Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1979-04-1111 E TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 11. 1979 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Wednesday, April 11, 1979, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Vice Chairman Jack D. Hewett, Edward W. King, Edward N. Austen, Joan G. Reuning, Lawrence P. Fabbroni (Town Engineer/Building Inspector), Nancy M. Fuller (Secretary). ALSO PRESENT: Mrs. James O'Connor, Roger Van de Poel, Josephine Van de Poel, Charles R. Smith, Loran Marion, Norman Tidd, Leonard J. Snow, Esq., Richard A. Perry, Margie Rumsey, David Ludington, Vincent Hinkley, Bion Carpenter, R.C. Mendiones, Mr. Halgas, Chris Fickes (WTKO News), Mindy Lasser (WICB News), Laine Acton (WICB News). Vice Chairman Hewett declared the meeting duly opened at 7:38 p.m. and accepted for the record the Clerk's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and The Ithaca Journal on April 2, 1979, and April 6, 1979, respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of the properties under discussion, as appropriate, and upon the Appellants and/or their Agents, as appropriate, on April 3, 1979. Vice Chairman Hewett introduced the Board members to those present. APPEAL OF ELIZABETH E. O'CONNOR, APPELLANT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO BUILD A TWO-FAMILY DWELLING WITH THE SECOND DWELLING UNIT MORE THAN 50% OF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY DWELLING UNIT AT 305 BLACKSTONE AVENUE, PARCEL N0, 6-71-1-11.1, ITHACA\, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV, SECTION 11, PARAGRAPH 21 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:40 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Mrs. O'Connor was present. Mrs. O'Connor stated that she wanted to put in the cellar steps to the other side of the property, commenting that it is 6' to the other side, and adding that the apartment is more than 50% of the primary dwelling. Mr. King asked to see the plans. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the second unit has a basement and is, therefore, included in the square footage of that unit, adding that Mrs. O'Connor would like to have access to the basement for the second unit, rather than the primary unit having the whole basement. Mr. Fabbroni noted that the 50% of the second unit is the issue, adding that by changing partitions, they can do it. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the building is under n U Zoning Board of Appeals -2- construction and the Town has the plans, and noted to the speak for basement area of the second unit is the issue. April 11, 1979 again that access Mr. King asked what the percentage is of the second unit. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the Zoning Ordinance says not to count the basement area of the primary unit. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the primary unit contains 1250 square feet; the secondary unit contains approximately 922 square feet excluding the basement area, which is over 50%. Mr. Fabbroni noted that these numbers do not include basement area. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there has been a porch added to the primary unit. Mrs. O'Connor stated that they added 6' to the kitchen of the primary unit and the porch also, adding that she built this for her mother and brother. Mr. Fabbroni noted that Mrs. O'Connor lives next door and stated that that house was built as a duplex with a variance. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the other property next door is owned by the Church. Mrs. O'Connor stated that they are the only homes on the street -- Blackstone Avenue -- her present house and the one they are building. Mr. King asked if percentage of lot coverage dwelling contains 2,300 coverage is certainly less in an R-15 zone, the dwelling will violate the maximum on the lot. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the sq. ft.; the lot is 1001x3001; the lot than 10%. the Zoning Ordinance allows 20% Vice Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against this matter. No one spoke. A picture was displayed. The Board members indicated that it looks like a duplex -- like the other house. Mr. King stated that he did not see any particular objection to it, and the neighbors apparently do not either. Mr. Roger Van de Poel, 1106 Hanshaw Road, spoke from the floor and stated that he had no objection. MOTION by Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mr. Edward Austen: RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant the requested variance to permit Mrs. O'Connor to construct the second dwelling unit in the subject property at 305 Blackstone Avenue according to the plans which she has submitted to the Building Inspector of the Town of Ithaca, such granting being a variance from the requirement of Section 11, Paragraph 2, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, in that the second dwelling unit will exceed 50% of the floor area of the primary dwelling unit, the second unit being 922 square feet proposed, and the primary unit being 1,250 square feet proposed approximately, with each unit having use of the basement area. vote. There being no further discussion, the Vice Chair called for a Zoning Board of Appeals -3- ® Aye - Hewett, King, Austen, Reuning, Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. April 11, 1979 Vice Chairman Hewett declared the matter of the Elizabeth E. O'Connor Appeal duly closed at 7:50 p.m. APPEAL OF NORMAN E. AND LILLIAN Be TIDD, APPELLANTS, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO EXTRACT NATURAL PRODUCTS FOR REMOVAL AND SALE OF TOPSOIL AT 801 FIVE MILE DRIVE, PARCEL NO. 6-31-2-18, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 70, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:51 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Attorney Leonard J. Snow was present representing Mr. Tidd. Attorney Snow presented a Environmental Assessment Form, a photographs of the area. Attorney is 300' x 300' x100' -- a triangle, on this property, sketch map, a completed Long USGS topographic map, and six Snow stated that the lot involved adding that there are no buildings ® Mrs. Reuning asked if there has not been some taking of dirt from there all along, noting that she lives there and has seen it for at least a year -- trucks, that is. Attorney Snow responded, yes, he believed so, probably, he suspected, for more than a year, however, he really did not know. Attorney Snow stated that, if the Board pleases, this is a relatively small lot, triangular in shape, about 3491, and 185' across the back, and points into the corner of Five Mile Drive on a dirt road. Attorney Snow noted that land in the area is flat, adding that this lot rises above it, the maximum elevation being less than 30'. Attorney Snow stated that the Tidd proposal is to level this, noting that in its present condition, it is not suitable for residential, but, if flattened, it would be suitable for one home. Attorney Snow stated that it does have utility for top soil. Attorney Snow stated that Mr. Tidd would like to level this small hill by removing the top soil, adding that when the work is done, it would be level, and further adding that it has some grass and some small shrubs. Attorney Snow stated that it has a cliff, so possibly this would remove some kind of a hazard. Attorney Snow stated that Cliff Swallows inhabit the area, but there are no other unique animals or plants. Attorney Snow stated that this is the only economical or possible use of the land. Vice Chairman Hewettt asked if there were anyone present who ® wished to speak for or against the Tidd Appeal. Mr. Loran Marion spoke from the floor and stated that he lives on Burtt Place which is off the Five Mile Drive, adding that he owns the Zoning Board of Appeals -4- April 11, 1979 is property across from the Tidd property and that he also owns property immediately behind the Tidd property. Mr. Marion stated that Mr. Tidd has been removing top soil for approximately three years and he had assumed that he had approval. Mr. Marion stated that, after a great deal of soul-searching, he has to oppose any further removal of top soil from the area, adding that he does this on the basis of a pile of trees, dirt, and rubble piled up at the end of the driveway for at least three years. Mr. Marion stated that he had no confidence that Mr. Tidd, when he completes this operation, will in any way attempt to clean up the area in order to make it appealing for anybody who is driving into his driveway. Mr. Marion stated that, also, there is a gas line that runs over the hill, buried 5 feet, which is the property of NYSEG. Mr. Marion, commenting that it would cost $6,000 to relocate that line, stated that if the Board agrees to this, he would like to see a clause that the gas line will be relocated; that there will not be a ridge along Route 13 to accommodate the gas line. Mr. Marion stated that he would also like something in there to the effect that the area will be cleaned up and that there will not be a pile of trash left, adding that it is an awful mess. Mr. Marion stated that he was also concerned about the swallows, adding that Mr. Tidd has dug into a 40 -foot area of that bank and dug out all those nests, and probably carried off 100 nests of bank swallows, which was not necessary. Mr. Marion stated that they could have taken all the dirt they needed in a 12 -to -15 -foot area, adding that he did not think Mr. Tidd has too much concern for other people and other beings. Charles R. Smith, Ph.D., Director of Public Education of the Cornell University Laboratory of Ornithology, appeared before the Board to speak to the biological aspects of this matter in regard to the colony of "cliff swallows". Dr. Smith stated that the birds in question are "bank swallows", not "cliff swallows, and displayed a 1976 photograph showing 196 nesting covets at the Five Mile Drive site. Dr. Smith stated that Mr. Paul Finger, of the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council, has accounted for 13 colonies in Tompkins County, representing about 670 nests, or 1,340 birds. Dr. Smith stated that the Five Mile Drive site is a large colony for Tompkins County, noting that the only other one is in the Town of Groton where there are about 200 nests. Dr. Smith noted that this colony represents 30% of all the bank swallows in Tompkins County, adding that if this colony is disturbed or if the soil is removed without judicious planning, that 30% will be eliminated and there will be a loss of anywhere from 400 to 1,000 fledgling birds. Dr. Smith stated that, in his estimation, this is something that should be given further consideration and stressed that there should be no disturbance from April 1st through September 30th, Dr. Smith stated that a contiguous wetland area also ought to be considered. Attorney Snow stated that, obviously, you have to have clean-up, and obviously, it was incorrect to remove top soil without permit; ® that is conceded, there obviously has been removal there for years by others and the cliff occurred when the excavation ceased. Zoning Board of Appeals -5- April 11, 1979 ® The Secretary entered into the record the following telephone statement she received from Mrs. Constance E. Cook on April 10, 1979: "The Zoning Board of Appeals should make every effort to upgrade that area and fully enforce the law, and, in this case, the Appellant should be required to level and grade the area so it does not look so devastated. If the Appellant is allowed to take out top soil, that is okay, but he should be required to level it and improve the appearance of the area." Mr. King wondered how long have the Tidds have owned it, with Mr. Marion responding, no more than three years. Mr. Tidd arrived and stated, probably five or six years; certainly more than three years. Mr. Tidd stated that he did not want to run a topsoil operation there. Mr. Tidd, noting that the Board has seen the pictures, stated that it is a big lump that is not worth anything to anybody, and added that he agreed with Mrs. Cook that the area should be improved. Mr. Tidd stated that there are 3,000 to 4,000 cubic yards left, as a guess, to level it, adding that he would like to level it down to about one foot above the highway, and further adding that he would like to make a decent building lot out of it. Mrs. Reuning pointed out that birds nest there. Mr. Tidd responded, yes, they nest there, but they never did before, adding that he only made a bigger area out of it, and further adding that there was excavation even before he owned it. Mr. Tidd commented that about three years ago, a builder wanted some dirt. Vice Chairman Hewett noted that Mr. Marion had mentioned a mess at the end of the lot, including upturned trees along the driveway. Mr. Tidd responded, yes, they would be part of the general clean-up to make it a building lot. Mr. Austen asked, what about the gas line, with Mr. Tidd responding, yes. when he gets the excavation done, he plans to relocate the gas line, adding that he has talked to the gas company. Mr. King asked where the gas line is, with Mr. Tidd responding, parallel to the road, 13A, on the bank side. Mr. King wondered if there were plans currently with NYSEG to relocate this gas line, to which Mr. Tidd responded, verbal only. Mr. King wondered when, to which Mr. Tidd responded, as soon as he gets the dirt down, adding that he planned on taking dirt out parallel to the line and back of it. Mr. King wondered how close, with Mr. Tidd responding, by mutual agreement. Mr. King noted that there appeared to be an estimate from NYSEG that it would cost $6,000, to which Mr. Tidd responded, yes, that is correct, but if he took the dirt out and did not make that much excavation and dug a trench, the cost would be minimal. ®Vice Chairman Hewett wondered if, on the building lot, there would be water and sewer, to which Mr. Tidd responded, no, well water and septic system. n LTJ Zoning Board of Appeals -6- April 11, 1979 Mr. Austen wondered what the regulations are. Mr. Fabbroni responded that when you yards, then you have to have a reclamation particular bank, if the 3,000 to 4,000 yards within the area of the ZBA. Mr. Tidd offered office, and you can have a 1,000 a year, on removing topsoil now are in excess of 1,000 plan, adding that this is a good number, falls that he checked with the Mr. Fabbroni stated that apparently, the nests are already in there. Mr. Tidd asked if he would be allowed to go on his lot and slope it, with Mr. Fabbroni responding, if there were some way to work around the nesting season this year. Mr. Tidd stated that he believed he was in his rights if he went down in there with a bulldozer and sloped the grades so that there would be no hazards, and if he sloped the grades the way it originally was, the swallows would not nest there, adding that they have not nested there forever, only since he started work there. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the Town would have to look into it a lot further from the environmental standpoint if Mr. Tidd proposed to bury the nests that are there; if, on the other hand, we reach some agreement that he went in there in the fall, that may be acceptable. Dr. Smith pointed out that the birds are protected under the Migratory Birds Act from April 1st through September 30th, adding that the State Statutes have already been violated. Mr. King wondered at what rate Mr. Tidd planned to remove the topsoil -- on a regular basis or only sporadically, as he had need, with Mr. Tidd resonding, probably, in the course of the summer to level the entire area. Mr. King wondered if Mr. Tidd meant by removal of topsoil from the site, and asked if Mr. Tidd had any other further plans for the lot. Mr. Tidd responded, not other than to build a house down there. Mr. Fabbroni noted, for information, if you mine less than 1,000 tons a year, then you do not require a mining permit from the State, you do require the permit under the Town's Zoning Ordinance that Mr. Tidd is here now for; if you plan to mine more than a 1,000 tons per year, you have to have a permit from the State DEC. Mr. Tidd asked if this is being called a mining operation. Mr. King asked how many cubic yards are in a ton, with Mr. Fabbroni responding that 1 cubic yard equals 1-1/2 tons. Mr. Austen wondered if there has ever been a permit issued for this, to which Vice Chairman Hewett responded, no, there is nothing on our record giving a permit. Mr. Tidd stated that he never knew he had to have a permit. Attorney Snow stated that it is one thing to disturb the birds is when the birds are in it, adding that you would not want to disturb them at nesting time. Attorney Snow stated that he thought we have a commitment here not to damage the gas line, adding that it would be possible to work in other areas of the lot. Attorney Snow, commenting Zoning Board of Appeals -7- April 11, 1979 ®that it is a relatively small lot, stated that he thought the area would be enhanced. Dr. Smith reiterated that any excavation activities should be delayed until after September 30th, adding, also there is a contiguous wetland there. A brief discussion ensued with regard to drainage. Attorney Snow stated that he had indicated that there was no contiguous wetland, adding that a hill causes more drainage problems than a flat land, and further adding that there is some flat land before you actually get to the wetlands -- about 300'-4001. Attorney Snow stated that by using good management, there should be no runoff problem. Mr. King asked Mr. Tidd how many years he had been excavating, with Mr. Tidd responding that a couple of years ago they took out several loads of dirt and about three years ago the cliff was created, adding that the mound was probably there from the highway construction. Mr. Tidd stated that last summer, late June or early July 1978, a man wanted some dirt and he said okay, then he went in and whether he got any he did not know, but Mr. Bonnell said no. Mrs. Reuning mentioned the flood,of 1972 and wondered if that had ® affected that area. Mr. Marion responded, yes, it ran right into his cellar door. Mr. King asked Mr. Tidd what part of this he could currently excavate without disturbing the birds, with Mr. Tidd responding, the southern end. Mr. King wondered if that would be in the area of the pipeline of the Gas and Electric. Mr. Tidd stated that no matter what area you are in, you run into the area of the pipeline. Mr. King asked Mr. Fabbroni if he had studied the EAF, to which Mr. Fabbroni responded, yes, and it needs some correction to indicate that the birds are there. Mr. Fabbroni pointed out that the form is not signed. Mr. Tidd signed the form. Mr. King asked Mr. Tidd if he could do this leveling operation after October 1st and between October 1st this year and March 31 of 1980. Mr. Tidd stated that he would like permission to start on the southerly end of that, keeping in mind that we do not want to disturb the birds in there. Mr. Tidd stated that they do not have a deadline that they have to meet; it is more of a convenience situation. Mr. Tidd stated that if the birds are in there, they could work on the other end of it instead, if they cannot, then they will just have to wait. Mrs. Reuning wondered if Mr. Tidd could work with an ornithologist. Mr. King asked what would happen to the birds if Mr. ® Tidd started excavating, with Dr. Smith responding that it would disturb the birds. Mr. Tidd asked, what about trucks, noting that they are used to that noise. Dr. Smith stated that he did not object to the leveling, but at the appropriate time. Zoning Board of Appeals -8- April 11, 1979 Mr. King stated that he thought the Board members should see the site. Vice Chairman Hewett stated that he would like to adjourn this matter until the Board can visit the site. MOTION by Mrs. Joan Reuning, seconded by Mr. Edward King: RESOLVED, by the Town of Ithaca Zoning matter of the Norman E. and Lillian B. extraction of natural products for removal Five Mile Drive be and hereby is adjourned set after discussion. Board of Appeals, that the Tidd Appeal in re the and sale of topsoil at 801 until a date which will be There being no further discussion on the MOTION, the Vice Chair called for a vote. Aye - Hewett, King, Austen, Reuning. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. After discussion, it was agreed that the Board members will meet at the site at 11:00 a.m. on Saturday, April 14, 1979. Messrs. Marion, Smith, Snow, and Tidd will be informed when the Board will meet next on this matter. The Secretary was directed to inform Chairman Francese of the on-site visit. Vice Chairman Hewett declared the matter of the Tidd Appeal duly adjourned. APPEAL OF DEWITT HISTORICAL SOCIETY, APPELLANT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO HAVE AN OCCUPIED HOUSE TRAILER AT 1406 TRUMANSBURG ROAD, PARCEL NO, 6-24-1-25.31 ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 59, PARAGRAPH b, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Mr. Richard Perry was present. Vice Chairman Hewett read the following letter, dated April 6, 1979, from Mr. Brian Nevin, President of the DeWitt Historical Society of Tompkins County to Chairman Peter K. Francese: "...Notice has been received of a public hearing to be held on 11 April 1979 which notes that the DeWitt Historical Society has appealed from an unfavorable decision of the Building Inspector to permit the location of a house trailer on its property at 1406 Trumansburg Road. Please be advised that the DeWitt Historical Society has not appealed and does not appeal from such denial. We did not know that such an ® appeal had been made in our name, and do not sanction it. At no time have we given anyone permission to have the trailer on the property. In fact, the opposite is true! The location of the trailer on the property is not consistent with the ownership and use of the property Zoning Board of Appeals -9- April 11, 1979 ® as an historical landmark. Mr. Perry, who husbands the property for the Society has been advised that the trailer will have to be moved." MOTION by Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mrs. Joan Reuning: RESOLVED, by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals, that the Appeal of the DeWitt Historical Society be dismissed. Mr. Perry spoke from the floor and stated that he leases the land from the DeWitt Historical and there is nothing in his lease that says he cannot locate a trailer there and have an employee live there as protection from vandalism and theft. Mr. King pointed out that there is no appellant. Mr. Perry spoke of pilfering and vandalism and stated that the Sheriff's Department has done nothing. Mr. Perry stated that he placed it there at a time when it was not feasible to have it moved anywhere else, adding that he would move it if he were given permission. Mr. King stated that he could see no objection to continuing with the hearing, but with that basis. Mr. King asked Mr. Perry if he had his lease with him, with Mr. Perry responding, no. Vice Chairman Hewett offered that he took it that the weather was the problem. Mr. Perry stated that he has written DeWitt and has received no response. Mr. Perry stated that his lease requires an arbitration committee of three people, if he were granted the permission to place the trailer in a suitable place. Mr. Perry mentioned Indian Creek Fruit Farm comprised of 87 acres and stated that he leases the total land, that is, everything but the house. Mr. Perry stated that over five years' time there has been considerable loss by kids that are free to roam the premises because there is no one there except the curator in the Frear house, adding that he has lost produce, machinery, money. Mr. King asked if someone lives in the trailer, to which Mr. Perry responded, yes, the man that runs the fruit stand and works for him. Mr. Fabbroni wondered what kind of sanitary procedures Mr. Perry would have. Mr. Perry stated that they will meet the requirements of the Health Department, adding that there is water there from a well, and electricity from a pole there. Vice Chairman Hewett read from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Mr. Perry under date of March 13, 1979, as follows: ...We need protection from vandalism and theft which the Sheriff's Dept. has been unable to give us in the past. By having an employee living in this mobile home, we can solve a housing problem as well as protect my machinery and merchandise from neighboring kids who have in ® the past, destroyed machinery and have stolen from the barns and fruit stand. The party living in the south part of the Frear house is located too far from the buildings in question and is only there part of the time. I therefore request a variance from the town Zoning Board of Appeals -10- April 11, 1979 ordinance." Vice Chairman Hewett read from Article XIII, Section 59, Paragraph b, of the Ordinance, as follows: "Upon special approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals to be reviewed each year, one mobile home for each property owner shall be permitted in all agricutural and R30 districts, provided that one of the occupants of said mobile home shall be a full time agricultural employee of the property owner or a bona fide agricultural student doing agricultural work for the property owner." Mr. King asked if the property were zoned R-30 or R-15, to which Mr. Fabbroni responded that the parcel is split between R15 and Ag and where Mr. Perry wants the trailer is in an R30 or an Ag district, adding that the portion of the property that is farmed is in Ag. Mr. Fabbroni commented that R15, as he has viewed it, is a little strange for this piece of land, adding that R15 usually connotes land that has public water and sewer available to it, and further adding that this is a little peculiar to be zoned R15 -- a 15,000 -square -foot building lot would probably never be approved. Vice Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak on this matter. No one spoke. Mr. Austen asked Mr. Perry where he would propose to put the ® trailer if the Board so decided, with Mr. Perry responding, wherever the Zoning Officer recommends, and also the DeWitt Historical Society, Mr. Fabbroni offered that the factors of the well and the electricity create a different perspective, adding that he had envisioned it up by the barn. Mr. Perry offered that, if they could have it, they would put it near the barn but in a way to be able to see the fruit stand. Mr. King noted that there is a well near there, to which Mr. Perry responded, yes. Mr. King suggested that, if Mr. Perry could get the consent of the DeWitt Historical, he did not think the Board will have any problem with it, that is, with agreement from DeWitt for proper location and screening. Mr. Fabbroni stated that he would suggest some other things: (1) Mr. Perry could dig the test holes now, and explore the possbility of septic fields, and (2) in the meantime, he could go up there and look at the potential site behind the fruit stand, (3) take pictures from the north and the south as to views; (4) do a test on the soil and verify that it is a potable source of water. Mr. Fabbroni stated that with these four things, the Board would be in a better position to make a decision. MOTION by Vice Chairman Hewett, seconded by Mrs. Joan Reuning: RESOLVED, that the matter of the Richard Perry request to ® a mobile home on the farm he leases from the DeWitt Historical be and hereby is adjourned to April 30, 1979, in order for the and Mr. Fabbroni to be ready to return. locate Society Perrys Zoning Board of Appeals -11- April 11, 1979 ® There being no further discussion, the Vice Chair called for a vote. Aye - Hewett, Austen, King, Reuning, Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Vice Chairman Hewett declared the matter of the DeWitt Historical Society Appeal duly adjourned at 9:15 p.m. APPEAL OF JAMES A. FREEMAN, APPELLANT, MARGIE RUMSEY, AS AGENT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO SUBDIVIDE A LOT INTO TWO LOTS LESS THAN 15,000 SQ. FT. IN AREA AT 1450 SLATERVILLE ROAD, PARCEL NO. 6-58-2-30, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 67, AND ARTICLE IV, SECTION 16, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Vice Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 9:16 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Ms. Rumsey was present. Ms. Rumsey stated that Mr. Freeman is requesting permission to build a second small house in the rear and a variance is needed to do ® so. Ms. Rumsey stated that the existing house is very small and is a very unique house, being a one -bedroom under FHA and a three-bedroom for tax purposes. Mrs. Reuning wondered about access to the second lot, with Ms. Rumsey responding, through an existing driveway around a garage to the back lot. Mr. King wondered what Mr. Freeman would do with his family -- split it, half in one house? Vice Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present who would like to be heard on one side or the other. There appearing to be no response, Vice Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present in favor of the request. No one spoke. Vice Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present in opposition to the request. Mr. David Ludington and Mr. Vincent Hinckley indicated from the floor that they were in opposition, noting that they border the Freeman property on the west. Mr. Bion Carpenter also indicated his opposition and stated that he resides less than one-half mile away. Mr. R. C. Mendiones also indicated his opposition and stated that he resides next door. Mr. Halgas voiced his opposition. Mr. Ludington, 1456 Slaterville Road, asked what the purpose of ® this second building was, wondering if it were for the same family for additional living space, or is the suggestion here approval for a second lot -- a second family. Ms. Rumsey stated that the buyer is interested for his family. Mr. Ludington wondered if the matter r Zoning Board of Appeals -12- April 11, 1979 ® actually being discussed here was about subdividing a lot, adding that he was opposed to that. Mr. Ludington stated that the neighborhood lots are large and he could see no reason why that small a lot with that small a house should be permitted back away from the road. Mr. Carpenter, 1467 Slaterville Road, stated that he would question the need for subdividing the lot for one family, adding that it would make very small lots for the area in relation to the others. Mr. Mendiones, 1452 Slaterville Road, stated that he opposed the subdivision of that lot whether crosswise or lengthwise, adding that he is next door to Mr. Freeman's house. Mr. Mendiones stated that one of the reasons why he opposed vigorously is the fact that if given permission to divide that lot and build another house, the density of population would be increased. Mr. Mendiones stated that another thing is that he would like that neighborhood to be as it is, adding that the houses are far apart and the houses are built there nicely and far apart with a wide space to look at. Mr. Mendiones stated that another thing is that if a Board will approve dividing this lot and another house built in there, he was very sure that it is not going to be the owners who buy this lot to build that house and then to be rented, which would mean an additional increase, therefore, he would like, personally, to have that neighborhood stay as it is. Mr. Hinkley, 1446 Slaterville Road, stated that he would not ® agree to a variance for a separate standard lot without road frontage for two reasons: (1) is there a hardship involved in this case? Mr. Hinkley stated that he could see no undue hardship involved here, and, (2) it would appear that a house to the rear of another one does present a fire hazard, just in the delay of time in getting equipment to that house in the rear which could be a danger to the house on the other side. Mr. Hinkley stated that he would be opposed to this variance. Mr. Hinkley stated that another question he would raise is that the garage is now being occupied by another party and asked if a variance has been granted for approval of occupancy in the garage. Mr. Fabbroni stated that if the use of the garage is by another party who is not a resident of the house and this use does not predate zoning, then it is an illegal use. Mr. Hinkley offered that this would be a third dwelling on this land. Mr. Halgas stated that he opposed the Board changing its mind as to the denial. Ms. Rumsey stated that if Mr. Hinkley is interested in that garage - it is occupied by a blood relative, adding that if he is interested as a busybody, it is okay. is It was noted that the set back is out of order. Mr. Ludington stated that this appeal was falsely presented, adding that it was not even necessary for this to be here if he just U Zoning Board of Appeals built another house. -13- April 11, 1979 Mr. Fabbroni pointed out that you cannot have two dwellings as separate structures on one lot. Mse really, density. Rumsey stated that she would like to better understand, the concern of these people here, adding that it sounds like Mr. Halgas stated that he liked the freedom of the country. Ms. Rumsey spoke of the proposed owner's need for more room. Mr. Fabbroni stated that, apparently, the potential buyer wants more room, so he is going to build two separate houses so that he can walk back and forth to and from each house. Vice Chairman Hewett commented that he would wonder how long the family would put up with this, and asked what would happen if he sold it, commenting that it would be difficult. Ms. Rumsey responded that, in her opinion, it would not be difficult. Mr. Fabbroni offered that looking at the pictures, an somewhere between the garage and build a new building in the back if the problem is more space, from architect could design an addition the existing house, adding to have to for room is the primary purpose. Ms. Rumsey stated that they told her that they want a separate building at the back with a separate lot. Mr. Austen stated that it does not meet Section 16 of the Ordinance. Ms. Rumsey indicated that the parcel is almost 28,000 square feet in size, adding that he is more concerned with building a separate house. Mr. Fabbroni stated that you cannot build a second house on one lot, even if you did not have a separate lot, reiterating that you cannot build a second house on that lot now without a variance. Ms. Rumsey wondered about a variance for a second unit on this lot, adding, let's drop the second lot, and further adding, let's consider one lot with a separate building on it with a variance so that it is the same family. Mr. King stated that usually the Notice of the Appeal states the purpose and this Notice is for a subdivision. Ms. Rumsey asked if she could, on his behalf, drop that request, with Mr. King responding that Ms. Rumsey could file a new appeal for that purpose. Ms. Rumsey commented on bringing all these people back. Mr. Fabbroni pointed out that Ms. Rumsey is talking about a second building, and stated, so, let's talk about it on a second lot, adding, to change the appeal would not probably change the discussion. Mr. King stated that he, personally, feels that the Board is ® being asked to grant an area variance and a use variance and there is no particular hardship or special circumstance being shown where the Board has any right to grant such a variance. Mr. King stated that he could understand the man's desires, however, he did not see anything Zoning Board of Appeals -14- April 11, 1979 ® in this that merits a variance or a separate lot. Mr. Ludington commented that if he loves the lot, he could expand the existing house. Mr. Austen stated that he saw nothing that would really permit the Board to do this. MOTION by Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mr. Edward Austen: RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca deny and hereby does deny the Appeal of James A. Freeman, Appellant, Margie Rumsey, as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission to subdivide a lot into two lots less than 15,000 square feet in area at 1450 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-58-2-30, for the reason that there has been no showing of unnecessary hardship to justify the granting of the application to subdivide nor for a variance for the purpose of constructing a second dwelling on the parcel. There being no further discussion, the Vice Chair called for a vote. Aye - Hewett, King, Austen, Reuning. Nay - None. ® The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Vice Chairman Hewett declared Appeal duly closed, ADJOURNMENT the matter of the James A. Freeman Upon Motion, Vice Chairman Hewett declared the April 11, 1979 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly closed. Jack D. Hewett, Vice Chairman. Respectfully submitted, Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary, Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals. Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Meetings of April 11, 1979, adjourned to April 30, 1979. IN THE MATTER OF A PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1979, AND ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, APRIL 30, 1979: APPEAL OF NORMAN E. AND LILLIAN B. TIDD, APPELLANTS, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO EXTRACT NATURAL PRODUCTS FOR REMOVAL AND SALE OF TOPSOIL AT 801 FIVE MILE DRIVE, PARCEL NO. 6-31-2-18, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 70, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. PRESENT: Jack D. Hewett, Edward W. King Edward N..Austen Joan Reuning FINDINGS OF FACT: Vice -Chairman WHEREAS, the subject property, which is nearly triangular in shape and is located on the easterly side of Five Mile Drive at its intersection with the southwesterly line of a private dirt road, contains a natural grassy mound of sandy loam which rises as much as fifteen feet above the general level of the area, viz., from a general level of about 405 feet MSL to something in excess of 420 feet MSL, and contains approximately one acre of land with perhaps something less than 10,000 cubic yards of such "topsoil" material thereon above such approximated 405 foot MSL level; and WHEREAS, such soil deposits have been excavated, and material removed, from these sites on the northerly end of the lot, exten- sive excavations having been made on the westerly side of the mound with two lesser excavations on the easterly side thereof leaving exposed steep banks, in two of which, bank swallows have nested in 1977 and 1978; and WHEREAS, evidence presented to the Board of Appeals indicated that many of the nests and fledgling birds were destroyed last summer by mining of the bank on the northeasterly face of the mound; and it appears from the evidence that the birds will nest in the bank only if it presents a rather -.precipitous face, and that disruption of the bird habitat is to be avoided during the nest.ing season which runs from approximately late April into late August each year; and the Board having visited the site on April 140 1979, and there being no bank swallows in evidence at that time, contrary to expectations that the birds might arrive as early as April 1st; and 17] Norman and Lillian Tidd Appeal Page Two WHEREAS, Section 70 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca provides for the regulation of the extraction of natural products by requiring the Special Approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals, such section requiring the submission of a plan of the proposed project and proposed removal, with proposed regrading and replanting of the property upon completion, the Board being enjoined to take into account the possible future development of land and the possible nuisance or detriment of the operation; and the Board being empowered to impose such conditions as it deems necessary to protect the general welfare of the community, such possible conditions including placing time limits upon operations and requiring a performance bond; and WHEREAS, in addition to the finding of the foregoing facts recited hereinabove, the Board further finds that: (1) The property is in a Residential District R-9. (2) There has been a substantial amount of brush, tree roots, and debris collected and piled along the roadway at the northerly end of the lot; and beer cans and other debris have I I been deposited on other portions of the lot. (3) A buried gas pipe line runs along the westerly side of the lot parallel to Five Mile Drive, and it is reputedly buried about 5 feet deep and runs over the top of the hill; and it would be quite expensive to excavate to -the considerable depth now necessary to drop such lot to an approximate 405 foot MSL l level, but that if material were excavated from the immediate area of the line, it could then be re -buried at the new level I i without undue expense. (4) It may be possible to conduct mining operations on the i southerly side of the lot or'on the-more•gradualiy-sloped open i --faces of the bank where no birds are nesting, without .unduly I disturbing nesting bank swallows on the other open faces of the mound, but the situation would have to be carefully monitored during any operation conducted between April 1st and September j 30th tobe sure that the operations were not injurious to such swallows as may be nesting there. • C: • 11 Norman and Lillian Tidd Appeal Page Three (5) The appellant desires to remove the entire mound within the next twenty-four months and to level and grade the lot to a level near the present elevation of the roadway, viz., about the 405 foot MSL contour; and he has expressed his willingness to attend to relocation of the gas pipe line to below such level so that it would not be left buried in a ridge at its present loca- tion (such possible pipe line ridge being deemed by the Board an objectionable feature which must be avoided in these operations); now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca grant and hereby does grant Norman E. and Lillian B. Tidd, a Special Permit under Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to remove the top soil material from the site of his property down to a level of approximately 405 feet MSL in accordance with their plan, within the next thirty (30) months this approval being expressly contingent upon the following: 1. That existing debris along the westerly site of the property be removed promptly hereafter, and, that generally during the operations they see that the site is kept clear of debris. 2. That the operations be stopped at any time after it appears that the bank swallows have moved in and that the opera- tions are in any way upsetting or jeopardizing the birds. 3. That Mr. Tidd supply to the Enforcement Officer such agreement as he can obtain with the New York State Electric and Gas Company for the eventual relocation of the gas pipe line, before the expiration of these thirty months, to below the new surface level of approximately 405 feet MSL. 4. That Mr. Tidd either post.a performance -bond -running to the Town of Ithaca or a letter of credit in an amount which would be $14,000.00 more than the cost of lowering the pipe line to the desired level, the performance bond or the letter of credit being conditioned upon the completion of this leveling of the property within the thirty months and completion -of the plan generally. n qS •• 0 J • 1 Norman and Lillian Tidd Appeal Page Four MOVED by Mr. Edward W. King, seconded by Mr.,Edward N. Austen. Aye - Jack D. Hewett, Edward W. King, Edward N. Austen, Joan Reuning. Nay - None. Carried unanimously. STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS: TOWN OF ITHACA ) I, Nancy M. Fuller, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, New York, and Secretary to the Zoning Board of Appeals of said Town, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and exact copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of said Town of Ithaca at an adjourned Public Hearing held on the 30th day of April, 1979, with all members of said Board of Appeals having had due and proper notice thereof, and a Notice.of such Public Hearing having been duly and properly poste and published on April 2, 1979, and April 6, 1979, respectively, and said Notice of Public Hearing having been served by mail upon the various neighboring property owners on April 3 and April 24, 1979, and that the same is a complete copy of the whole of such resolution. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the Corporate seal of the Town of Ithaca, New York, this 10th day of May, 1979. Nancy M, duller, Deputy Town Clerk and Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeal S E A L