Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2004-05-03 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, May 3, 2004 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Kirk Sigel, Chairperson; Harry Ellsworth, Board Member; James Niefer, Board Member; Ronald Krantz, Board Member; Andy Frost, Director of Building/Zoning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town; Michael Smith, Environmental Planner. EXCUSED: None OTHERS: Mark Bianconi, 204 Hook Place; Malvis S. Burns, 24 Saunders Place; Karel Sedlacek, 39 Maple Avenue, Spencer NY; Robert and Karen Springall, 7 Saunders Road; Dave Burbank, 161 Whitetail Drive; Dick Mathews, 380 King Road East; Mike and Ann Elmo, 139 King Road East; Chad Horihan, 21 Saunders Road; Bill Petrolis, 22 Saunders Road; Patrick Leahy, 527 Highland Road; Will Burbank, 132 Glenside Road; George Frantz, 604 Cliff Street; John Coakley, 528 Albany Street South. Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. APPEAL: Karel Sedlacek, Appellant; requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to construct a new residential dwelling with a building height of 39 ± feet (36 foot limit) located at 15 Fairway Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 66-3-3.523, Residence District R-15. Chairperson Sigel — Okay. Good Evening. Welcome to the April meeting being held in May of the town of Ithaca zoning board of appeals. First I'd like to apologize to everyone for having to cancel the meeting last time. That was my fault so if you want someone to blame, you can blame me. I appreciate everyone rescheduling and being able to come back tonight. We have six appeals this evening. That of Karel Sedlacek, that of Steven Srnka, the appeal of John Young and Susan Barnell, the appeal of Heritage Park Town Houses, the appeal of Michael and Ann Elmo, and the appeal of Mark Bianconi. We will be taking them in that order. So the first appeal tonight is that of Karel Sedlacek, hope I pronounced that right, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to construct a new residential dwelling with a building height of approximately 39 feet, where there is a 36 foot limit in effect, located at 15 Fairway Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 66-3-3.523, Residence District R-15. Please you can come and just sit at the desk there. If you would, please state your name and address for the record. MR. SEDLACEK - Sure. My name is Karel Sedlacek, and I currently live at 39 Maple Avenue in Spencer New York, it's actually West Danby. TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Okay. So it's Karel? MR. SEDLACEK - Yes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Okay, sorry about that. Could you give us a brief overview of what you're asking for and why you need it? MR. SEDLACEK - The land that we have basically lends itself, with some additional excavation, to do a walk out basement. So what we are doing right now is... the lay of the land is such and the setback of the house is such that basically what we think is that essentially our neighbors to the north, the Diapola's and our neighbors to the southwest of us, the Bailey's, will essentially see a two story house from where they are. From the south of us and the east of us and to the northeast of us are the Cornell plantations behind our land. There is a ravine that is basically an offshoot of fall creek that runs up behind our land with forest and stuff like that. So there is nothing really behind us except river valley with the wood partition on our side of the ravine and on the opposite side, and so in any event, what I guess I'm saying is that the elevation, the three story elevation, would not be seen by anybody in a neighborhood, it's basically just woodland behind us. What we're trying to do with the grade and placement of the house is to present a two-story elevation from three sides to our neighbors. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Are you aware of any trails through the plantations land back there that your house might be visible from? MR. SEDLACEK - There are trails that would be off to the northwest next to the golf course behind the Diapola's house. As far as I know, we've walked through the land and you have to walk through the woods to get to some trails, but there's nothing that skirts our line. The ravine and the land behind our house is pretty wild. Nobody's walking through there. It's actually going to take a little bit of work on my part to do some clearing and get rid of some barbed wire and things like that. MR. FROST - If there's any kind of trail I think it's quite... MR. SEDLACEK - Yeah, Yeah, it does. It's either bordering the golf course which is 700 feet away from our house that way or it's down well below our elevation along the river. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Okay. Any questions or comments? MR. NIEFER - That lot is fairly level as it now exists. MR. SEDLACEK - Yeah. MR. NIEFER - There's a slight slope back towards the gorge. 2 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SEDLACEK - There is. And then on our land, still on our property, there is actually the — on the site plan, and I gave the correction to the architect, but anyway — where you see the wood's edge on the drawing, right in there there is an encroachment of the ravine itself. So our land crosses well into the ravine and so we have - part of it is a cut off where there is the ravine and then there is a sloping piece there. So we're going to be working some of the soil off into the northeast corner where there is some dampness to fill it in and then work it around that way. MR. NIEFER - I'm having a little bit of difficulty with this item you just handed out to us as far as identifying it with the cul-de-sac that is right in front of your house. Where the cul-de-sac is shown on this... MR. SEDLACEK - Do you see where the last letter of my last name appears in the upper right hand corner towards there? MR. NIEFER - Yeah. MR. SEDLACEK - There is a little portion of a radius there. That indicates the cul-de-sac. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL -Where it shows the twenty-five foot setback in the upper— roughly upper middle? MR. SEDLACEK -Are you familiar with the Diapola house? MR. NIEFER - Yes. MR. SEDLACEK -With that cul-de-sac? MR. NIEFER - Yes. MR. SEDLACEK - Okay. There are two vacant lots currently on either side of the Diapola's house. There is one that adjoins the golf course itself, and then there is one on the southeast corner of the cul-de-sac. That's the land... MR. NIEFER - Yeah, I know where your lot is. MR. SEDLACEK - I'm sorry. MR. NIEFER -Are you going to have to remove quite a lot of soil from the rear of your house in order to accomplish this walk-out basement? MR. SEDLACEK -We've estimated that it's under seven hundred cubic yards or whatever it is. And we've talked to the engineer— the town engineer— about it. 3 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. NIEFER -Where will that soil go? Will it be pushed out towards the gorge? MR. SEDLACEK - Part of it will go onto — if you look at our land, this part here... the Gorge goes like this, so this part of our land continues to slope here gently and then the ravine is further up here. So we're going to move this way onto our land to level it out this way and then we're going to move soil this way into this upper right hand corner where it's a little soggy next to the Diapola's lot. They raised their land up above ours, so we wanted to even it out to their land so that we don't get their run-off. Okay? And then the other part is that we'll probably do a little bit underneath our— we'll raise it along, as well along, their driveway to basically have our land not continue to be a watershed for their property. Actually probably most of the soil will not go back towards the back part of the land in order to get that corner elevated. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - So I assume Jim that you're concerned because the elevation map shows just about a two foot drop from front to back and they're going to need about an eight foot... MR. SEDLACEK -Well the house is going to be up. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Okay. MR. SEDLACEK - So it's going to be a combination of raising the house up and minimizing the amount of excavation. We'll be able to raise the house up because we're going to be filling the northeast corner, that boggy part of the triangle up, so that we have more of a natural slope from the Diapola land through our land and so forth down across the back property. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL -And then are you planning to seed most of your yard with grass? MR. SEDLACEK - Yes, absolutely. I mean it's grass now, it's just that the neighbors, the Bailey's had been mowing the land before we even bought it so it's a nice grass except for the are that tends to be a little bit soggy where the driveway would be and then the back corner. MR. ELLSWORTH - Is that the roof peak that's 39 feet? MR. SEDLACEK - Pardon me? MR. ELLSWORTH - This one I've got my finger on with the peak that's 39 feet— the highest? 4 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SEDLACEK - Yes, sir. Actually that's not a good —that picture is misleading I think— if you look at the elevation itself, the top left elevation, that front peak is actually below the... yes, okay. MR. ELLSWORTH - So this is the roof then? MR. SEDLACEK - Yes, that's the highest? MR. ELLSWORTH -What's the difference to the next roof? Three feet? MR. SEDLACEK - I don't know MR. ELLSWORTH - In other words, what I'm getting at is that it's just this section of roof here that's... MR. SEDLACEK - Yes, yes, that's right. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - It looks like about three, two and a half or three. Okay. Any other questions or comments. Ok, we'll open the PUBLIC HEARING. Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Does anyone wish to speak about this case? If not, we'll close the public hearing. Anything else? Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. MR. KRANTZ - Seems reasonable. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Mike, any comments? MR. SMITH - No, it's a type 11 action for an area variance (inaudible) so there is no SEAR. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. I'm going to move that this Board grants the appeal of Karel Sedlacek, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to construct a new residential dwelling...with a building height not to exceed... now, are you estimating that it will be exactly 39 feet high? MR. SEDLACEK -Well, as it's drawn there is 37 feet 11 and 5/16 inches. MR. FROST - I added plus or minus just because it gives him a little extra in his variance. 5 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SEDLACEK - Yeah, yeah. When we get the exact what we have to do from the trust company which the architects are not willing to say exactly, but the builder says.. when the trust company says this is what it's going to be, we'll work with that. So I think that foot is probably, we'll either be right on the money or below it, but I think we'll be within the 39 feet. MR. BARNEY - I could say do you want to limit the height variance of the building as shown. Because once you give the variance the way you've given it, basically the entire building could be at 39 feet. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - That's true, normally we do say that (comments inaudible). MR. BARNEY - I'd say, amend your resolution to say as substantially shown on plans submitted. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK, I will move that amendment that the building must be constructed substantially similar to the plans submitted by the applicant. Second? MR. ELLSWORTH - Second. ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 011: Karel Sedlacek, 15 Fairway Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 66.-3-3.523, Residence District R-15. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Karel Sedlacek, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to construct a new residential dwelling with a building height of no more than 39 feet located at 15 Fairway Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 66-3-3.523, Residence District R-15. FINDINGS: a. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS- a. ONDITIONS:a. The building must be constructed substantially similar to the plans submitted by the applicant. The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows- 6 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth ,Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Thank you. MR. SEDLACEK - Thank you gentlemen. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Thank you, John. APPEAL of Stephen Srnka, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 21 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to convert an existing non-residential structure to a two-family home with said structure having an existing north side yard building setback of approximately 25± feet (40 feet required) located at 809 Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-2-17, Residence District R-30. A variance to permit a rear yard setback of less than 50 feet and a front yard less than 30 feet may also be requested. MR. FROST - I kind of also broadened the appeal because it's an odd-shaped lot. Our gentleman may decide what is front and rear, and I wanted to cover all the bases on that one. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. Is a representative here? Please come take a seat. Give us your name and address for the record. MR. SRNKA - Yeah. Steve Srnka, 809 Five Mile Drive, Ithaca. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Could you give us a brief overview of what you want to do and why you need a variance? MR. SRNKA - Well, currently I operate my business out of there, which is Marion Electric, and that's just the old starter's barn, hay barn, stuff like that. So I just want to convert it into a two family dwelling units, and eliminate the business from the premises. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. MR. FROST - This property has been before the board at least twice in the last 20-25 years. One permitting what was Marion Electric to start there in the first place, and the second time by Mr. Srnka's, Steve's father to allow a one-unit bedroom which never came to pass to my knowledge. 7 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY -Are you still going to be in business, just relocating the business somewhere else? MR. SRNKA - I'm actually selling the business to somebody else. You know, so the business will be totally relocated. MR. FROST - Steve's father had since passed away. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - So it is the case, right Andy, in this zone that you can have a residential building. MR. FROST - right, right, but each of the units will be limited to obviously either a family or at most two unrelated people. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Right, OK. I just wanted to make sure you're aware, building the two three-bedroom apartments, that in this district you're not permitted to rent each one to three unrelated people. MR. SRNKA - That's OK. In that location, I'd rather have a family down there anyway. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. You can rent them to a family of any size really, but if you're looking to rent to students, obviously that's not an ideal location, but.. MR. SRNKA - Right. MR. BARNEY - Steve, one of the things we don't have is a floor plan, now this is a two-story structure? MR. SRNKA - yes it is. MR. BARNEY - Now, in our zoning ordinance, one unit has to be half the size of the other and we don't have any particular floor plan. Can you describe what your intention is for creating the floor area for each of the units and where they're going to be located? MR. SRNKA -Well, there's going to be one upstairs, total apartment upstairs and one downstairs. So there will be total floors. There will be three bedrooms in there and two bathrooms. MR. BARNEY - But the ground surface of the first floor is level with the ground outside? MR. SRNKA - Umm, it's a little above it. There's a little slope that goes... 8 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - There is actually a requirement in the ordinance that in this type of up and down situation with the first floor not being into the ground, which would make it a basement, is that one of the units is going to have to be half the size of the other. So as an example, you may want to have an apartment on the first floor, and then an apartment that's half the floor area on the second floor and maybe have a common storage area or something similar to that. But we haven't gotten that far in terms of our discussions, I know you wanted to try and get the approval to get the apartments in there. So everything will have to comply with the building code as well as any zoning limitations for two families. MR. SRNKA - OK, OK. But I still would be able to do the full apartments though? I mean, hopefully. There's no basement, it's just concrete. MR. FROST - Again, when floor area, what we call the primary ordinance has got to be twice the floor area of the secondary unit. MR. SRNKA - OK. MR. FROST - So if you're using the full second floor and the full first floor, you can't do that. MR. SRNKA - OK. So what am I limited now to then? MR. FROST-Well, as an example, if the first floor was a thousand square foot, the second floor would be 500 square foot. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - You can use all the area in the building. It's just you're going to need to have say the apartment, the unit on the first floor would need to also encompass one third of the area on the second floor. MR. SRNKA - OK, each floor is probably going to be somewhere about 2500 square feet or so I'm not sure. I don't have to reduce one side down, do I? MR. FROST - I think that's what we're trying to say, but we can discuss that maybe after the meeting. MR. BARNEY - Well, the statute reads that a two family dwelling is permitted except that the second dwelling unit should not exceed 50% of the floor area, excluding the basement of the primary dwelling unit, except where the second dwelling unit is constructed entirely within the basement area. It may exceed 50%. So if you're fully in the basement, then you're going to have, what you're having, same size apartments, one on each floor. But at this point, without any basement. MR. ELLSWORTH - Do I have to put up a sign here, you keep prompting me...? 9 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - But you don't have a basement now. You're choices I think are you either have to divide it as Mr. Chairman has suggested or, umm, you could come back for another, a request for another variance which would allow you to build up and down same size. Which you may or may not get, I mean we can't promise that. MR. SRNKA - OK. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Yeah, we just don't want you to obviously proceed, assuming that you can do that when that's not allowed. MR. SRNKA - OK. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Umm, you think it's appropriate John, I mean it seems like it would be OK to continue to grant the setback variances for it being a residential building, obviously assuming that it— MR. BARNEY - Well, at this juncture, that's all — CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - it's going to conform. MR. BARNEY - that's all that's applied for, and obviously any construction would have to be in accordance with the rest of the... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - right, right. (comments inaudible). CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. Any questions? It seems like, it's obviously a residential district, so it's you know, it's going back to what it should be which is good. OK, we'll open the public hearing. Anyone wish to speak on this case? Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - If not, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 7:24 p.m. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Mike, any comments on the environmental assessment? MR. SMITH - No, just the same thing that you just mentioned, it's getting closer to the residential use, and the traffic and stuff will be less than with the business use. 10 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK, and Andy, you had thrown in these things about the uhh... MR. FROST - Yeah, just when you look at the survey map which is the fourth page in the packet, in this particular case, it's an irregular shape lot, and I simply took the portion that's most parallel to the road and called that the front yard, umm. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. MR. FROST - And the only thing I found as a potential problem was the side yard setback. (comments inaudible) And over here, I was kind of looking at this location here as the side yard. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Right, that... MR. FROST - Although I suppose you could argue that's more the rear yard. But I don't see that really as either a rear yard problem or a front yard problem (comments inaudible). CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Yeah, I would agree, it appears from the survey that they just have a deficiency from the side yard um m, and that is, let's see a measurement there, do you know the approximate distance there? (comment inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Oh, you did. Rear yard of 50, oh wait a minute. MR. FROST - 25 foot on the side here it needed 40. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. (Pause). OK. Alright, I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the case of Steven Srnka for the reasons contained in the environmental assessment form prepared by town staff and undated. Second. MR. KRANTZ - Second. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 012 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Stephen Srnka, 809 Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel no. 31.-2-17, Residence District R-30. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz. 11 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Stephen Srnka, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 21 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to convert an existing non-residential structure to a two-family home with said structure having an existing north side yard building setback of approximately 25± feet (40 feet required) located at 809 Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-2-17, Residence District R-30. A variance to permit a rear yard setback of less than 50 feet and a front yard less than 30 feet may also be requested, based upon the undated Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff. The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. (comments inaudible) MR. BARNEY - I think I would do a couple of things. My orientation got screwed up here, but I would suggest that you want to be specific with the variance to make it a 25 foot variance from the property from the building to what would be the northeasterly property line, and then a I'm guessing it's more like a 12 or 13 foot, do you know what the dimension is to the Tidd property from the corner closest to your... MR. FROST - This is a thirty scale as I talked to you Steve on the phone, when you make copies of the survey map you tend to lose scale. MR. SRNKA - Right. MR. FROST - So where he's talking about is the corner of the house that's closest to the main road. And I guess what Mr. Barney is wondering. MR. SRNKA - Wouldn't that be the south part though? MR. FROST - Well that would be the western side of the building. MR. BARNEY - Westernmost corner. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Southwestern corner. MR. SRNKA - The southwest corner, yes. MR. FROST - Closest to the Tidd's property. 12 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SRNKA - Yes. MR. FROST - And do you know what the measurement is again. We can't scale it... MR. SRNKA - It was roughly about 25-28 feet on that side. And then on the front side it was well in, well it was just the back corner that we had the clearance on. MR. BARNEY - Could you just come here for a second, I think the map is oriented with north being this way as opposed it this way, which is the way we're used to seeing it. The dimension here is 25 feet, or the dimension here is 25 feet? MR. SRNKA - Right here. MR. BARNEY - That's 25 feet? MR. SRNKA - Yeah, about 25 or 28 feet. That's where it needed to be 40. MR. BARNEY - OK. MR. FROST - Actually you were talking that to be 40 from that point, and you were really looking at that as a front yard, that's why I put that in there. MR. BARNEY - Well I don't know if it's the front yard or maybe it's to the nearest boundary line... MR. FROST - it's just one deficiency that you can call the rear yard. MR. BARNEY - Maybe we could say that, if you are inclined to grant the variance, you could grant a variance for the 25 feet to the Tidd property which would be the property next west. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK, 25. MR. BARNEY - And a 40 feet, it that's what it is, to the property next east. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK, they don't look like the same distances. MR. BARNEY - No, I think MR. SRNKA says he has about 40 feet here and he needs 50. It's to be treated as the back there. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - I think Andrew was treating that as the side. 13 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - Right. But I again I've covered the request for rear yard, side yard and front yard just for the very reason that we're debating this. So, it's properly advertised, what you conclude is up to you. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, yeah, I would just be specific granting a variance for those two dimensions. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Yeah, we can just specify the lines and not necessarily whether... MR. BARNEY - Right, not get into whether it's the front or side years, because it isn't on here. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - and this distance is more like 40 you said? MR. BARNEY - The existing distance is 40 - MR. FROST - That's the most you would need for a setback... MR. BARNEY - Right? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - (mumbles agreement) MR. BARNEY - The existing distance to the easterly piece is about 40 feet? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - I'm saying this looks like a bit further than this, and you're saying this is... MR. SRNKA - I haven't measured it, but... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. MR. FROST - I think the bottom line is you're getting rid of a non-conforming use, and making it. (comments inaudible) MR. FROST - I've tried it, it doesn't measure up... MR. BARNEY - Well it's a shame to grant a variance that turns out to be inadequate. (they measure the map) MR. FROST - like I say, I've tried to uhh, even by adjusting the copies, to get it into scale, and I couldn't. 14 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Just trying to figure out your distance here. MR. SRNKA - That's OK. MR. FROST - Steve, you didn't happen to bring the original survey though did you? MR. SRNKA - No, I didn't, I did have the one copy that I had done and brought it down here originally to start with but I didn't bring the original copy, no. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Just waiting on a ruler and a calculator. MR. SRNKA - Not a problem. MR. ELLSWORTH - Right there is a 100 feet. Divide that into 3 parts you'll have 33 feet. MR. KRANTZ -Well, most significantly, it's always nice when a variance is a positive thing because we're removing. I mean it is primarily obviously a residential area, and you're removing a commercial business from it, and restoring the residence. (comments inaudible as the map is measured) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK, I will move, to grant the appeal of Steven Srnka requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 21 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to convert an existing non-residential structure to a two-family home with said structure having an existing northeast lot line setback of no less than 34 feet and a southwest lot line setback of no less than 19 feet, located at 809 Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-2- 17, Residence District R-30 with the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied and an additional finding that the applicant is moving the property into closer compliance with the zone it is in. John, should we have some kind of requirement about the two family dwelling needing requirements on that. MR. BARNEY - I don't think you need to. I mean it's got to meet all of the requirements, you don't want to get into a litany of... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. Second? MR. NIEFER - Second. 15 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 013:Stephen Srnka, 809 Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel no. 31.-2-17, Residence District R-30. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Jim Niefer. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Stephen Srnka, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 21 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to convert an existing non-residential structure to a two-family home with said structure having an existing northeast lot line setback of no less than 34 feet and a southwest lot line setback of no less than 19 feet, located at 809 Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-2- 17, Residence District R-30. FINDINGS: a. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. b. The applicant is moving the property into closer compliance with the zone that it is in. CONDITIONS- NONE ONDITIONS:NONE The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. MR. SRNKA - Thanks. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Thanks, just be sure to check with Andy. MR. FROST - Steve, you can call me in the morning. APPEAL of John Young and Susan Barnell, Appellants, Patrick Leahy, Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Article III, Sections 7 and 9 and Article IV, Sections 14 and 16 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to subdivide and create building lots by subdivision which do not have the required lot widths or frontages on Town, County, or State 16 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES highways located at 140 and 150 Glenside Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 30-1-1, Residence District R-9 and R-15. Additionally, a variance from Section 280A of NYS Town Law and an approval from the Board under Article XII, Section 54 may also be required. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Hello, are you Mr. Leahy? MR. LEAHY - Yes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Please state your name and address for the record. MR. LEAHY - Patrick Leahy, 527 Highland Road in Ithaca. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL -And please explain what you're doing and why you need some variances. MR. LEAHY - OK, this Glenside park subdivision is a five lot subdivision of a 44 acre parcel. The goal of which is to not only subdivide for residential building purposes but equally importantly to solve some encroachment issues with the neighbors that have sprung up over the years. Of the 5 acres, excuse me the 5 lots, that we were subdividing, one of them will be donated for the use of a park by the town that I believe has already been approved by the Town Board. Two more would be or three more, excuse me would be subdivided for residential building purposes, one of those, lot two will be sold to the adjacent neighbor. And then the final parcel, the large, the majority of it, the lion's share of the piece will remain undeveloped this time. So there's actually two of the lots which don't meet the minimum front end requirements, lot 2 and lot 3. So our hope is to apply for those variances to enable those two lots to be approved. Is that a good start? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - (laughs) Yeah, that's fine. I have to admit it took me a while to find all the lots on this map. The elevation lines make it kind of tough to find them all, but I think I did. Everyone...? MR. KRANTZ —AS you're coming up from Floral Avenue, the Turco's house is on the left, correct? And there is no real road in there, it starts in. MR. LEAHY - Right. MR. KRANTZ -And then it's just a clearing in back in there? MR. LEAHY - Right. There is no formal road in there at this time. MR. NIEFER — Lot number 6 which at the moment you're contemplating, it's not going to be developed, but there was some reference to ingress and egress to that lot if and when it should be developed. Am I correct that ingress and egress 17 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES was going to be up the hill from the pump station lot, lot number 1, that that was going to be the area that was going to theoretically be reserved for a roadway into lot 6? MR. LEAHY -Well, lot 6 does have road frontage on Coy Glen road. Do you see it there? There's road frontage on Coy Glen Road on lot 6? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, on Coy Glen Road, I think that's what Jim is talking about, just uphill from the pump station. MR. NIEFER - Just uphill from the pump station. MR. LEAHY - OK, right. I'm sorry, right. MR. NIEFER - So that was the area that was going to be the roadway into lot 6? MR. LEAHY - I'm sorry, yes you're right, into lot 6. Yes, that's the idea. MR. NIEFER - Uhh, the survey tends to show some kind of a proposed road towards the back part of lot 3 adjacent to lot 6, is that proposed roadway abandoned in the plans we're talking about today? MR. LEAHY - Not in the plans we're talking about right now. MR. NIEFER - It's not in it. MR. LEAHY - No, there's no intention at this point that that road be built right there. At least by us anyway. MR. SMITH - Jim, are you looking at those double-dashed lines going up through there? MR. NIEFER - (mumbles agreement) MR. SMITH - I believe that is for a waterline easement that the town has. MR. LEAHY -Although it does run across the easement providing access to that lot 3. 1 know it's kind of complicated. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, the easement, one of the easement lines is common with the property line along lot 3, OK, so continuing it is just an easement— MR. SMITH - Yeah. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —for water? 18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SMITH - for a waterline, yeah. MR. LEAHY - I should point out that lot 2, the plan is to sell that to the Cook's that you see there just to the west of that lot. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, lot 2 is going to the West. MR. LEAHY - Yeah, and my understanding is they do not plan to consolidate it, so it would require the variance, the road frontage variance. MR. BARNEY — Does that front... I'm having a little trouble reading the map here, does that front on any road at all? MR. LEAHY - Lot 2? MR. BARNEY - Lot 2. MR. LEAHY - No. MR. BARNEY - That's completely landlocked? And the access to it is where? MR. LEAHY - It would be right up the right hand side of it from Glenside Road. Right along the Turco lot. You know, adjacent to lot 2, and then that access would proceed to lot 3. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - The Turco lot is the one just to the south of lot 2? MR. LEAHY - Right. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - We don't normally have lots that have no access, I mean to something, even if it's not an official road. MR. FROST - Once again I've advertised this variance as for road frontage as well as to section 288 of town law. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Right. There's no kind of easement or anything, that grant's lot 2 access across Turco's lot? MR. BARNEY - Not across Turco's lot, but across the... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Oh, across the Cook's lot? 19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SMITH - I thought that lot 2 actually did come out and touch Glenside Road as a flag lot where there's a small piece of road frontage down there it's labeled L6. MR. LEAHY - OK, let me get my bigger map out. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Oh, you're right, I think that flag... MR. FROST - This has gone through the planning board by the way, so... MR. LEAHY - You're right, I'm sorry I need to look at the larger map myself. Lot 2 is a flag lot now with minimal frontage on Glenside Road. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. MR. LEAHY - I'm sorry about that. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL- The easement line looks like it cuts it off. MR. LEAHY - I have the larger map here if you want to see that. MR. SMITH - And then the lot number 3 has that road frontage down on Floral Ave. MR. LEAHY -Albeit minimum. MR. BARNEY - It looks like it has 47 feet of frontage. Is that right? I'm reading these microscopic dimensions here on the side. The dimension L6? Is that the dimension along the road? Can you tell on the larger map? I can't really be sure. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — for lot 2? Lot 2's road frontage. MR. LEAHY - Right. MR. BARNEY - That's 47.02 feet on the dimensions over here on the right. MR. LEAHY - That's right, that's right. I believe that the frontage is minimum 60, is it not, in R-9? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — yes. MR. BARNEY - It's a little less unusual, if I can put it that way, to grant a variance for something that at least has some frontage on a public road as opposed to no frontage at all. Completely landlocked is not usually a good thing. 20 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — and then lot 3 is only 20 feet it looks like, but that's going to be the town part. MR. LEAHY- Right, that's just 20. MR. SMITH - I think tonight or in your packet you also had easement language for other access across that lot to back to the town part also. So the town wouldn't be limited to that 20 feet, it would also have access across that lot 2. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. BARNEY - Mike, where does that 20 feet for the town come from? Is that Floral Avenue? MR. SMITH - Yeah, it's right down there at the corner at the city/town line. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — L34? MR. BARNEY - Where are we putting the stadium on lot 3? Laughter MR. LEAHY -Wherever you'd like. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, so which lots require any kind of... which lots, Andy, require any kind of variances? Lot 2 obviously does, and lot 3. MR. LEAHY -And 3, right. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — are they the only ones? Lot 1 looks fine. MR. LEAHY - Yeah, they're the only two of the new lots. Now I should mention that the Turco lot where we're granting an additional area to solve an encroachment issue, if you see there right below lot 2, they built a driveway up in there. Apparently there is no official easement on record for that lot. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. LEAHY - So if we really wanted to clean it up we would grant an easement through lot 2 to that lot. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — through lot 2 to where though? MR. LEAHY - to where? 21 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — yeah. MR. LEAHY -Well, I'm following their driveway I guess. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, through lot 2's flag, or the pole portion, right, OK, OK. You're not here requesting that? For the Turco lot. You're not representing the Turco's? MR. LEAHY - Not officially no, no. Just lot 2 and 3 are the... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. LEAHY - I guess I'm just bringing that to your attention more than anything. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, I appreciate that. Alright, any questions or comments? MR. BARNEY - May I? I guess I'm... The lots that are being conveyed or at least contemplating being conveyed to the other existing lot owners... I'm looking at parcels B, C, D, E, and I guess there's an A somewhere, oh, yeah, here's A. Those, were they the subject of subdivision process. MR. SMITH - Yeah, they were in the subdivision, and one of the conditions was they had to be consolidated with the adjacent neighbor. MR. BARNEY - OK, because technically they need variances too. If they're not. So... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, let's open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel open the public hearing 7:48 p.m. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — anyone wish to speak about this case? Everyone saving their comments for later? OK, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 7:49 p.m. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, Mike, any further comments on the...? MR.SMITH - These are area variances, so no SEAR. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I will move to grant the appeal of John Young and Susan Barnell requesting variances from the requirements of article 3 sections 7 and 9. Ok, which... these are just frontage. Which sections are the frontage? 22 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so these are both just minimum widths at the street. MR. BARNEY - Right. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — both lots and that's all. Is that... Lot two must need width at the setback, which is still section 9. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, what is section 7 for? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Front yard, which I don't think lot 2 has because it doesn't front on the street, correct? MR.SMITH - two does. MR. BARNEY - I think the division of the front yard by these flag lots runs from the bottom of the flag, right? - not from the bottom of the pole. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — either way if there's no house on it, can you violate the front yard setback? MR. BARNEY -Well, I think that's what I'm a little concerned about granting a variance here from section 7, you're allowing it basically to be placed anywhere right up against the line. (comments inaudible) MR. BARNEY -Well, you need to set the limit, and maybe that's how you do it.... Grant a front yard variance and make it conditional on the house being so many feet away from maybe the south line of lot 2? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — could they otherwise? Well, we don't even have to grant any variance from sections 7, so without a grant of a variance from section 7. MR. BARNEY -Well, I think that forces someone to come back in to get a variance to build a house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — because you wouldn't have the full width MR. BARNEY - I think in the past we have granted these variances where the condition of the grant to maintain distance from the adjacent property owners, which basically amounts to a front yard requirement from the bottom of the flag. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. 23 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - Interesting the number of cases we have tonight that aren't really clean when it's a matter of interpretation. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — If we leave it out then they have to come back when they want to build a house. MR. BARNEY - yeah. I'm not sure you want to force someone to do that. What I would do is suggest you put the effective front yard limit in there and then somebody comes back and wants to put a house somewhere other than that then let them come back and make the case somewhere different, but this way we allow them to build their house. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — section 14 is one we don't need. MR. BARNEY - section 14 is the one R-15... are we dealing with that? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Oh, yeah we do. Are these all R-9? MR. BARNEY - it does say R-15... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — There is a mix for some of the larger ones. MR. FROST - but that subdivision is all part of the main parcel which is both the... MR.SMITH - R-15 and R-9 CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — do you know what lot 2 is in, Mike? MR. FROST - I mean the parent parcel is in both, so technically it's not subdivided until you grant your variances, so I put it both ways. MR. BARNEY - where is the zone line? (they consult the zoning map) MR. FROST - The dark purple here is the R-9 and the yellow is the R-15. MR.SMITH - lot 2 is in-between... MR. FROST - so, we're close. 24 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so I'm not sure if the width of the road applies either. MR. BARNEY - The road width is what it is, it's really how much you want to impose on the construction, whether you want to go with the R-15 limits or the R- 9 limits. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Well, let's impose the larger amount. Which would be... MR. BARNEY - R-15 CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — front yard not less than 25 feet? MR. BARNEY - yes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — and then the other lot is going to the town, so the width of the street is fine. And this is 14. OK, let's start over. I move to grant the appeal of John Young and Susan Barnell requesting variances from the requirements of Article 3 sections 7 and 9 and article IV sections 14 and 16 of the Town of Ithaca zoning ordinance to subdivide and create building lots by subdivision which do not have the required lot widths of frontages along town, county or state highways along Glenside Road and Five Mile drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 30-1-1, Residence District R-9 and R-15. Specifically that the lot labeled lot 2 on the applicant survey is granted a variance to have a width at the street not less than 47 feet and a width at the required ... MR. BARNEY - hold on just a second. Can you tell on that map if those lines are parallel because looking at this one it looks like they might narrow as they go back. MR. LEAHY - Yeah, I think they do narrow a little bit. MR. BARNEY - Maybe make that 40 feet because the setback will still fall within that. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, change that to be 40 feet for the width of the maximum setback. With a condition on lot 2 that any structure built on the lot must have at least a 25 foot setback from the... MR. BARNEY - line marked L3. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — line marked L3, which is the southerly line of the main portion of the lot. And that lot 2 is granted a variance for road frontage to be no less than 19.5 feet. 25 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - Lot 3. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Lot 3, sorry. And with the finding that the variance meets the requirements for an area variance. OK, did you follow any of that? MR. KRANTZ - I'm a little confused, because there is no frontage along town, county or state highways, so what are we being set back from? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —for which lot? Actually all the lots we're granting variances for have frontage on a road. Lot 2 has a narrow strip, it's hard to tell, it does have a narrow strip that goes to Glenside. And lot 3 has a narrow strip that goes to Floral. And those are the only two we're granting variances for. MR. KRANTZ - OK. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — there is another lot, the Turco lot, which does not conform, but we're not dealing with that. MR. KRANTZ - OK. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Second? MR. KRANTZ - second. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — all in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 014: John Young and Susan Barnell, Glenside Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Map No. 30.-1-1, Residence Districts R-9 and R- 15. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of John Young and Susan Barnell, Appellants, Patrick Leahy, Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Article 111, Sections 7 and 9 and Article IV, Sections 14 and 16 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to subdivide and create building lots by subdivision which do not have the required lot widths or frontages on Town, County, or State highways located along Glenside Road and Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 30-1-1, Residence District R-9 and R-15. Specifically, the lot labeled "Lot 2"on the applicant's survey is granted a variance for road frontage of not less than 47 feet and a width at the maximum setback of not less than 40 feet and "Lot 3"is granted a variance for road frontage of not less than 19.5 feet. FINDINGS: a. The variance meets the requirements for an area variance. 26 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CONDITIONS- a. ONDITIONS:a. Any structure built on "Lot 2"must have at least a 25 foot setback from the line marked L-3, which is the southerly lot line of the main portion of the lot. The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, you're all set. MR. LEAHY - OK, thank you. APPEAL of Heritage Park Townhouses, Appellant, George Frantz, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be allowed to construct single-family homes with exterior and interior heights of 40 feet (36 and 38 height limitation respectively) located at 6 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-3 and 25 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-13, Residence District R-15. MR. FROST - I just want to say for the people in the pulpit, when the public hearing is open by the chairman, then you can speak. If you could direct your comments to the chairman and not to George or the property owner. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Could you somehow manage to be near a Microphone? MR. FRANTZ - My name is George Frantz, 604 Cliff Street, Ithaca. MR. BARNEY -wait a second, George. We need to record you so we need you to do your Karaoke routine here. MR. FRANTZ - I'm used to a much smaller boardroom. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — that will be noted as a hardship. MR. FRANTZ - OK, again my name is George Frantz, I'm here representing Heritage park Townhomes in their appeal for a height variance for 6 Saunders Road and 25 Saunders Road. Where we really need the variance is in the 27 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES interior of the homes and in our original appeal we listed the proposed height of the homes as 39 feet 10 inches was our estimate at the time. Since then we actually received the stamped drawings from the architects, and the actual height from the base of the floor to the peak of the roof is 39 feet 3 inches. OK, so we're actually about half a foot lower than we thought we would be. The home at 25 Saunders Road, the required variance from the exterior 36 feet is due to the fact that we would like to have a walk out at the rear of the house onto a small patio. And this patio will actually be about 6 feet below grade and include a small retaining wall with a sloping back up to grade as you can see here with these orange dashed lines. The green line is the existing grade from the survey, umm, and then the orange line is actually the proposed grading. See where we're actually excavating down into the ground about 5 feet (inaudible). Here at 6 Saunders Road, we're actually excavating down about 3 or 3 and a half feet. The walkout is going to be below grade, roughly 3 to three and a half feet. So at 6 Saunders road the height at least from the street will be within the required 36 feet exterior height. And at 25 Saunders Road, it will be about 33 feet from exterior grade, at least as viewed from the road. Another thing, this is just a point of information. We've actually also shifted the house at 6 Saunders road 7 feet back onto the lot, we've found we could do that and the one at 25 Saunders road, we've shifted it back about 22 feet onto the lot to take better advantage of the views from the northeast. OK? So, essentially we would like the variance again because we need the exterior variance because we desired the walkout. We believe they enhance the utility of the basement make it more usable space. We did investigate the possibility of change in the roof line from a 10-12 pitch to a 6- 12 pitch and it really did not look very attractive. We think that the 10-12 pitch both enhances the attractiveness of the home and also contributes more to the neighborhood character. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — could you review again what you said about the current slope of the land, the current elevation -which is current? MR. FRANTZ - OK, the current elevation are the green lines here. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK MR. FRANTZ - OK. 6 Saunders road is relatively flat. 25 Saunders road there's a bit more of a slope to the northeast. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, and which views of the home are you showing? MR. FRANTZ - These are the rear views. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Rear views, OK. Where the height again would be...it really shows the maximum height of the houses. On the front of the houses we're bringing the grade up to within a foot or 28 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES so of the base of the siding. You know, so the house blends in with the landscape on both of them. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. NIEFER - On lot number 6, why are you putting fill on top of the original grade? MR. FRANTZ - We're putting fill on top of the original grade to avoid going too deep into the bedrock in that area, and also we're attempting to at least hold off on the possibility of having footer drains that drain by gravity. It's very tough in this particular development, because the land is very flat, there's a lot of groundwater. So, if we can avoid the sump-pumps we would like to do that. And the earth there came from another site, but the idea again is to not have the houses sticking up out of the ground one, two, or three feet. We'd like to keep our homes and we build them, low to the ground. And again that will be graded off at a gentle grade from the house back to Saunders road and to the sides. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — and I believe you said that for one of the houses or possibly both that the lowest elevation which would be where the basement door is, the elevation is going back up as you went away from the house, further back on the lot. MR. FRANTZ - OK, at 6 Saunders road it's going to be again roughly 3 feet below grade and then there will be a gentle slope back up to grade. The lot may then drop down enough that the footer drains may drain by gravity, again we're not sure at this point. The one at 25 Saunders road is actually going to be a sunken patio on all sides. Again the south side towards King road, the level of the ground is going to be... there will be about a 3 foot high retaining wall, then it will slope back a three and one grade that will be landscaped, another two or three feet back up to the existing grade. And the same on the north side, because the windows will have it open a little more, and the ground level will then climb back up and actually increase a little before dropping back to the existing grade. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —what about as you walk away from the rear of the house? MR. FRANTZ - As you walk away from the rear of the house it would actually be the same. We can use this low retaining wall slope up. With the exception that in one corner there will be a set of stairs out back up to grade. MR. NIEFER - At 25, the proposed house at 25 is there a bedrock problem there also? 29 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FRANTZ - There's... we're probably going to hit bedrock there. But we're going lower with this house because there is really no chance at all of having gravity drains, footer drains. So we abandoned that notion early on and decided just to bite bullet and dig into the bedrock. MR. NIEFER —At number 6, how is the height at number 6, the peak... strike that first part. How does the peak at proposed 6 compare with the peak of existing 4? Is the peak of 6 going to be higher than the peak of 4? There are two houses, is 6 the ridgeline going to be higher than the ridgeline of 4? MR. FRANTZ - I don't know. I don't know how high? MR. NIEFER - Four is an existing house I believe and you're putting a house adjacent to it. My question is, is the ridgeline going to be higher than that of the house on 4? MR. FROST - I think the audience is shaking heads, yes. MR. NIEFER - Pardon? MR. FROST - I think the audience is shaking their heads, yes. People who live there now. MR. NIEFER - OK. MR. FRANTZ - I didn't measure the height of the house next door. What I do know is that we're attempting to set the finished, the first floor of our proposed house... it's only going to be slightly higher than the first floor of the next door house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — is the lot at number 5 is slightly higher than the grade at lot 4, is that true? MR. FRANTZ - Yes, in general the grade in the subdivision slopes upwards towards King Road. But again it's a very gentle grade. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. (pause) OK. Anyone have any other questions at this point? MR.SMITH - Kirk, I would just mention that behind both of these number 25 has future town park land behind it, and number 6 has a future town trail going behind it. When they are mentioning the height from the road, it's also going to be visible from the back. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — It's a good point. Thank you. 30 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. ELLSWORTH - I have one more question perhaps it's been answered and I was thinking of something else, but as far as each of these proposed house and the walk out basements, any surface water flow from the walk out basement area, is it going to be away from the building naturally or are you going to have to have a sump there to pump it out or French drains or something else? MR. FRANTZ - Well, at 25 there will have to be some sort of sump pump system, for both inside and however they do the footer drains outside. That water will have to be, yes, pumped, up and out. 6, again it's tough to say, but if we have to, yeah, we'll pump it and then the grade once you get beyond the walkout area, the depressions slope away from the house. Code is what? I think about six inches within six feet of the house. So we'll have that standard grading to pitch water away from the foundations. And probably even within the walkouts themselves, I'm not doing that design, but there will have to be a pitch from the doors back away from the house even within the walkouts. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — But as you get further, at least at number 6 you said, as it gets further back from the house the grade goes back up. MR. FRANTZ -At 6 actually it continues down here. The town has raised the path. I've noticed that. The town has raised it. They've laid down what appears to be crushed concrete and then crushed stone or stone dust out there, which has actually raised the elevation of the path about a foot higher than the surrounding land. OK? But the drainage across six is generally in that direction, OK? Towards the north, towards Chase pond? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, but I thought you had indicated that at 6, from the basement door, the slope was going back up, the elevation was going back up. MR. FRANTZ - There will be a slight grade up to existing grade and then it will slope back down. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. FROST - One of the things we may hear when the public hearing is open, the other issue is where the water goes once they do get it away form the building. They do have some water drainage issues in the subdivision, so I think you may hear some of that. MR. BARNEY - Is either one of these proposed houses going to have a studio apartment in the basement? MR. FRANTZ - No. They're being built as single family homes CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — yeah, both applications state single family. OK, any other questions at this time? George anything else you want to say? 31 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FRANTZ - No I think I've covered it. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, we'll open the public hearing now. Please, sir, in front, and we'll get to everybody. Please state your name and address before you begin and then tell us what you'd like to say. Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. MR. BURBANK - Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Dave Burbank. I'm a member of the Deer Run community. My address is 161 White Tail Drive. And I've lived in Deer Run for 13 years now. And Mr. Chairman, with your permission I'd like to distribute a few drawings. MR. BURBANK - The primary reason I'm here tonight is to address my concerns of where the water will go and particular when they build the house at 25 Saunders. If you look at the drawing I just handed out, the green area is land that I own and live on. And I believe ht red area is the proposed location of 25 Saunders Road. Also if you reconcile this drawing with the subdivision map George put on the board there. I think his map is a bit outdated. Mr. Barney I'm sure recalls that we did 10 lot line changes a few years back, and I don't think that map reflects those latest changes where George is pointing right now. Just to give you a real brief historical perspective in terms of drainage — back when Ed Halberg was actively developing the properties in Deer Run there were a lot of houses experiencing water problems from water running off of the Saunders road area. At the time there wasn't much development on Saunders road, at that time, Bernie Malloy, I believe owned most of the lots in the Saunders road area, and through an arrangement I believe between the Town of Ithaca and Bernie Malloy and Ed Halberg, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, a drainage ditch was constructed essentially along where I have marked that map with a blue line. And that drainage ditch exists now and catches a lot of water that comes down off of those lots on Saunders Road. But if you look that blue line stops just about where my property starts. When it was built, I hadn't developed that property yet, I lived at 166 Whitetail at the time and there was no house where the green area is. But now I'm there and I get a lot of water off of that hill. And that blue line also runs along a proposed Town Trail, which the planner, Mike Smith, alluded to a few minutes ago. And that town trail would in theory continue up along where the yellow line is all the way up into the proposed Town park. And I'm wondering if it would make sense for somebody to continue that drainage ditch along that yellow line in some fashion. I'm not an engineer I don't know how you would do t—to catch a lot of the water that's running down off of those lots. When they build the house at 25 Saunders road I am particularly concerned about where the water is going to go, and when they put in the sunken patio on the back, that water's got to go somewhere out the back. I don't think it's going to go back to the proposed town park land because the town has been building up that land year after year after year with used asphalt and it's 32 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES quite high now. So I think it's all going to come towards my house. So I respectfully ask that throughout this process, Mr. Frost and others he works with, works hard to ensure that adequate drainage is provided in accordance with New York state building code. Can I answer any questions before I step down? MR. FROST - I would just want to suggest, I mean the building code doesn't always easily address neighboring properties in terms of what's happening at the property where the construction is taking place. MR. BURBANK - Right, sure. MR. FROST - And to help mitigate your concerns, really I think it would become a larger issue for the town perhaps extending that drain as you suggest. MR. BURBANK - I think that might solve a lot of the problems. I notice another neighbor of mine, Malvis Slocum, who was sitting behind me, is here tonight as well. I was on her property two nights ago and all her garden beds are washed out from water that appears to have come from the lot where they want to build at 25. I'm hoping that perhaps if that drainage ditch is extended and maybe some footer drains run into there, that maybe that problem would be lessened as well. MR. FROST - I think we have one other person in the audience that lives on Saunders that has complained about drainage. I think it's a fairly large problem... as you all know that live up there, the Bedrock is fairly high, so water tends to perch up on the water table being above the bedrock. It's really a pretty broad problem, that I'm not so sure there's an immediate cure. I don't think there's any one thing that can cure those problems just due to the topography up there and the high bedrock. I'm certainly aware of the problems I've heard from some of the residents already and I have over the years. MR. BURBANK - Sure. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — anyone else have any questions for Mr. Burbank. MR. BURBANK - Mr. Chairman thank you for taking the time to listen. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — thank you very much. OK. Anyone else wish to speak? Sir, please. MR. SPRINGALL - Good evening, thank you for taking the time. My name is Rob Springall, I live at 7 Saunders Road immediately across from 6 Saunders road. I've lived on Saunders road since 1998. I'm currently the second longest resident on the Saunders road development aside from Ken and Chris Hodges who couldn't be with us tonight. I'm also a member of the lot owner elected design committee for the Chase Pond subdivision. If I may, Mr. Chair, share with you copies of some photographs of both lots in question. 33 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — please. MR. SPRINGALL - Mr. Burbank and some of our other neighbors — I'll leave them to address the drainage issues which Mr. Burbank has already brought up. Let me focus my comments simply on the height and the possible difference in the grade of the lots from the abutting properties. One picture I've shared with Mr. Chairman is of number 6 Saunders road immediately looking across Saunders from my lot. That's my driveway in the foreground there. To the left would be number 4 Saunders, and to the right would be number 6 Saunders. As you'll see on the left, the blue house number 4 Saunders is a traditional colonial with 8 foot ceilings. I was not able to get an exact measurement of the peak of that roof, but I believe it did not require any variances to the ordinances, nor is it unusual in it's construction. On the second set of pictures there is a smaller picture of info of the front of number 4, for the committee's pleasure, as is a picture of the front of number 8. The lot on number 6 has already been mentioned is a relatively flat lot, with fairly tight proximity to it's neighbor number 4, and fairly close proximity to its neighbor number 6. Both of which you will see made minimal changes to the natural grade to have a pleasing, aesthetically pleasing grade to the sides of their houses. The other concern we have which lends itself to drainage has already been alluded to, which is the walkout basement at number 6 Saunders, which is a fairly flat lot as you'll see in the pictures. It does abut a town-built path which you cannot see from the pictures in front but it is about a foot above the natural grade. So there's no hole, there's no appreciable drop-off in the back of the number 6 lot. Any questions from the committee? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — are there any questions? So you are arguing then that the at least for the home at number 6, that they should leave the land basically flat, or I guess level off some of the fill that's been put there. MR. SPRINGALL - Yes, it seems that the as proposed the house would sit substantially higher than its neighbors. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, and you're arguing that the lot should be leveled off and that it should not, basically should not dig out an area for a walkout basement and raise up other parts of the lot around the house. MR. SPRINGALL - Correct, it aesthetically would not match number 4, 8 and as has already been said up here once, I'm not an engineer, I couldn't speak as well to the drainage. MR. BARNEY - Could you clarify, now you said you were part of a homeowner's design board, what was the term that you used? MR. SPRINGALL - Uhh, the covenant refers to it as a design committee. 34 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - OK, could you just for the board's sake explain what that means. I mean, the board though could hear what you're saying, I'm not so sure there is a legal authority that the board has to deal with whatever issues your covenants may permit your design group to do, so if you could just kind of clarify to the board your perspective here. MR. SPRINGALL - Oh sure. The design committee serves only to create similar aesthetic look to the properties. It doesn't pretend to dictate specific colors, specific designs, just to maintain compatibility from lot to lot. It was originally written by the Malloy's when they owned all the parcels in this subdivision. I think in recognition of the fact that it was unlikely that the Malloy's were going to build every house from the same plan book. MR. BARNEY -Wouldn't that committee have the authority in it's design review to limit the height to the height of the adjacent property. MR. SPRINGALL - There is no specific height requirements in the covenants as written, but we certainly would have some authority to approve or disapprove of certain plans as proposed. MR. BARNEY — If the plan as proposed came in with a higher than an adjacent owner's structure, wouldn't you be able to, if the committee saw fit to, disapprove that plan. MR. SPRINGALL -We could. MR. BARNEY - for that reason. MR. SPRINGALL -We could, and then the covenants give a process of binding arbitration if the landowner disagrees with the finding of the design committee. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Am I right to assume, Mr. Barney, though that the zoning board has no responsibility to uphold the standards of this covenance unless... MR. BARNEY - Oh, absolutely. No, you're role is strictly in as the zoning ordinance applies. I'm just exploring their other alternatives here. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right. MR. SPRINGALL - and we don't approach you as the design committee, we are here tonight as neighbors, individual neighbors. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right, so that process at your design committee has not happened yet I assume. 35 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. SPRINGALL - no, there has been no submission of these plans to our design committee. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —OK. But you understand the considerations this board has in denying or granting the appeal doesn't necessarily take into account your goals. MR. SPRINGALL - understood, understood. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, any questions? MR. ELLSWORTH -Where is the high point of the land on this site plan? Or is it all flat up there? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL- for number 6? MR. SPRINGALL - For number 6 or for the whole subdivision? MR. ELLSWORTH - Well, for this subdivision. Somewhere along the Burbank's lot here or what? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — no, I mean the highest point would be somewhere along King, right? MR. SPRINGALL - There's very little variation, but I'm not a surveyor. MR. FRANTZ — Uhh, Harry according to the subdivision plot, the high point is in the southeast corner along King road, roughly 1296 feet. The other end where it fronts on King road is approximately 1286, so there is roughly a ten foot drop as you go west along King road along the frontage and then the subdivision again it's very gently, but there's grade back towards the northeast. MR. FROST —what's the drop off somewhere in the center of the cul-de-sac in what would be the northeast, eastern most part, say behind lot... MR. FRANTZ - Yeah, well from the cul-de-sac, it's uhhh... MR. FROST - I know you're building on lot 25, but is there a guesstimate you might be able to get for lot 22? MR. FRANTZ - I don't... MR. FROST - I'm just trying to figure out the droppage you may have from the cul-de-sac to the drainage ditch shown in blue on Dave Burbank's map. 36 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FRANTZ - Well, the drop there is actually, let me find the number at the end of this topo line, 1285 to roughly 1270. There's a 15 foot drop, again there is along the northeastern boundary of the property there is a substantial drop from the relatively flat Chase Pond site down to the Deer Run... MR. FROST - Can you provide or mention the elevation drop on lot 6, if you can figure that. Just so the board has a sense as to the grade. (second tape begins — some comments lost) MR. FROST - ... Is on the elevations from the front of lot 6 to the back of lot 6. MR. FRANTZ - It looks like from about 1285 at the corner, southwestern corner of the lot, back up to the northwest, it looks like its' approximately 6 feet. MR. FROST - 6 feet? MR. FRANTZ - yes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —for lot 6? MR. FRANTZ - for lot 6, yes. MR. NIEFER - I'm presuming it would be a town function to build this yellow section of drainage? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — that Mr. Burbank suggested? MR. NIEFER - Yeah, CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — yeah, I would think so. MR. NIEFER - and that's on somebody's property there. Whoever 4.3.14 is. Would the town have to get an easement? (comments muffled) MR. BARNEY - I quite frankly don't know what, how they would in fact... that trail. We did this land acquisition about 4 years ago? MR. FROST - I would say five or six. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, umm, and you see that little strip of land to the right of Mr. Burbank's. That's part of the trail as well CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. 37 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - I just don't know if there would be room for a drainage ditch or not. That's something that it would be nice for Dan, our engineering person to take a look at... he would want to make that determination. MR. KRANTZ - Now if these houses were being built so that they were in compliance, and the only objection were the four feet additional height, they wouldn't be here would they? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — correct. MR. KRANTZ - So that, you know, I don't know. You're talking about walkout basements... MR. FRANTZ - No, we would still be here. The interior height of the house... MR. KRANTZ - Yeah. MR. FROST - Right, right. I think what Ron's point is, is if you didn't have to come to the zoning board, the water issue would be really a matter perhaps for the building permit process, though I'm suggesting that it's a much larger issue than just a couple houses. MR. FRANTZ - I mean, for the record, these are the last two of twenty houses on the site, so I think the horse is long gone with regards to the drainage issue. (inaudible comments from the public) CLERK— Sir, we need you to come to the microphone to speak and identify yourself. MR. BURBANK - Sure, Dave Burbank again. One of the reasons I think, sir, that this is different than previous construction in the area is that I think they are proposing substantial changes to the grading of the lot by adding quite a bit of soil and that to me has more of an effect on drainage than some of the flatter lots. MR. FROST - I expect likewise, the attorney can correct me, that in granting approvals you have the ability to condition those approvals how you see fit, so... MR. SPRINGALL - If I could, Mr. Chairperson, to put on the record a comment that was just made in the audience. There are two lots left beyond the two which we're discussing tonight which are unbuilt, and the drainage issue is something faced by every house in the subdivision inside the basement. But I agree with Mr. Burbank that we are talking about a slightly different issue as it effects abutting property. 38 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Thank you. MR. SPRINGALL - Thank you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, anyone else. Sure, yeah. MR. PETROLIS - Good evening, thank you very much for allowing me to speak tonight. My name is Bill Petrolis. I live at 22 Saunders road. I just want to make some brief comments, and I'll make them as brief as possible. When I purchased my lot at Saunders road I got a big huge packet with deed restrictions and covenants in it, and I'd just like, when I went through the process with Malloy brothers, I went by the rules. And the thing is is that before I could even build I had to get the design architect committee one to sign off on my house, and also two is how I was going to set it on the lot. That's why at the beginning when a lot of the older homes were there. A constraint was placed on the placement of the homes because of the drainage problems and also other items. I feel a lot of the things that are in the covenants and deed restrictions I don't like, but the point is is that I accepted those when I purchased that piece of land. Just like how I would want build my house different, most people don't like having someone tell you "this is where you're going to build your house", but you live under those conditions when you get into a situation like that. Other concerns I heard from him is uhh, "make this house financially viable", my house, I have my basement in the ground and the thing is, this year the county raised my assessment by $75,000, so I don't think you know, the financial hardship thing has much to do with it. The other issue which I don't want to belabor is on the drainage is that over the last 6 years or so I've noticed that as more houses it's gotten more critical, and I'd like to thank Andy as he's been very conscious of things happening up there and to mitigate damages, but what Dave Burbank has mentioned with that particular house on lot 25, 1 have the same concerns of him getting flooded and also the town property getting flooded with the design of the house. On lot 6, my concern is my fellow neighbors as well as the walk there, is water going over to the town's property. And, so that's why I like to speak tonight and thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Thank you. OK, next person, Ma'am please. MS. BURNS — Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Malvis Slocum Burns and I own the home on lot 24 Saunders road and one of my primary concern is indeed drainage, and perhaps I hope, I am not at all an engineer. You'll forgive me, I have a liberal arts background, but I purchased the house almost a year ago. MR. FROST - Can I just interrupt for a second. The board is trying to follow — this map that is part of your packet actually has the street numbers on it. MR. NIEFER - That's so dark you can't even make head nor tails of it. 39 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - OK, lot 24 is just above lot 25. (comments inaudible) MS. BURNS — So I adjoin the number 25 lot and also Dave Burbank's lot who spoke earlier. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — you're to the North? MS. BURNS — Yes. And my good neighbor who spoke Earlier, Mr. Springall, has this picture. The blue, grey-blue house would be my house... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, I think actually we have a copy. MS. BURNS — Oh, you have a copy. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Thank you. MS. BURNS — I am very concerned that the house next to me, or the house that's being proposed is on a grade ground, I'm a little bit below if you just take the natural conditions, so if it is raised, I'm even more below, and I'm very worried about the potential of flooding. As has been pointed out, many houses in this area have flooding problems, and Mr. Springall who spoke there is a sump pump and the water is pumped into a ditch. Since I purchased the property about a year ago, two more houses have been built and I saw them during the building process that the basements were flooded, whereupon my brother, who was visiting, suggested that a deep ditch will be dug, and it was dug and it helped. But I don't see any such proposal for number 25 at this stage. And I don't know if that's a requirement or not, but Mr. Chairman, I would like to respectfully ask you and Mr. Frantz and Heritage Builders that this may be considered at least towards Saunders Road. What can be done towards the back, I'm not technically or engineering-wise adept enough to make a suggestion, but that flooding is a real problem in this neighborhood is very apparent. Every time it rains or as you walk and I think my neighbor bill just spoke that his basement has been more and more flooded as more and more homes have been built. I have been fortunate but I very much hope that this won't happen to me also. But I would like to second the concern of my neighbors as to appearance and height which is some concern to me as the ground will be raised, but my primary concern is the drainage problem. Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Thank you. OK, Sir, please. (comments inaudible) 40 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. OSLIBO —We live in 8 Saunders Road, the property directly adjacent to 6 Saunders Road and I think we like to make three points in common basically with what has been said before. First we think that the four feet height variance is a dramatic change especially taking into account if you look at the house from the backside from the town of Ithaca trail where it is substantial and if Mr. Frantz says the slope is approximately six feet from Saunders road to the trail, I don't really know because there is so much dirt on the lot that I don't really know what the original grade was there, and to us it basically looks as if there is fill from other properties brought into the lot to raise the house so it is even higher above existing grade which in turn has the potential to cause as has been said previously, substantial flooding to all properties immediately adjacent to it because obviously the water would flow from there to our house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — You're concerned with the status of it being higher and also obviously the drainage. MR. OSLIBO — I mean I think there are a multitude of issues. One is the easement that's there that leads the house to be brought further up to Saunders Road because they can't go further to the back. I mean I'm not well versed in design and the like but having a higher house even further to the road actually would make it look even more steep I guess. Also I'm concerned about that it is from the trail of Ithaca, because basically it is a three-story building from the trail. And also it is a three-story building from existing grade because, as it looks at least, the fill that is brought in is only meant to raise the grade so it can be built without any, or substantially no, digging. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. Thank you. MR. OSLIBO — Thank you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Does anyone else wish to speak. OK, if not, we'll close the public hearing. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL closes the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. MR. NIEFER - Seeing as Andy's gone out now, I was wondering if any other properties up there on that Saunders drive area have walk-out basements or if these are the only two that will have or do have walk-out basements requiring heights variances. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Umm, I don't recall any variances for height on this road recently. The house closest to King road I remember had a variance for setback a year ago. Do you recall? MR. BARNEY — I don't recall any other height variance. 41 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. NIEFER - So those other homes that are being built up there, spec homes, Lockri I believe is building them, they are all within the height zoning requirements apparently because nothing has come to us. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, we would have seen those recently. MR. BARNEY — That could mean one of two things, that they are within the right size or they're built oversize and we don't know it yet. (laughter) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, but as far as we know I mean those would have been here recently. MR. NIEFER - Do we as the zoning board have any say so over fill being brought into a building lot and then the builder goes ahead and builds based on the new fill and the new grade that's there as long as the height meets the zoning ordinance. MR. BARNEY —Well, we have fairly extensive provisions in our zoning ordinance and the requirement to get a permit to move significant amounts of fill either onto or off of the lot. Uhh, the only way that this board gets involved, one, is if the fill exceeds a certain amount, this board has to grant that approval to allow the fill to be put on the lot. I don' think the amount of fill here has reached that level, but I don't know. The first step is the engineer which issues a permit and it exceeds 250 cubic yards it goes to the planning board and if it exceeds 2500 yards it comes to this board, so I'm assuming that the fill here meets the requirements of either the engineer or the planning board. Ordinarily, you wouldn't get involved. If they put the fill there and it's otherwise placed there in accordance with our fill law and the house was placed there with a height that was permissible in our ordinance it would be measured from the fill line on the exterior and on the interior, the lowest point. However, when someone comes in and seeks a variance for a height on top of a fill, then I think you have the right to look at that and determine if the need for it is self created or perhaps because of the nature of the fill having been put there elevating the level of the house to begin with so that is appropriate to allow higher elevation for the granting of the variance. I think that is within your purview to decide one way or the other. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I think we could certainly argue that given the rest of the neighborhood, that the fact that these lots don't appear to be out of the ordinary compared to the other lots, and that the other lots don't have height variances or walkout basements and aren't, don't appear to be elevated from their natural. You know, didn't have fill added from their natural elevation lines. I think that would be a justification for denial in this case. 42 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. NIEFER - There is no question that approving a variance accentuated a drainage problem for the neighborhood. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I think it can be also based on the aesthetics of the situation, having a home that is higher than the other homes. MR. KRANTZ— In actuality though assuming that they did not have walkout basements this request for a variance wouldn't even be here tonight. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — There is an issue of the interior height as well. MR. BARNEY - There are two measures, and the lower of the two that governs. One is the exterior which is 36 feet or the interior which is 38 feel from the lowest interior point... that's the floor from the peak of the rood. The reason being to avoid... a number of ordinances use an exterior grade only and by moving some dirt around you can change that exterior grade quite a bit so we opted for a two pronged test and you cannot exceed either of those prongs, 36 feet exterior or 38 feet interior. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Any other? MR. NIEFER - Going back to the, and maybe one of these letters from the doctor might have touched on, but I have not gotten a definitive answer regarding the peak of one house as compared with the other, comparing 4 Saunders with proposed 6 Saunders as to whether one is going to be 4 feet higher than the other. No one has really addressed that and I don't think the appellant has addressed that really clearly. MR. FRANTZ - Can 1, what is the question again? MR. NIEFER -Well, my question is the ridgeline of the existing house as opposed to the ridgeline of the proposed house. MR. ELLSOWRTH - Is this going to be the highest one up there? MR. NIEFER - How much higher is the ridgeline of the proposed house going to be than the ridgeline of the existing house? MR. FRANTZ -Well, as I said before I don't know because I didn't measure the house at 4 Saunders road. What I did try to make clear is that we did try to set our first floor approximately the same height as the house at 4 Saunders road. So the height of our house is not going to be visibly sticking above or visibly higher than the house at 4 Saunders road. And the reason, and if I can address the drainage issue which many people have commented about, the grading pans for both of these homes were done in a matter to as is standard for all grading plans to not run water into adjacent properties. At 6 Saunders road, what I have 43 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES done is created a shallow swale at the side of the house, which would send the water either towards the street and the ditch there or again towards the back, which is the natural drainage flow right now. So we are not shifting water towards our neighbors, we are doing what is the responsible thing to do which is the standard practice in the design trade which is to direct it towards a ditch or get it away from other homes. At 25 Saunders road we are doing the same thing, intercepting the flow that is now coming down Ms. Burns lawn and directing it into a shallow swale along the street or around the house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —We did already close the public hearing, so I'm sorry, but the applicant does get to continue talking as the applicant and the public... MR. BARNEY - But I think even that should probably be limited to questions from the board directly to the applicant, not to engage in debate directly with the applicant because then it is not fair to the other people because the last word is kind of getting said. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — True. Mike, any other comments? MR. SMITH - No. These are both area variances, so no SEAR. MR. BARNEY -Andy, Mr. Niefer asked whether there were any other homes up there in the Saunders subdivision, and I didn't know how to answer that? MR. FROST - I don't get around as much as I used to, Christy does most of that, I'm not aware of...Bill, I wondered are there any other walkouts you're aware of? MR. WILL BURBANK— I don't, you know from the backside of the front lot (comments inaudible) MR. FROST - Does anyone else on Saunders have a walkout? Maybe one. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —And you're not aware of any of those lots that have height variances. I don't remember any. MR. FROST - Not as I recall. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I don' know about the other board members, but I am inclined against the approval. For me I don't feel that the height has a large impact on the drainage. You know obviously moving some fill around has some impact. For me it's more the aesthetics of the house. All of these houses have been built in a relatively short period of time. None of them have height variances and these lots don't seem to be any different significantly than other lots in the development. Most of the variances we give for walkout basements are in situations where the ground has a significant slope and basically you would have to put in a lot of fill to meet the zoning requirements, to meet the 44 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES height requirement. And in this case, they're actually having to move fill around to circumvent them. MR. KRANTZ - Can we approve the interior elevation but not the exterior to avoid the walkout basement. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, that's an interesting question. None of the other homes have had the interior elevation variance either. What's different about these homes that their interior elevation exceeds... are their ceilings higher than eight feet on any floors? MR. FRANTZ - No, the ceilings on these homes are 8 foot ceilings. The reason for the request of the variance is that it is not a colonial revival style of architecture it is more a Victorian style of architecture and the Victorian style of architecture has this steeper roof line. MR. BARNEY - Is it really just the pitch of the rood that's causing the problem? MR. FRANTZ - The proposed pitch is 10-12. MR. BARNEY -And that's really what's causing the need for.... MR. FRANTZ - Yes, as the house in the illustration shows, it's really a more Victorian style house. MR. FROST - But if the roof pitch was lower, you could still potentially have a walkout without potentially needing the variance. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — that's what he pointed out in the letter. MR. ELLSOWRTH - He addressed that in the letter. To build a six on twelve. MR. FRANTZ - If we, I'm sorry can you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — You already addressed that George. You already said that you could lower the roof and not require any variances, is what you'd pointed out in your letter. MR. FRANTZ - That is correct, but it would have a pretty detrimental impact on the aesthetics of the house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Right. So, somebody asked about granting the interior and not the exterior. I guess that would seem to make sense to me. 45 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. NIEFER - Eliminates the walkout basement, which to me is a holding pond. You've taken the site and created holding pond at that back basement door if you don't pump it out right. MR. FROST - The reality is if they had two stories below grade it's not something that is going to impact the visual of the outside. I think they did the interior measurement to give something to play against the exterior measurement. MR. NIEFER -What's the ceiling height for the basement? MR. FRANTZ - Uhh, I think. MR. NIEFER - I guess what I'm getting at is, can you lower that and... MR. FRANTZ - I think it's like 7'... MR. NIEFER - 6. MR. FRANTZ - Yeah, it's less than 8 feet, but I remember 7, let me just check, I have it right here. That's 7 feet 11 and a half inches for the height of the basement ceiling. MR. NIEFER - So you only pick up 5 inches to 7'6" normal ceiling. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — basically we can't force the applicant to not put in a small amount of fill and raise the house up higher MR. NIEFER -Well, there are two things going together—walkout basements the other thing. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right, but we can require that the height be limited as far as the lowest exterior grade which discourages the applicant from just going to extra trouble to raise the house. MR. BARNEY - It depends on where you put the exterior grade — you can make the exterior grade go up 3 feet if you want to. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right, that's my point. The applicant can make their house higher. MR. BARNEY -What I'm saying is if you give up the interior dimension limitation and you raise the exterior grade you have the situation where it can be 40 or 41 feet on the interior side but still be 36 feet on the exterior. MR. FROST - So what that interior measurement serves to do is discourage people from putting that 3 foot of filler on the property. 46 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - (comments inaudible) MR. ELLSOWRTH - are these stick-built homes or are they modulars or are they sectionals or what are they? MR. FRANTZ - These are stick built homes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — So John's point is good. To really restrict how high the house can go we need to limit both the interior and the exterior. Because if we limit just the exterior you can put some filler around the house and make it go higher. MR. ELLSOWRTH -Which makes the drainage problem worse. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right, I mean we can't stop the applicant from just moving everything up, moving the basement floor up and the roof up and the ground up. MR. BARNEY - How would the board feel about this if you were convinced that the height of this building would not exceed the height of the buildings on either side of it. MR. ELLSOWRTH -Well, it's allowed a certain height. If the building on either side is less, it should still be allowed that height. MR. BARNEY - I guess my question is, I'm not sure we have the full information to make a decision tonight. If you would find it reasonable to grant a variance if after the variance was granted the height didn't exceed the height of the other two buildings. MR. KRANTZ - I would be more inclined to be receptive to it, yes. MR. ELLSOWRTH - My sense is that the way it is presented it isn't going to go through, but I'm speaking for myself. So I guess what I would propose is, do you want to re-submit, or do you want to get a denial? MR. FRANTZ -Well, let me guess... Right now we're proposing a basement finished floor elevation that at the walkout is, if my memory is right here, 2.5 feet below grade. If the concern is the height of the house, and by the way the amount of fill we are proposing is upwards of 4 feet, so if that's the concern, then I would be comfortable recommending to my clients that we reduce the basement finished floor elevation another foot which would bring the necessary fill down another foot which would bring it down to 3 feet above existing grade, which by the way is comparable to the homes along the King road side of Saunders road. 47 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. ELLSOWRTH - you're still a foot over the height requirements... MR. FRANTZ -We're still going to be 39 feet 3 inches interior height. But the house will be a full foot lower than what is proposed now. And the fill would be a full foot lower. The reason why we have the fill there is not to raise the level of the house but to prevent what we have seen in may other houses where there is not enough fill and you have a house sitting on top of this little bump on the earth. So really the reason for the fill is not to raise the house but to spread it around and actually blend in more with the surrounding lots. And if we lower the house another foot... of course if you do not grant us the walk-out, we will be moving that earth around to the back of the house and creating a gentle slope from the house back towards the rear lot line. MR. ELLSOWRTH -Where there's a swale that drains down through, drains away? MR. FRANTZ -At the trail? MR. ELLSOWRTH -At the back lot line. MR. FRANTZ -Well it appears that what happened... It appears that at one time the land drained naturally towards Chase pond. What the town of Ithaca did was put in a foot or so of crushed concrete. I forget what project it was, what town project it was from... Eastwood Commons, the curbs. They took, when they re- built the streets at Eastwood Commons they took the curbs up, they got a crusher, they crushed them, laid them down as base for that trail. MR. KRANTZ - You know that's really what the broad significance of all this is really is that the town of Ithaca which has such diligence in determining and raising our assessment values doesn't show the same diligence in taking care of the neighborhood's drainage problems. MR. BARNEY -Wait a minute. Assessments has nothing to do with the town of Ithaca. MR. KRANTZ - They know how to take your money, they ought to put some of it back. MR. BARNEY - I beg your pardon? MR. KRANTZ - They know how to take your money, with the assessments, they ought to be able, more concerned with taking care of a drainage problem in the neighborhood. MR. BARNEY - Ron, the town levies have not gone up in recent years. What has gone up is the assessments and the county is the one that chooses and 48 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES makes those assessments. The town tax rate has been relatively stable in the last 5 years. MR. KRANTZ -Well, the drainage problem isn't. MR. ELLSWORTH -Well, do you want to come back or do you want to... a vote. MR. FRANTZ -We would like to get going on these two homes. It's been a couple of months now, umm, and ... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I think that at least a couple of board members have expressed the opinion that if the home is not higher than the neighboring homes that possibly they would vote in favor of a variance for the interior height, I believe. But not necessarily the exterior height if I was reading that right. MR. FRANTZ - I guess if it's the house at 4 Saunders road that would certainly be acceptable. The next lot over is 8... this house is set way back on the lot, this house is set way back on the lot and it is actually also. We have to build our house closer to the one at 4 Saunders road because of the town sewer line easement that runs diagonally across the property which is why we can't set it as far back as we want to. So if it's no higher than the house at 4 Saunders road I think that's something we can, you know, live with. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — It also appears that 8 is a little lower elevation. I mean the lot in general. MR. FRANTZ - The lot in general. Yeah, again it continues that gentle slope down. MR. NIEFER - I would like to see some assurance that the final grade of the 6 Saunders not be any higher than the final grade of 4 and also 8 so that it is a level plain across the number 6 as compared to 4 and 8. MR. FROST - It sounds like 8 is lower so how about an average between the elevation or the height of 4 and 6, why not use the average, because I think you said that 8 slopes back downwards. (comments inaudible) MR. FROST - I think the average would be the fairer way to go so that it wouldn't be any higher or lower. MR. BARNEY -Are you talking about the building or are you talking about the grade. MR. FROST - Both, if that was possible. 49 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FRANTZ - But, yeah, there is no way we could get it as low as 8 because that house is set fairly low in the ground to begin with. MR. FROST - So it would be higher than 8 but lower than 4 which would be the average, assuming that 8 is lower than 4. But I guess then why not just have no higher than 4 and not worry about 8. MR. FRANTZ - I think if you set the roofline not to exceed the roofline at lot 4 umm, then I don't think we'll have that much of an impact on lot 8. MR. BARNEY - Lot 4, however, is higher up than lot 6. The house at lot 4 actually appears again the finished floor elevation appears to be about 3 feet higher than the original grade, and again they used the fill from the basement to back fill up against the house and they raised the yard a foot and a half or two feet already so. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, it appears that you have at least some board members who would be in favor of this if you can show that the roof elevation would not be higher than the elevation at 4, and that's for an interior height but not for an exterior height which would allow these walkout basements and changes in grade building it up and some areas and making it lower in others. MR. FRANTZ - What I am hearing is that you will not grant anything — the variance from the exterior height. That the house can be no more than 36 feet from exterior grade top the peak of the roof. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — That's what I'm getting from the board, yes. I assume you feel for both lots 6 and 25. MR. FRANTZ - Let me ask just Andy, is it safe to assume that you have the drawings for 4 Saunders road in your office? MR. FROST - Not in my office. MR. FRANTZ - But somewhere in Town Hall. MR. FROST - Yeah, they would probably be in the basement, but yes we should have them. MR. FRANTZ - So we have that record that we can use to calculate the height of the house at lot 4 and set the height of our house accordingly. I do have a question about— are you applying this — I think we need to separate 25 Saunders road from 6 Saunders road. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK 50 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - They're really two separate appeals. I don't know whether you're trying to get a straw vote here George or what but there's nothing that would prohibit them from approving one and denying the other or denying both. MR. FRANTZ - Well, no... MR. FROST - The question is, can you make a decision on lot 25 that's any different than what your feeling is for number 6. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — My line of reasoning for both of them at least as far as the exterior height is based on the appearance at least as compared to the other homes in the area, I think that applies equally. Neither lot is particularly unusual. MR. FROST - May I make a suggestion? Our next zoning board meeting is May 17. this is 2 weeks away, so if you considered an adjournment, you could take a look at the building plans for the houses we have up already, develop some markups and perhaps come back and get a vote. You're only looking at wasting two more weeks. MR. NIEFER - If we're looking at continuing negotiations with Mr. Frantz, I think we should open it to the public as well, both have given their presentations. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, let's see what Mr. Frantz wants to do. Do you want to have an adjournment for two weeks? MR. FRANTZ -Well, I don't see any need to adjourn number 6. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Why? MR. BARNEY - He's basically saying he'll accept the limit to the higher— no higher than the building at lot 4. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. BARNEY - If this board is willing to grant a variance, again I'm... (comment inaudible) MR. BARNEY -We can adjourn the one and then uhh, vote on the other if you wanted to. MR. FROST - If I can step out on a limb here, perhaps, George by looking at that you can better address the concerns of the neighbors with drainage and other things. Perhaps not only serving your own desires to seek a variance but to also 51 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES maybe appease the people at least with better information the people who are concerned and come back and maybe everybody can be happy. MR. FRANTZ - I just have some information on lot 25 that distinguishes it from lot 6. MR. FROST - It's up to you. MR. FRANTZ - The house to the south here is actually substantially higher. And Mrs. Slocum's house here is substantially lower. And also in the case of lot 25 the house is not sitting up above the ground as much as the house at lot 6 is. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. FRANTZ - Let me see, the basement, the first floor elevation of lot 25 is, I'm just trying to find the contour number... the finished floor elevation of the first floor of lot 25 is set at 1293, uhh, 1293 feet. And that is umm, roughly 4 feet, 4 and a half feet above the existing grade. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —which house is that? MR. FRANTZ - This is house 25. The proposed house at 25 Saunders road, the front corner appears to be about 4 and a half feet above the existing grade, but the house is also set back from the front yard line 77 feet. Ok, so there's going to actually be a very gentle slope up to the house from the street and it's also going to be lower than the house next door, 27. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I'm sorry, George, could you pause just a second. (The tape is changed) MR. FRANTZ - So again, we're not proposing to import fill into lot 25. We're hoping to use what is excavated to fill the slope around the house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — So, would you be able to work within the restriction that the elevation of the ground around the house at lot 25 be no higher than the current elevation of the land. MR. FRANTZ - Uhh, no, we cannot do that. As I was saying, we're going to have to raise it somewhat. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — How much? MR. FRANTZ - OK, we're talking, let's see, it appears at the most about 2.5 or 3 feet, and that's in a gentle slope starting at the road line going back 77 feet to the front of the house. 52 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Are you raising the elevation of the land at every point around the house or are there any points of the house that will meet the current elevation? MR. FRANTZ -Actually the house will, yes, in the southern corner towards King road where the property continues to rise, umm, the... no, the finished floor elevation there will be again about 2.5 feet or so above grade, but again. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — But, I'm saying are you going to raise grade at that point on the house? MR. FRANTZ - No, no, not at that point. We're going to be raising the grade in front of the house and to the north of the house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — But not on the south side. C* - Not on the south side, correct. And not on the side facing the park. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —And how much are you raising it on the north side? MR. FRANTZ - On the north side, where the house is, again it appears to be about 2.5 feet. OK.... And then it would, you know again, gently slope away from the house. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, how would the board feel about granting number 6 with no exterior height restriction, and the requested interior height restriction if the height of the house does not exceed the height of the house at number 4, and then at 25 Saunders road, grant the interior variance but not the exterior variance again with the restriction that the grade along the south side of the house not be raised from its present elevation which would essentially fix the house could then be no more than 36 feet higher than that point. MR. ELLSOWRTH -We don't know the variances on the other houses though. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —what do you mean? MR. ELLSOWRTH -We don't know the measurements on the other houses. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — You mean at 25? MR. ELLSOWRTH - Yeah. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Well, that's true, I mean the house to the north is clearly not a, is clearly a shorter house, and then the house the south is on higher land, so I don't know that either of them make a particularly good 53 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES reference. I mean, allowing it as high as the house to the south would possibly be too high, and to the north, maybe too low a restriction. You know, and then there is the 36 feet which we wouldn't be giving a variance on.... (comments inaudible) MR. BARNEY - You can fix the absolute grade by reference to topo. MR. FROST -Would you just say the height of the building can be 36 feet above... MR. FROST - From an enforcement standpoint, it to me would be a little difficult to know where the grade was before you started... (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —We're just trying to fix... the goal is obviously to try and prevent them from making the house higher by adding fill around it, but I'm not sure how to accomplish that. MR. FROST - I understand that. I just know to be quite honest, if the house is built and then we get the certificate, that I wouldn't know exactly... MR. BARNEY -Well, I think you could probably condition it on an as-built elevation... surveyor provision. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — got to help me out here guys... I mean we can adjourn these and ask the applicant for more information. Let's go back to 6, who's comfortable approving 6 with the height not to exceed the height of the house at four and the interior height variance with no exterior height variance. Where are you... I mean are you leaning more towards no variances? MR. KRANTZ - The highest built, or lot in the area is 4? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — no, that's just the higher of the two neighbors to 6, or so it appears, I don't think that's the highest in the development necessarily. MR. ELLSOWRTH - I would vote for your proposal. MR. KRANTZ - OK, fine. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I don't want to talk you into it. (many comments at once) 54 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - The motion is to deny the variance with respect to the exterior direction, but to grant the variance with respect to the interior dimension provided that the top of the peak of the house does not exceed the height of the top of the peak of the house at 4. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —And that, I think will do two things — it will essentially eliminate the walkout basement. MR. BARNEY -Well, it may or may not, it depends on how far you have to dig down. MR. FROST — and then, it eliminates the walkout and then are you going to condition this upon a survey showing the relation...? I mean I can't eyeball that. MR. BARNEY - No, I don't think it would be an unreasonable condition to assert that before certificate of occupancy is granted an as-built survey be made to show the height of the two buildings, to show that it doesn't exceed that. I don't think that's a problem. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK... OK. MR. BARNEY -A surveyor can go out and do that without even having to go on the property. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, well I will make that motion with that condition for the house at 6 Saunders road with the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. MR. KRANTZ -Area variance? MR. BARNEY - Yeah. Height is an area variance. MR. KRANTZ - Oh, OK. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so just to recap that is granting the request for the interior height to be no greater than 39, 3... is that what we said the new interior? MR. FRANTZ - 39 feet 3 inches. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, interior height to be no greater than 39 feet 6 inches with the finding that it satisfies the requirement for an area variance and with the condition that the applicant must submit an as-built survey? MR. BARNEY -As-built surveyor's certification to the height of this building and the height of the building on lot 4, or 4 Saunders road, showing that the height of 55 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES the building on 6 Saunders road does not exceed the height of the building on 4 Saunders road. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, does everyone follow that. OK, second? MR. ELLSOWRTH - Second. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 015: Heritage Park Town Houses, 6 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-3, Residence District R-15. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Heritage Park Townhouses, Appellant, George Frantz, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be allowed to construct a single-family home with an interior height no greater than 39 feet 6 inches located at 6 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-3, Residence District R-15. FINDINGS: a. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS- a. ONDITIONS:a. The applicant must submit an as-built surveyor certification showing that the elevation of the highest point of 6 Saunders Road is no higher than the elevation of the highest point of 4 Saunders Road. b. The request for a variance to exceed the allowed exterior height is denied. The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. MR. BARNEY - It was in that motion also, Carrie, that the application for a exterior, variance of the exterior dimension was denied, just the interior one was granted. 56 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Right. OK, and I'm sensing form the board that they would like to see a more specific proposal at 25 showing the elevation of the house so that we can compare since there does not appear to be as easy a limit to set as far as a neighbor. MR. FRANTZ - OK, so you want some sort of, well, elevations or cross-sections of the lots? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, from the different views, showing what the current grade is, how you plan to change it, how high the house is and... MR. ELLSOWRTH - How high the adjacent... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - the height of the adjacent... MR. BARNEY - two adjacent lots. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so I will move to adjourn the appeal for 25 Saunders road until the applicant, until the applicant has materials ready? I don't know if they can make it in two weeks necessarily. MR. FROST -We also have to do the advertisement and that sort of thing also and I've got to publish this... MR. KRANTZ -Well, you've got to put that out anyway. MR. BARNEY -Well, let's find out, George would you be ready to go — you would need to the materials in by what, a week? MR. FROST - I've got to do a mail out by essentially by May, or I have to do a newspaper notice by May 10tH MR. BARNEY -Well a newspaper notice is a separate issue for a moment. Lets first take your mail-out requirement— you need the materials to send out to the board, when? MR. FROST - By May 12tH MR. BARNEY - For a May 15th meeting? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — May 17tH CLERK— 17tH MR. ELLSOWRTH - You got room on that agenda? 57 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - Well, it appears now I have a case that can't go to May... MR. BARNEY - So the question is how much in advance of May 12th do you want the materials in? MR. FROST -Well, I have to have it in the newspaper... MR. BARNEY - Stick the newspaper for a minute, because. MR. FROST -Well, it all sort of runs together... MR. BARNEY - No, if you adjourn to a specific time and date you don't have to advertise, so I'm not too worried about that. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so the 12tH MR. BARNEY - that you want them in, or when you want them to go out? I mean you want a day or two to process them in here, don't you? MR. FRANTZ - Is May 10th a Monday or a Tuesday? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — It's a week from today. MR. NIEFER - There goes your weekend. MR. BARNEY -Would you rather have us make it May 7th? MR. FRANTZ - No. MR. BARNEY - So May 10th, can you have it in? MR. FRANTZ - It seems to me that we have a lot of topo data and... MR. FROST - May 11th is fine. MR. FRANTZ - it would just have to scramble to I'm assuming take these elevations that are in these drawings and make some drawings that will illustrate to the board how the house will appear at least in relation to the existing terrain on the lot. It's going to be tough to get information for the houses on either side, unless we get permission to go on and survey, but... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, I guess all we can say is, that would obviously strengthen your case, so obviously do your best. 58 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - You should be able to get heights without going on the property. MR. FRANTZ - That's the other thing, yeah. MR. BARNEY - I mean the interior you wouldn't get, but you can shoot from the street from a known height at a known angle. MR. FROST - (question inaudible) MR. BARNEY - Well, you've closed the public hearing on this one? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yes. MR. BARNEY - OK, then you are advertising this, correct. I had thought we were returning to public hearing, but we are not. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —We didn't necessarily have to, but I think we should. MR. BARNEY - Then you do have to advertise it... then you advertise what. MR. FROST - I would just hate to advertise and then have to... MR. BARNEY - Charge it to the developer. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, I will move to adjourn the appeal for 25 Saunders road to the May 17th meeting of this board. MR. FROST - So for those in attendance, you can come back, you will have an opportunity CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — second? MR. NIEFER - Second. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 016: Heritage Park Town Houses, 6 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-3, Residence District R-15. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Jim Niefer. RESOLVED that this board adjourns the appeal of Heritage Park Townhouses, Appellant, George Frantz, Agent, located at 25 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44.2-2-13, Residence District R-15 until the next Zoning Board meeting on May 17, 2004 at 7:00 PM. 59 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. MR. BARNEY - And that's just on lot 25. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — thank you everybody for coming and speaking. APPEAL of Michael and Ann Elmo, Appellants, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Sections 18, 21, and 23 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to maintain a second dwelling unit with a side yard setback of 25 feet (40 feet required) and variances from Article XIII, Sections 57 and 68 to allow the second dwelling unit to be detached from the primary residence on a building lot that has a lot depth of less than the required 200 feet, located at 139 King Road East, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44-2-2, Residence District R-30. A new Town Zoning Ordinance in effect after the date of the appellant's application would allow a second detached dwelling unit on a single parcel of land. An approval from Article XII, Section 54 may also be requested. MR. FROST - If I could just start out by saying that I've also advertised this in multiple directions, depending on how you wish to go and I think the appellant is looking for two possibilities, and I think primarily she wants to maintain, connect, the two building as she will describe but is also willing to keep them detached if it is sure of getting a variance without being said... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Hi please give us your name and address for the record. MR, ELMO — Hi, Mike Elmo at 139 East King Road. MRS. ELMO —And I'm Ann Elmo at 139 East King Road. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, and please give us a brief overview of what you are planning to do and what you need variances for. MR. ELMO —We put an apartment above our garage with a variance that you generously gave to us a few years ago and I think that variance is coming due to be ended, to be terminated, so we would like to ask for a variance to keep that apartment there. And the reason being is because we would like to put an addition on our house. And if need be to hook the house to the garage, which is 60 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES part of the reason why we needed the variance in the beginning because if the house was attached to the garage there wouldn't have been a need for the variance in the beginning I believe. We're hoping to put that addition on, and hook the house to the garage and keep the apartment to be able to finance it. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — and what is your preference as far as attaching it or not attaching it? MR. ELMO — I guess we would just as soon attach it. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MRS. ELMO — Now that I found out that I could have a mud room and a nice big kitchen and a family room. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. FROST - With the attachment they would need a forty foot setback on the east side and existing is 25 feet, so that's one clear issue. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, and if not attached as an accessory building it meets the setback for that, right? MR. FROST - Well, I'd have to double check that on the new ordinance but this is an appeal that was filed with the old ordinance so... it is an existing lot that's a 192 feet deep where they need 200, hence you can also, I suppose approach this as a change to a non-conforming building lot as in article 12 section 54 of the old ordinance. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —A change to a non-conforming lot? MR. FROST - Well, I mean they would be enlarging a non-conforming.... MR. BARNEY - Under the new zoning ordinance they wouldn't require a variance for this either would they? MR. FROST - Except for possibly... well, no because they would still need the 200 foot depth. MR. BARNEY - But I thought that if we had a substandard lot under the new zoning ordinance... MR. FROST - Right, right, that's just like the old section 57... it's really for all intents and purposes what I see as a side yard variance being necessary, but once again I broadened my advertisement to cover all the bases. 61 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - I'm sorry Andy, I'm missing the 25 feet... so the side yard here is supposed to be 40, is that what you said? MR. FROST - Yes, for an R-30 zone both new and old. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, if... if the applicant had the desire to have them remain detached then I would I think definitely want to try to treat this under the new ordinance because we would have to grant a much less substantial variance for them. If they prefer to attach them, that makes it pretty much equal as far as the old or the new. And then it's simply a side yard setback. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK, you're sure you want to attach them? MRS. ELMO — Don't tell him... You're the last people I have to convince about this. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Well, it's easier, it's a little bit easier for us if you do want to attach them. MR. ELMO — If we do want to? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yes, if you want them detached it's easier for us if you wait... would they have to re-apply, or do they have a choice as to which ordinance to...? MR. BARNEY -Well, right now you have, as I understand it, a variance which allows it to be two separate buildings. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, that's time-limited. MR. BARNEY - Times limited to when? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — soon, I think it was eight years. MRS. ELMO —Yeah, I think there is one year left. MR. BARNEY -Well by the time that year elapses, they'll be under a new zoning ordinance and they'll have the right to have it now under a new zoning ordinance period. Am I right Andy? MR. FROST - Yes. MR. BARNEY - So they wouldn't need a variance. That's if you want it detached, you don't have to do anything, you can just walk out of here. MR. FROST — No, I think they still have a setback problem, though. 62 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY -Well I can't remember under the new ordinance whether it's... MR. FROST - It's 40 feet, I'm just trying to find it now. MR. BARNEY - It is, but is it for... oh for a building that's uhhh... MR. FROST - That's what I'm trying to find out. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I think it might be greater if uhhh... MR. FROST - That's a good question... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Isn't that what Andy wrote? It complicates things that we have a new zoning ordinance effective a month ago. (they search their papers) MR. BARNEY - They have to get special approval. (comments inaudible) MR. FROST - for the detached. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, for the detached second, yeah. MR. FROST - Then the other issue though is the setback... I think you'd be better served by attaching. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, and you still have the 40 foot with attaching it too. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — by attaching the units you are asking for less of a variance or less of an approval from the board. MRS. ELMO — Fine with me. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. MR. ELMO — Our final plan was to attach to the... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — That's a good plan. Stick with it. Uhh, Mike any comments? MR. SMITH - No, the SEAR is prepared depending on what it actually needed. If it's just an area variance the SEAR isn't needed. But just in general it appears that the driveway has adequate parking, and... 63 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. Any questions or comments from the board? If not, we'll open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opens the Public Hearing at 9:44 p.m. MRS. ELMO — Those are all our neighbors that left, but they don't know us because they live up in the nice part. MR. BARNEY - You'll have a nicer part too, now that you have an attached... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, if not we'll close the public hearing. And we do not need to do SEAR as Mr. Smith pointed out, if we're just doing a side yard setback. Is it a little bit more than 25 feet or is it...? Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 9:454 p.m. MR. FROST — There are site diagram, but I don't have a survey map showing 25, but that I think has been consistent from previous applications. MR. BARNEY - Have you measured to the side yard line? MR. ELMO — Yes, I think it's 25 feet and a few inches, we've also talked to the people who owned the land next to us, and they have no problem with our attaching the two houses and building a little addition. MR. BARNEY - Our concern is that sometimes you're off by 6 inches or a foot and we don't like to give you a variance that's 25 feet if you go out and have a surveyor to sell the place and they walk in the door and all of a sudden it's 24 feet 4 inches or something like that. MR. ELMO — I think the last survey we had, it said 25 plus. MR. BARNEY - Or minus. MR. ELMO — No, it just said plus I think. Maybe it said plus or minus. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —We'll give you a little leeway. OK, I will move to grant the appeal of Michael and Ann Elmo requesting a variance from the requirements of article... MR. ELLSOWRTH - 40 feet requirements. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, but what's the section though. MR. FROST - 21 to 23, probably 21. 64 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — requesting a variance from the requirements of article V, section 21, requesting a variance from the sideyard setback allowing a setback of no less than 24 feet on the —what side of the house is that? MR. ELMO — East. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — on the east-side lot line of the property located at 139 King road East tax parcel number 44-2-2 district R-30 with the finding that requirements for an area variance have been met and with the condition that no additional structure be built within the, what's the setback there? MR. FROST - 40 foot. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —within the 40 foot setback requirements, that just the existing structure encroach within the required setback. I assume that's what you're planning? MR. ELMO — Yes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. Second? MR. KRANTZ - Second. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 017: Michael and Ann Elmo, 139 King Road East, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44-2-2, Residence District 30. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Michael and Ann Elmo, Appellants, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 21 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to allow a setback of no less than 24 feet from the east side lot line of the property located at 139 King Road East, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 44-2-2, Residence District R-30. FINDINGS: a. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS- a. ONDITIONS:a. No additional structure shall be built within the 40 foot setback requirements. 65 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, you're all set. APPEAL: of Mark Bianconi, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 22 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to create a single-family home with a lot coverage of 24% ± (20% limit) at 112 Woolf Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 23-1-11.124, Residence District R-15 cluster. MR. FROST - This house has been under construction. They have not gone beyond anything that would affect the variance appeal that they are here for now. So the pictures that you see will show a new house. MR. ELLSOWRTH - I went by there just this afternoon and the house seemed totally complete to me. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Well they haven't exceeded the 20% yet though. They haven't added the part that? MR. ELLSOWRTH - 20% construction? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — No, 20% lot coverage. MR. FROST - It's R-15 zone, they are proposing a garage and a deck. MR. ELLSOWRTH - Are you living there yet? MR. BIANCONI — I'm sorry? MR. ELLSOWRTH - Are you living in there? MR. BIANCONI — Oh no, the interior has got a ways to go. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — So, could you or maybe, well first please state your name and address for the record. MR. BIANCONI — Mark Bianconi, currently living at 204 Hook Place in Ithaca. 66 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —And you are... the total area of the lot is a little under 5000 square feet. MR. BIANCONI — Correct. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Could you or someone else explain sort of how these cluster lots were set up, I assume there must be some common land set aside? MR. BARNEY - These uhh... This is Timmy Ciachki's subdivision back about let's say 15 years ago, something in that range. He came in with a somewhat novel approach. There was land... he was allowed an effective cluster in exchange for a 75, 1 can't recall if the land was a trail or... MR. SMITH - It was both park and trail. The park land is directly behind this parcel. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, so I assume that the common land has been dedicated to the town or... MR. BARNEY -We're having a discussion about that. It's either been dedicated or it's sitting on my desk to be dedicated. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — You're right at the 15 year mark as far as how far behind you are. MR. BARNEY -Actually I got a couple that are about 20-25 years that I've got to get to. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — So this is a rush job. MR. BARNEY - This is a rush job. MR. FROST - A few of the particulars actually. There is a 30 foot buffer all around the entire development in the back yards. So, they aren't divided...what would be required for the back— rear yard setbacks. MR. SMITH - They're meeting all the setbacks, right? MR. FROST - Yes, except for the interior... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I guess what I'm getting at is that the common land part of the cluster does add up to 15,000 square feet at least per lot. MR. BARNEY - Yes. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I'm sure that the planning board. 67 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - Either that or some of the some of the other lot sizes that were part of the subdivision were very much larger. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - OK. MR. BARNEY - I mean the cluster... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. It wasn't an allowance to put more houses on... MR. BARNEY - No, No. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, well I would just make the comment to the board that ordinarily I find that this restriction, the percentage of lot coverage to be something that I am not inclined to vote in favor of, but that this is an unusual situation in that the lot is much smaller than normal by design by the cluster subdivision design. You can think of it as the rest of the lot is there, it's just in the common land and... so in that case, and plus the fact that the two adjacent neighbors which are fairly close and would be significantly impacted have written letters of support. MR. ELLSOWRTH - (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - So, given all that, I'm inclined to be in favor of the application. Yeah, we'll wait and see. MR. ELLSOWRTH - In that area also has some odd groupings of houses... in some places they're real real close and other places they're spread out. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Well, some parts of that street are not part of the cluster. MR. FROST -We do have two issues. One immediate issue is not really the responsibility of the property owner, but I think it was determined today that your builder has pushed some rubbish vegetation onto town park lands in the back, and I've been asked not to issue any certificates until that situation has been mitigated, which I'm sure it will be. So I don't want to overly concern you, but there is some work that the builder has to do with regard to the back yard. There have been some concerns about drainage as well that may come up in the public hearing, so I'll hold my comments until then. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. Let's open the public hearing at this point, unless... do you want to say anymore? MR. ELMO — Just, you know, yeah, at this point we're just asking to use a little more land, I don't think it will affect the drainage. 68 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. FROST - Part of your design, I think in your appeal you made reference to some disability perhaps of your wife that's pushing this. MR. ELMO — No, actually it's with me. MR. FROST - It's with you? MR. ELMO — Yes. MR. FROST - OK, I don't know if you want to expand upon the need for the board's support of your appeal. You don't have to. MR. ELMO —Well just the key is with the strange configuration of the lots you can't build the house and attach a garage the way that particular lot goes so we had to put the garage behind the house, and in order to have a covered way which will eventually facilitate a ramp from the garage to the house — there's a covered breezeway and without that we wouldn't be over. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — So it's for some wheelchair accessibility, down the road. MR. ELMO — eventually. And the same with the front—there's a front porch that will eventually be set to have a ramp in there. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. Let's open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 9:55 p.m. MR. FROST - If you want to sit at the end of the table there, that's fine that way they can sit where they are. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — please give us your name and address for the record. MS. GILLARD — Sure, my name is Meg Gillard, I'm at 110 Woolf Lane, so I am a neighbor to the Banconi's. I don't— I'm not against the variance. I just had two concerns, and you covered one, the brush waste that goes around the French drain, and if there is plan to complete the French drain or if that's how it is it just being a ditch, or I'm not sure... I don't know if stone goes in there or that kind thing, or covered over. MR. FROST - I had met onsite with the builder and someone from the Town highway parks department to assess that situation. At that time we still had a lot of snow on the ground. At this point the town has concluded that the brush is on the parkland. I have not personally gone up just to look at the finished product, the finished grade, to determine how best to finish off any kind of drainage issues 69 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES there at this point, but that certainly is our intent to address that before we give them any certificates of occupancy. MS. GILLARD — The other question I have is in terms of landscaping between our borders — is, can you plant right along the line or do you need some... do you need to leave some space between our two houses. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — there really is no town requirement that addresses landscaping particularly within this cluster I guess as long as it's on their property. We're not talking about any highways or right-of-ways or anything like that. MS. GILLARD — No, its' really just landscaping to create some borders. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, people do that, doing it in the front yard where you get the road right of way, then that's a potential issue, but as long as you're doing it on the side yard, to my knowledge as long as it's on your property. MR. BARNEY - The trick is to make sure that you go out and buy a 5,000 dollar Sequoia that you planted on your side of the line, and not on the other side of the line. MR. ELMO — If she buys a 5,000 dollar Sequoia, I won't care where she plants it. MS. GILLARD — Thank you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Thank you. OK, with no one left to speak, I will close the public hearing. Any comments or questions? Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 9:57 p.m. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, Mike any comments? MR. SMITH - No, I... A SEAR was put together, I wasn't sure if this was an area variance or not. MR. BARNEY - It is. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I assume it is. MR. BARNEY -We should have given Mike the night off. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. Have you figure out... this says approximately 24%, have you figured out if it's anything more exact than approximately 24%. 70 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. ELMO — No, only because it does include probably the eventuality of a tool shed, so... a garden shed, so and that may vary by 40 or 50 square feet I guess. 10 by 12 versus 8 by 12. And I know there is a covenant up there of the minimum size of the sheds, but I don't know what it is off the top of my head. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, do you know what, what's the area of the proposed structures? MR. ELMO — the house itself is, no I'm sorry I actually don't. MR. BARNEY - The house looked like 66 by 27.3 CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Maybe we should add those up. MR. FROST -We have some numbers that Christie did, and we have exact numbers in the building permit file. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, we can just state to be built as indicated on the plans. And you said you would like to also be able put up some type of shed? MR. ELMO — Yes, there are no immediate plans for that. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — No immediate plans... what size would you be looking to put up? MR. ELMO — It depends on how much money I have left at the end of this. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, at this point, since you're exceeding, I would like to be rather specific in the application... I mean we don't have to specify a dimension, just an area. MR. ELMO — 120 square feet I guess, that's a 10 by 12, right? That would be the biggest, let's put it that way. MR. FROST - The connecting structure between the garage and the house, is that an enclosed structure or is it just a deck? MR. ELMO — That's an enclosed space, it's a breezeway. MR. BARNEY - If I've done my math right I got 2534.6 square feet building, garage and connecting structure. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —Well, that's a little under 5,000 so that would put us at... MR. SMITH - .29 acres. 71 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - .29? MR. SMITH - mm hmm CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — that would put us at 50% coverage. (they do that math) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I did a rough estimate and I come up with 2550, that seems to be a lot more than 24% of 5,000. 1 don't think you need exact numbers to know that this is way off. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Oh, I see, the 5000 square feet is area within setback lines. MR. BARNEY - Right, right. MR. ELMO — I don't know if you're aware either, and that number came into it, but that center driveway there... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Uh huh. MR. ELMO — I own that, and the other two houses don't, and that hasn't been figured in at any point either. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK. (comments inaudible) CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Right, now what's the area of the whole lot? MR. BARNEY - .29 acres according to the survey, and if that's the case that's 12,000 square feet, and I get 2500 square feet so we're really almost roughly, we're just a hair over 20%. Now there are a couple utilities, underground utility pedestals. MR. ELMO — Yes, there just actually just inside the driveway. MR. BARNEY - yeah they may add another 80 square feet maybe. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — You came up with 2534? MR. BARNEY - 2534.6? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right, that looks right. 72 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY -And then 12632.4, if you take 43560 times .29, which is about a third of an acre. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — right. What was the square footage of the lot again. MR. BARNEY - 2534.6. MR. FROST - of the building. MR. BARNEY - 2534.6 square feet. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — No, no, no, of the lot. MR. BARNEY - Oh, the lot? 12634.6 square feet. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — Yeah, so it looks like just about 20%. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, just a hair over. MR. ELLSOWRTH - That include the breezeway? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — yeah. MR. BARNEY - So you're requesting 24, 1 think 24 is more than adequate. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I'd like to grant just what is reasonably needed. MR. BARNEY -Well, I noticed the neighbors talking about 23.5%. You must have talked to them about... MR. ELMO — Yeah, I don't want to say who gave me these numbers, but talking about that size shed and that I think we were initially roughly over about 60 or 80 feet at most and then I was asked about the shed and I was just advised to give enough to make sure we have a safe buffer you know, some things come up. MR. BARNEY - If you talk about the shed running 10 by 15, that's a pretty big shed. MR. ELMO — 10 by 12. MR. BARNEY - 10 by 12, 120 feet? MR. ELMO — Yeah, that would be the biggest, absolutely, and maybe less. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so up it to 2700 square feet. 73 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES (the tape is changed) MR. BARNEY - including the shed, that doesn't include these pedestals though so you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so lets go to 22. MR. ELMO —Well the pedestals are before you actually see the lot come out on the plot map, they're in the driveway in the part that nobody has counted yet. MR. BARNEY - Yeah, except that they're on your lot and they're structures and they're covering part of your lot. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I mean we are counting the part of your lot that the driveway goes over— that's part of the lot, I assume that's part of the - when it's listed as .29 acres they must be including that. MR. ELMO — OK, I've been told different, but I'll defer to your... CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —well, by our calculations, 22% should give you plenty of additional room for a shed. MR. ELMO — if that does it, that's fine. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL - Obviously, if we missed something, you know, we can always amend it. I'm more comfortable getting it as close to 20 as we can. OK, I will move to grant the appeal of Mark Bianconi requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 22 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to create a single-family home with a lot coverage not to exceed 22% at 112 Woolf Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 23-1-11.124, Residence District R-15 cluster with the finding that the requirements of an area variance have been satisfied, with the condition that the home be built substantially as indicated on the applicant's plans. MR. ELMO —Would there be something there to include the shed so that everybody knows that was part of this? CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — I mean without a specific requirement that you not be able to, you can go up the 22%. MR. FROST — The only thing I'm thinking is that maybe was part of the discrepancy was maybe counting the overhangs of the roof which technically would be exempt... depending on what kind of view they had, whether they were viewing it from the ground or from the outside. That may have added some of the dimensions. 74 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES MR. BARNEY - Yeah, projections are not to be included. MR. FROST - Right, so I was saying where he was told 23.5 and I advertised 24, it was possibly from... taking from the roofline instead of from the foundation. MR. ELMO —As long as it fits, I'm fine. MR. FROST - Yeah, I mean you got what you want. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, second? MR. ELLSOWRTH - Second. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL —All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 018: Mark Bianconi, 204 Hook Place, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 23-1-11.124, Residence District R-15 Cluster. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Mark Bianconi, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 22 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to create a single-family home with a lot coverage not to exceed 22% at 112 Woolf Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 23-1-11.124, Residence District R-15 cluster. FINDINGS: a. The Requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. b. This lot is part of a clustered subdivision where additional common land is set aside to compensate for the fact that lots within the clustered subdivision are less than the required size. CONDITIONS- a. ONDITIONS:a. The home shall be built substantially as indicated on the applicant's plans. The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer NAYS: NONE 75 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 03, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — OK, thank you. MR. ELMO — Now just a quick question. Should I talk to them about getting that brush gone as soon as possible? MR. FROST - If you simply want to call Paul... and tell him to call me, that would be helpful. I may remember when I get in the morning, but I may get sidetracked. MR. ELMO —We had a similar concern with having to look at that brush once. MR. FROST - that'll be taken care of, thank you. MRS. ELMO — Thank you. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — and I would like to point out to the board that this gentleman patiently sitting through the entire meeting is Dick Matthews who is, who has applied to be a new board member. MR. FROST - You were at a good evening. It was a rather complicated appeals tonight so you saw a good sampling of what we do. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — this is about as long as we usually go. MR. BARNEY - Longer. MR. ELLSOWRTH - This is about the longest we usually go. CHAIRPERSON SIGEL — so if there is no other official business, we will adjourn. Chairperson Sigel adjourns the meeting at 10:08 p.m. Kirk Sigel, Chairperson 76