right from the start because they are neighbors that I know, I know all these people. Mr. Frost — Sure. It seems like you've been trying to dot all the Is and cross all the Ts, and I appreciate that. Other Business Mr. Frost announced that January 10 will he his last day, and the Town Board has accepted his retirement. Chairperson Sigel adjourned the meeting at 7:47 p.m. Kirk Sigel, Chairperson John Coakley, Deputy Town Clerk 21