HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2014-05-19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Monday May 19, 2014
Minutes
Present: Rob Rosen, Chair; Bill King, John DeRosa, Chris Jung Alternates
Christine Decker, and George Vignaux Staff: Bruce Bates, Director of Code
Enforcement, Paulette Terwilliger, Town Clerk and Susan Brock, Attorney for the
Town Absent: Kirk Sigel (alternates will alternate voting per appeal)
Appeal of Frandsen Real Property, LLC, owner and Elizabeth Reiter, agent,
requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270-73 D "Size and
Area of Lot" of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be able to subdivide a lot and not
have the minimum depth from the highway right of way, which should be 150 ft
on both lots. The West lot will be +/- 131.2 ft and the East lot will be +/- 142.4 ft
to the highway right of way, located at 209 Tudor Rd, Tax Parcel No. 57.-1-7-
8.168 and 56.-03-13.30, Medium Density Residential (MDR).
Charles Guttmann, Attorney for Mr. Frandsen and representative for Ms. Reiter was
present to answer questions from the Board.
Mr. Guttmann gave an overview of the appeal noting that these are both existing
nonconforming lots, one of which has a residence on it and the other is vacant and
landlocked. He added that staff and his client have tried to trace the history to figure
out how that happened but the proposal will make the occupied lot less
nonconforming and fix what appears to be a mistake from long ago in setting these
lots the way they are by redrawing the line down the middle to give both lots frontage
and decrease the nonconformity of one and make a buildable lot on the other side.
He noted that this has gone through the Planning Board process and this is the last
step.
The Board clarified that it is two lots now and will remain two lots with different lot
lines. They were also baffled on how this configuration of the two lots could have
come to be. Ms. Brock added that the other lots in the subdivision were "normal" lots
and these two were the only oddities.
Minor changes were made to the SEQR form and approved by the board.
ZBA Resolution No. 2014-009: SEAR Area Variance
209 Tudor Rd, Tax Parcel No. 57.-1-7-8.168 and 56.-03-13.30, MDR
May 19, 2014
Motion made by Rob Rosen, seconded by Bill King
Resolved that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance
based on the information in the Parts 1 and 2 and for the reasons stated in the Part 3
environmental assessment form.
1
Approved June 16, 2014
Vote: Ayes — Jung, DeRosa, King, Vignaux and Rosen Nays — None
Motion passed.
Mr. Rosen opened the public hearing at 7:14p.m.
Three neighbors addressed the board.
1st Neighbor: spoke
Virginia Steele, to the east. She asked why if the requirements were established, it is
so easy to get a variance. She said the lot looks very small and it dips radically.
Lady, lots look very small and the one next to me dips quite rapidly.
Mr. Lyons, across the street. He stated that when they moved in in 2000, into an
established neighborhood that had houses built since the 1970's, they understood
what this lot looked like and understood that this lot would not be built on because it
is too small and didn't have roadfront access so that was part of their decision to buy
their house. He thought it would significantly change the character of the
neighborhood to have a house on this end of the street because it is a cul de sac and
a park at the other end of the road so having another house on such a small lot
would change the character of the neighborhood and he did not think it was the
expectation of anyone in the neighborhood.
Ms. Sissel, neighbor. She agreed with her neighbors and asked if the board had
looked at the two lots because to her it is obvious why this lot is not built on because
of the drop off and the woods around it. She added that it was extremely wet this
past weekend. She stated that there have been rumors about how a house would be
built and most of it is woods and there would be drainage problems if something were
to be built there.
Mr. Rosen brought the matter back to the board and stated that the issue seems to
be that the neighbors assumed that the minimum lot size was the minimum lot size
and that the spare change that was left over from lots that were the minimum size
would be not built on. Ms. Brock noted that these lots meet the size except for depth
and Mr. Bates added that the eastern most lot, the vacant lot, is 8 feet deficient. The
western lot, the one with the house on it, would be 18.5 feet deficient which is what it
is now, there would be no change. The line is measured from the biggest point to the
back. There was some confusion and Mr. Bates made additional copies of another
survey map for the board, applicant and neighbors.
Mr. DeRosa asked the neighbors if they could speak to the issue of the small
deficiency and how that would affect the neighborhood because the issues they had
raised such as grade and wetness are not applicable to the lack of depth. That is a
building issue, not a character of the neighborhood defect.
2
Approved June 16, 2014
Ms. Sissle responded that she did not know what the town was thinking in setting
these boundaries but turned the question back to the board instead asking them why
they thought it would be a good idea to grant an exception in this case.
Mr. Vignaux, who was looking at an aerial view on his computer and noted that the
other side of the street had 8 houses and the side under question only has 6 houses,
so the addition of a 7t" house would still leave more open space than the other side
of the street. He added that as he looked at the entire neighborhood, the spacing of
the houses is such that there is one open space where this vacant lot is so it doesn't
seem it would change the character of the neighborhood by overcrowding; it seems
to fit. How would that change the character?
Ms. Sissle responded that the lot is mostly woods so if a house were built that would
change the character and Mr. Lyons added that in looking at only the side of the road
in question, there are 6 houses that all have equal lots and it looks like there is a
vacancy but you have to take in the greater sense in that there is a park on the other
side and beside his house there is an undeveloped road, so there is a lot of area in
this neighborhood that is undeveloped and that is what concerns me; it adds yet
another family to what we had thought would never be developed and it comes back
to that.
Mr. DeRosa responded that it comes back to what he said; he understands what the
neighbors are saying, but what the issues they are stating would happen regardless if
this were an ever so slightly bigger lot.
Mr. Rosen responded that he can understand the concerns of the neighbors because
the lot size is a minimum and that is what they bought into. They thought they were
buying into a certain size and certain look. Ms. Jung asked if the code was different
back then and again, the board didn't understand how the lots were divided back
then. Members talked about the importance of depth and the question is; when is a
variance too much. There was some discussion on the possibility of a ROW from
Tudor Rd to the landlocked property to allow a buildable lot and Ms. Brock clarified
that it could be deeded or conveyed over but not as a ROW. The lots around the
ones in question were discussed and there are lots across the road that have an
even larger deficiency (131, 134, 132, 129, 165, 172, 139, and the ones to the west,
147, 152, 149, 151, 150) and some that are only a few feet short or a few feet over.
Mr. Bates looked at the neighborhood tax map and all of the lot depths seem to be
slightly under or slightly over the 150 feet with a few exceptions that are significantly
deficient but built on. The neighbor across the street is only 131 in depth and the
next door neighbor is 104; a significant number of the houses in the neighborhood
would have needed a variance to build if the intent was the 150 foot depth and this
seems to be some kind of error in the subdivision layout that was filed.
Mr. Rosen closed the public hearing at 7:43 p.m.
Mr. Guttman addressed the board again noting that although he appreciates the
comments of the neighbors, they do not go to the issue of the deficiency here which
3
Approved June 16, 2014
is depth. He added that as Mr. Bates stated, there are existing lots across the street
with depths of 130 — 150 feet so it is consistent with the character of the
neighborhood. As noted, the Town has passed an ordinance but this is a 5%
difference and the Town also created this Board, and the purpose of this Board is to
grant variances in appropriate places. Regarding the saturation of the neighborhood,
that question really goes to the frontage and the frontage being proposed exceeds
the required frontage and is consistent with the neighborhood. Regarding the woods
and whether the land is wet; that doesn't go to the question of the variance for depth
which is being asked for. That is a building and design issue, not a zoning issue. The
size of the lot meets the lot requirement and the depth is 5% lacking. He added that
the applicant could go to the neighbor abutting the back and buy 7 feet and they
would be able to build.
ZBA Resolution No. 2014-010: Area Variance
209 Tudor Rd, Tax Parcel No. 57.-1-7-8.168 and 56.-03-13.30, MDR
May 19, 2014
Motion made by Rob Rosen, seconded by Bill King
Resolved that this board grant the appeal of Frandsen Real Property, LLC, owner
and Elizabeth Reiter, agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter
270-73 D "Size and Area of Lot" of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be able to subdivide
a lot and not have the minimum depth from the highway right of way, with the
following
Findings:
1. It does not appear that the benefit can be achieved by any other means
feasible to the applicant, including but not limited to acquiring a strip of land to
provide access to Tudor Rd because the access would still be nonconforming,
and
2. Based upon the current density of the neighborhood; the lot depths within the
neighborhood, particularly on either side and across the street, and taking into
account further the fact that the frontage of these two resulting lots would be
entirely consistent with the frontage throughout the neighborhood and in
compliance with current zoning laws, this proposal does not change the lot
depth for the eastern lot and substantially improves the lot depth for the
western lot, even though the western lot will still not comply with the 150 feet
of depth, it improves the current 101 feet depth of the lot. Therefore there will
be no undesirable change in the neighborhood or to nearby properties, and
3. It is debatable whether or not the request is substantial, but to the extent that it
is, that is outweighed by the benefit to the applicant in light of the minimum
detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, and
4
Approved June 16, 2014
4. There are no apparent physical or environmental effects as stated in the
SEQR form, and
5. While the difficulty may have been self-created because the two lots were
purchased together, that is outweighed by the benefit to the applicant and the
lack of any material detriment to the health safety and welfare of the
community.
Vote: Ayes — Rosen, DeRosa, Jung, Vignaux and King Nays — None
Motion passed
Appeal of Town of Ithaca, owner, and Patrick Fairbrother, agent for Ithaca Cal
Ripkin/Babe Ruth Baseball requesting a variance from the requirements of
Chapter 221-6A(2) and Chapter 221-6A(1)(a) of the Town's Sign law to erect a
manual scoreboard that exceeds the height limitation of 6 ft and exceeds the
allowable square footage of 4 sq ft to be located at Tutelo Park, 151 Bostwick
Rd., Tax Parcel No. 31.4-6.1, Low Density Residential (LDR).
Mr. Fairbrother addressed the board and explained that they plan on trouble shooting
some of the details, such as the catwalk, to see how difficult and the various costs of
the two options presented. One is 8 feet tall and the other is 11 feet tall. It will be
placed back from the outfield fence.
The Board discussed the different sizes and the smaller one would not have room for
the balls and strikes to be shown. It was determined that it would not be visible, or
barely, from the church and the only other neighbor is the school bus garage.
Mr. Rosen opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m. There was no one wishing to
address the board and the hearing was closed.
Minor changes were made to the SEAR Form
ZBA Resolution No. 2014-011: SEAR Sign Variance
Ithaca Cal Ripkin/Babe Ruth Baseball
Tutelo Park, 151 Bostwick Rd., Tax Parcel No. 31.4-6.1, LDR
May 19, 2014
Motion made by Rob Rosen, seconded by Christine Decker
Resolved that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance
based on the information in the Parts 1 and 2 and for the reasons stated in the Part 3
environmental assessment form.
Vote: Ayes — Jung, DeRosa, King, Decker and Rosen Nays — None
Motion passed.
5
Approved June 16, 2014
There was some discussion during the composition of the resolution regarding the
sign and whether to refer to it being required to be built at depicted. The Board did
not want the applicant to have to come back in if they had to vary it and stated for the
record that elements as depicted can be rearranged and configured but the sign must
function as a scoreboard.
ZBA Resolution No. 2014-012: Sign Variance
Ithaca Cal Ripkin/Babe Ruth Baseball
Tutelo Park, 151 Bostwick Rd., Tax Parcel No. 31.4-6.1, LDR
May 19, 2014
Motion made by Rob Rosen, seconded by Bill King
Resolved that this board grants the appeal of Town of Ithaca, owner, and Patrick
Fairbrother, agent for Ithaca Cal Ripkin/Babe Ruth Baseball requesting a variance
from the requirements of Chapter 221-6A(2) and Chapter 221-6A(1)(a) of the Town's
Sign law to erect a manual scoreboard that exceeds the height limitation of 6 ft and
exceeds the allowable square footage of 4 sq ft to be located at Tutelo Park, 151
Bostwick Rd., Tax Parcel No. 31.4-6.1, Low Density Residential (LDR) with the
following:
Findings
1. That the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood given that it is a Town park and made for playing sports
and this is an accessory appropriate to the environment, and
2. That it will not have an undesirable change because it is not visible from any
residential properties, and
3. That although the request is substantial, and self-created by the applicant's desire
to have a large scoreboard, nonetheless, the benefit to the applicant outweighs any
detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community in that it is not visible to
any residential properties because this is set deep in the property with a back drop of
woods and only visible from the bus garage and possibly from the church and is
consistent with the use of the ball field and will therefore not change the character of
the neighborhood.
4. That there will be no adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons
stated in the SEAR form.
Conditions
1. That the color will be generally as depicted; green with lighter colored lettering, and
6
Approved June 16, 2014
2. That the maximum height will be 11 feet and the maximum square footage will not
exceed 112 feet and shall function solely as a scoreboard in the usual manner.
Vote: Ayes — King, Rosen, DeRosa, Jung and Decker Nays — None
Motion passed
Appeal of Town of Ithaca, owner, requesting a variance from the requirements
of Chapter 270-59 "Height Limitations" to replace a the water tower that is 72
foot high which exceeds the height limitation of 30 feet, to be located at
Christopher Lane, Tax Parcel No. 72.-1-10, Medium Density Residential (MDR).
Mr. Hebdon explained the project.
Mr. Rosen opened the public hearing at 8:22 p.m. There was no one wishing to
address the board and the hearing was closed.
ZBA Resolution No. 2014-013: Height Variance
Town of Ithaca
Christopher Lane, Tax Parcel No. 71-1-10, MDR
May 19, 2014
Moved by Rob Rosen, seconded by Chris Jung
Resolved that this board grants the appeal of the Town of Ithaca, owner, requesting
a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270-59 "Height Limitations" to replace a
the water tower that is 72 foot high which exceeds the height limitation of 30 feet, to
be located at Christopher Lane, Tax Parcel No. 72.-1-10, Medium Density Residential
zone with the following:
Findings
1. That there will be no detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community
and
2. That the Benefit cannot be achieved by any other means given that the height is
the minimum height required to provide water and pressure for the system to the
community, and
3. That the request is substantial, but nevertheless, the existing tank is 70 feet high
and the replacement adds only 2 feet, and
4. There will be no adverse physical or environmental effects which has been
legislatively determined by the DEC because the action is Type 2, exempt from
SEAR, and
5. This is not self-created in that there is a tank in place already and this is a
replacement consisting of the minimum height needed to adequately supply the
neighborhood.
Vote: Ayes — King, Rosen, DeRosa, Jung and Vignaux Nays — None
7
Approved June 16, 2014
Motion passed
Continuation of appeal of Carrie Regenstein, owner, requesting a variance from
the requirements of Chapter 270-71(F) "Yard Regulations" of the Town of
Ithaca Code, to be able to place a detached garage within the 15 ft setback from
side property line in the front yard, located at 301 Muriel St, Tax Parcel No. 70.-
2-3, Medium Density Residential (MDR).
Claudia Brenner was present to answer questions from the Board.
Ms. Brenner gave an overview, stating that she and the applicants went back to the
property after the last meeting to review all possible places the garage could be placed
and decided on keeping the garage in the same place but removing their beloved pine
trees and locating the garage 7 feet further into the yard. She noted that going any
further would present issues because it would be into the grade and would require a
massive amount of regarding etc. She said that it was her understanding that there
were concerns about the garage being so close to the road and this revision cuts that in
half or meets the board halfway. This is a cul de sac and there isn't a lot of traffic. She
added that she did meet with Mr. Bates to discuss options and locating the garage
attached to the house, but there are issues with fire separation etc.
Mr. DeRosa asked her what she felt was the main reason for locating the garage in the
fornt of the house as opposed to the back and she responded that there is a brand new
addition to the back of the house with a lot of glass and there would be a fire separation
required as well as the house being 8 rises up and if you bring the garage in at grade
you would need a staircase in the garage which would make the roof really tall to attach
it to the house. Mr. DeRosa asked about a detached garage in the back and Ms.
Brenner stated that it would be far from the house and they spent a lot of money and
effort putting in the existing sidewalk and there is more than enough room. While it has
an address on Muriel St, it effectively has its front and parking area on Rosehill Rd and
that is where the garage is proposed.
Mr. King asked if the proposal is the same size and Ms. Brenner responded that it was
and it was not her understanding that there was an issue with the size. They would like
to be able to park their two cars in there.
Mr. DeRosa stated that the issue was more that the garage would be an unusual
structure on that street and Ms. Brenner responded that she looked at the neighborhood
and they are proposing a very attractive garage that matches the existing house and
she did not see it as an architectural detriment at all. There are other garages in the
neighborhood, either attached or in the back so this is not different.
Mr. DeRosa stated that he was surprised that given the range of concerns that were
expressed that the only change was pushing it back a bit. It is going to be out of
character being so close to the pavement.
8
Approved June 16, 2014
Mr. King thought there were plenty of places to put the garage and Ms. Brenner
responded that there really isn't given that they are looking to age in place and the
house is significantly above ground. She added that they looked at all locations and not
attaching it to the house and given that the house is elevated, there is nowhere else.
Mr. Rosen responded that they don't want to attach it to the house anywhere, they didn't
want to build it anywhere it is permitted on a very large lot, and the only place that is
acceptable is in a public space. Ms. Brenner agreed, stating that they are asking to be
able to put it 7.5 feet closer than allowed.
Mr. DeRosa stated that it is very out of character from the other homes on the street
being basically on the front lawn if you are looking from Muriel St. Ms. Brenner
responded that no neighbors have come in or complained about the proposal and it was
well-advertised and discussed and the sense is that the neighbors do not mind and Mrs.
Regestein had spoken with neighbors and no one minded.
Mr. Bates noted that they are parking cars there now and Ms. Brenner added that this is
one of the nicer houses in the neighborhood and they are trying to stay close to the
house as they get older and to match the house etc. They have built a one story house
and this is the next step to staying home with a very nice gradual step and pathway that
they invested a lot of money into and this is not a detriment to the neighborhood.
Ms. Brenner stated that she was having trouble understanding why having a garage is a
negative attribute and Ms. Jung responded only because it is so close to the road; the
town wants structures to be away from the road. Mr. Rosen came back to the steps and
felt that if they were there, the justification that the occupants wanted the garage to "age
in place" and have easy access to the house, the flight of steps weakens the argument
and therefore putting the garage in the other location is the same distance for them to
walk. Mr. DeRosa stated that he understands their reasons and wishes, but the
question is whether they are entitled to a variance because they prefer where they want
it. That is not the basis for a variance and Ms. Brenner responded that the basis is that
it is not a detriment to the neighborhood in that it is a nice garage that fits in with
everything else on their very nicely landscaped and existing property and they are
asking for a variance to put it slightly closer than is allowed. It is a wide road.
Mr. King asked why they didn't make the garage any smaller which would allow for it to
be further from the road and Ms. Brenner responded that if it was any smaller, a car
wouldn't fit. Usually a garage is 24 feet and this is 22 feet and that is the outside
measurement, so only 20 feet inside and depending on the car, you need that space to
open the doors etc. you have to be able to maneuver around the car. She added that
she could speak to them about that but it is already smaller than what would usually be
built and is a compromise already. If it made all the difference in the world she could
talk to them and they told her to get the variance and then they would consider whether
or not to build it. She asked where the board would feel good about since she already
met them halfway. Ms. Jung asked at what point does it get in front of the house? Ms.
Brenner responded that the evergreens are not going to survive the pushing it in as it is.
9
Approved June 16, 2014
Mr. Rosen stated that he is getting the sense that everyone is uncomfortable with the
revised plan and Ms. Jung stated that this is a very large lot and it is not like that is the
only place you can put the garage and that while she can see the arguments about why
you wouldn't want to, she didn't know if that was enough to grant a variance when there
are so many options.
Ms. Brenner responded that since the other options don't work for the clients they have
a right to ask for a variance and what the board would be comfortable with? Is it 15 feet
or nothing because they have already moved it back to 7.5 feet.
Ms. Brenner stated that since the Regensteins are not here, she would like to table it
again until they would like to come back to the board.
Vote: Ayes — King, Rosen, DeRosa, Jung and Nays — None
Motion passed
ZBA Resolution No. 2014-014: Adjourned Area Variance — Garage
Carrie Regenstein, 301 Muriel St, Tax Parcel No. 70.-2-3, MDR
May 19, 2014
Motion made by Rob Rosen, seconded by Christine Jung
Resolved that this appeal is adjourned until the applicant requests to have it back on the
agenda.
Vote: Ayes — Rosen, Jung, DeRosa, King and Decker
Motion passed
Ms. Brock noted that the way the resolution was worded allows the applicants to come
back with the same proposal.
Mr. Rosen brought the board's attention to the draft minutes and moved their approval.
Ms. Jung seconded. Minutes were approved unanimously.
Mr. Bates reviewed the upcoming appeals and the meeting was adjourned at 8:58 p.m.
Submitted by
Paulette Terwilliger
Town Clerk
10
Approved June 16, 2014
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Lori Kofoid, being duly sworn, say that I am the Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of
the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official
newspaper, Ithaca Journal:
O ADVERTISEMENT
O NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
ZOMIr1G EX)Au1 OF APPEALS :
NONCE OF MOM
HFARNG
Monday May 10,29094
215Nodhldaatra Strest,
MUVnaw
dao RX
Appeal u1 Fnnds art Reel
Puayrarfrk LLCM, +gowei a¢arri.
ks zabe,thi Reiter, aiapeia ib-
Location of Sign Board Used for Posting: cf"° °thg a `anon`1r�a,m the
^¢quirkvrhwriP ofCha*,v 270
71"t Lr Sy wird A'ca of LA"
Town Clerk's Office of$e owri of lthma Code,
215 North Tioga Street a dp"'r,b"° to�,r°:ab�t "'m
p�td rcrpp M/cvv tfar., grtirrpivrtyaV4
Ithaca, NY 14850
depth fi,M�a'��`miti ki be,�r:50
ftoil f;vrrtkr blas Dm,`West lot
will oe Ir 1311 It pack the
Date of Posting: Wednesday April 30, 2014 i €aollrrk vvrdl be i`.M2,4(1 to
g Cha,l ii,ytn✓u,y rr�hk rakw p?,<.I e.
a te,JtO 209�ir�rfor`f6 4 Sax
F'"arv,' No 1.1-7-&T68 sia'd i
Date of Publication: Friday May 2, 2014 , fla Medium"rr�taa
tp 1erm.rtrhtde vrPral fbhfaPl.
Cat Futh Dime,
la,crl ia.altr4saing <a winarre,a
frury fhr requirrxr¢of t, of
t
Lori K fold yr er. 22100 axrb
Chapier 221 4A0)(p,h of die
Deputy Town Clerk uawr^rxnign law fra rare as
rrr aMAl x on"kare•6ru.R'tfaxk ex,.
nerwica fhe heiRM[lakatriar(if
6 Ci.and yxtt ayd%ilie allowa.
f,Vr,,,{w.bolsgte cif y„ay ft
I to he!c'au ted at Tutelo Park,
STATE OF NEW YORK) ?b1 Bostwickllai fxak'aatO
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS:
No Hr,,ay'p t ray rp ,la ,
rtew,rsoraf„r tLhfpt.
ApltiaM of prawn of Ithaca,
TOWN OF ITHACA) war ,nscjuca fing a vuilixiou
Crarvru [ft+ mqurr rrraras of
cka,tw 270 a kkr,r;,Mhl IAM,
t v4iriri.^ to ra to it r a?ha we
Sworno and subscribed before me this day of ter ower that Is fa foot hggh
ebtkh exceeds ubi phrc Esaacnftf lair
/J e r6"A .hG oW r V &ao-4au laatTa
•✓ , 201 d7/�/' a a&�+Y�'frretrtral ikra i Lane,1"ezr
parr el No 72A 107 idloin
r a)urr r[+y f
o
� hlua Mtt r a`pfaQ sairfrrrngpt«rrt .r ;.agrta«aaJ of
C ,b"ao;mrrt kr dri rowut r ire...
._... nluutio-awr8ir¢Sr a rwvi?¢aar.gt hraaird the
^" iecryuim"ferataurafchi par 70-
Notary Public W"T `wile! Pbppt¢6zl oittr' bat
Cfvar-P+ow+ar iia tlkbaact 4'a cbc to:
Pw hrVe to p°faes r..;ltir„vrrooay„,f
Gryrrr tpp!r wick r the 1!5 It SO-'
1a pr,#ae stria prrop riy frrsa'
rn thea front yard lrcx tfr rd at
PAULE—TTE TERWILLIGER wdcg"u ud l art,Tax r•>,anx4pb,
&c ry Public,StF3Cf 41 b1P YC28 al M prysdipirp 'Ckmfty�
No.01TE6156809
he ir„;o of(MDR),
cuaf'ffe;ci in Tompkins county
Gulninission Expires Ike comber 44,�” Ll
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL
STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS.:
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS )
I,Lori Kofoid,being duly sworn,deposes and says,that deponent is not a party to the actions,is over 21 years of age with a professional
address of 215 North Tioga Street,Ithaca,New York.
That on the 30''day of April,2014,deponent served the within Notice upon the property owners of the following Tax Parcel Numbers:
209 Tudor Rd.,Tax Parcels 57.4-7-8.168 and 56.-03-13.30,Area Variance
Timothy&Louanne Bangs Gary Blissard&Elizabeth Mahon Adam&Naomi Bogdanove
201 Tudor Rd 208 Eastern Heights Dr 14 John St
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Carol Battisti Marta Castelhano&Ricardo DeMatos John&Josephine Churey
106 Overlook Rd 12 John St 216 Eastern Heights Dr
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Stephen&Mary Colicco Stephen Demmings&Elizabeth Takacs Victor&Helene Dillard
207 Tudor Rd 219 Tudor Rd 15 John St
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
,_44ancang Dong&Jingzhen Guo Michael Forster&Araceli Lucio-Forster William Frandsen
32 Pinewood PI 201 Eastern Heights Dr 265 Van Etten Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Spencer,NY 14883
Czeslaw&Krystyna Golkowski Keith&Martha Hjortshoj Michael&Linda Hoffinan
227 Durfee Hill Rd 20 John St 17 John St
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Patrick&Judith Hughes Edith Johnson Margaret Johnson&Michael Roman
220 Eastern Heights Dr 111 Tudor Rd 208 Tudor Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
David Juers&Helen Lang Jagadisan Kandaswamy Michael&Mary Kendrot
206 Tudor Rd 210 Eastern Heights Dr 93 Linda Ln West
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Riverhead,NY 11901-6309
Sean Kennedy&Jeanine Peters-Kennedy Robert&Roberta Kohut Mitchell&Linda Lavine
11 John St 214 Eastern Heights Dr 719 Ringwood Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Peter LaPage&Deborah O'Connor Yulin Li&Yimin Xu Richard Lovelace
9 John St 205 Tudor Rd 213 Eastern Heights Dr
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Benjamin Lucio-Martinez& Charles&Beth Lyons Judith MacIntire
Eglantina deLucio 216 Tudor Rd 217 Eastern Heights Dr
X10 Sharlene Rd Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
aca,NY 14850
Timothy Marchell&Sarah George Lyza Maron&Miguel Pineros Mary Meade
221 Eastern Heights Dr 211 Eastern Heights Dr 204 Tudor Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Affidavit of Service by Mail Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 5/19/14
Richard&Thirleen Okine Gregory Page&Barbara Rauschenbach Theodore&Marilyn Rowland
393 W.Turnberry Court 218 Eastern Heights Dr 206 Eastern Heights Dr
West Chester,PA 19382 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Caren Rubin Barbara Salamon John&Marie Sanderson
212 Tudor Rd 205 Eastern Heights Dr 210 Tudor Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Ann Schissel Vimal Selvaraj&Motoko Mukai Walid Shantur
214 Tudor Rd 203 Tudor Rd 23 John St
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Robert&Karen Spreng Roger&Virginia Steele Nathaniel&Amanda Sutter
22 John St 217 Tudor Rd 10 John St
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Michael&Paula Twomey Ronald&Tara Wilder Elizabeth Windstein
16 John St 219 Eastern Heights Dr 209 Eastern Heights Dr
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
David&Susan Wohlhueter Frandsen Real Property,LLC Elizabeth A.Reiter
202 Tudor Rd 19 Orchard St Guttman&Wallace
Ithaca,NY 14850 Spencer,NY 14883 411 N.Tioga St
Ithaca,NY 14850
151 Bostwick Rd,Tax Parcel 31.4-6.1,Sign Variance
Micheryl Blake Catholic Cemetery Association County of Tompkins
720 Five Mile Dr 113 N.Geneva St 170 Bostwick Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Denmark Development Inc. Patrick Doty First Assembly of God Church
407 Wyckoff Ave 801 Five Mile Dr 197 Bostwick Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Ithaca City School District Melanie Claire Mallison Francis Melly&Barbara Marks
400 Lake St 658 Five Mile Dr 201 Bostwick Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Mitchell Ventures,LLC Bob Orshalom John Rogers&Claudia Stoscheck
122 Ithaca Beer Dr 726 Five Mile Dr 721 Five Mile Dr
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Edward&Brigid Shipman Tammy Snyder Jeffrey&Diane Sweet
681 Five Mile Dr 662 Five Mile Dr 691 Five Mile Dr
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Philip White,Jr. Brian&Lisa Witchey Stacy Wright
348 S.Applegate Rd 723 Five Mile Dr 6045 Stillwell Rd F"
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
2
Affidavit of Service by Mail Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 5/19/14
Patrick Fairbrother Town of Ithaca
221 Ridgedale Rd 215 N.Tioga St
Itahca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Christopher Ln,Tax Parcel 72.4-10,Height Variance
Gordon&Nora Arquit Enes&Fatima Bahtic Stephen&Beryl Barr
130 Christopher Cir 515 Warren Rd 517 Warren Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Andrew Bergstrom Benedetto&Giuliana Campagnola Helen Cogan
514 Warren Rd 1209 Hanshaw Rd 109 Christopher Cir
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Arthur&Rebecca Dolch Anita Estes–Trust Fire Rocket,LLC
104 Christopher Cir 215 McGraw House 110 Willow Creek Point Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Jean Firestone-Mailhot David&Susan Frahm Joseph&Alexandra Giordano
512 Warren Rd 128 Christopher Cir 100 Christopher Cir
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
—un Gyaw&Swe Myint George&Linda Hirvonen Ithaca City School District
428 Winthrop Dr 44 Myers Rd 400 Lake St
Ithaca,NY 14850 Lansing,NY 14882 Ithaca,NY 14850
Frank&Belinda Leonardo Yanping Li and Yun Wang Lu Liu
518 Warren Rd 918 Taylor St 126 Christopher Cir
Ithaca,NY 14850 Albany,CA 94706 Ithaca,NY 14850
Rocco Lucente Sergey&Alla Lukina Alexander&Janet MacCallum
120 Briarwood Dr 535 Warren Rd 'n6 state Street
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 __ "' Portsirionth;NH 03801
Mary Booth Johnson Family Boykin Jr.and Ruth McCaa Paul Merrill
111 Tudor Rd 436 Winthrop Dr 101 Christopher Cir
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 1485.0
Keith Millman&Randi Millman-Brown Linda Mittel Michael&Lois Ocello
105 Christopher Cir 539 Warren Rd 519 Warren Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Timothy Perry Marsha Pond Ruth Pond
520 Warren Rd 844 Clubview Blvd.N 529 Warren Rd
Ithaca,NY 14850 Columbus,OH 43235 Ithaca,NY 14850
Shashikant&Anuradha Pujar Louis III&Marilyn Reycroft Tanya Saunders
107 Christopher Cir 541 Warren Rd 516 Warren Rd
/0"'Nhaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
3
Affidavit of Service by Mail Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 5/19/14
Mark& Sandy Studin Eric Tagliacozzo&Katherine Lee The Sragow Family Trust
537 Warren Rd 102 Christopher Cir 1701 San Ysidro Dr
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Beverly Hills,CA 90210
Joel Ufford Hugh&Melissa Wallace Rhoda Weiss
108 Christopher Cir 103 Christopher Cir 124 Christopher Cir
Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850 Ithaca,NY 14850
Baruch Whitehead Town of Ithaca
432 Winthrop Dr C/o Creig Hebdon
Ithaca,NY 14850 215 N.Tioga St
Ithaca,NY 14850
By depositing same enclosed in a postpaid addressed wrapper,in a post office under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Post Office
Department within the State of New York.
Lor—iZofd,Deput)Towr)C1n
Tow Iihaca
Sworn to before me this 301h Day of April 2014.
�otary Pul�lie
Debra DeAugistine
Notary Public-State of New York
No.01 DE6148035
Oualified in Tompkins County
My ommission Expires June 19,20
4