Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1979-07-160 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 161 1979 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Monday, July 16, 1979, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairman Peter K. Francese, Jack D. Hewett, Joan G. Reuning, Edward W. King, Edward N. Austen, John C. Barney (Town Attorney), Lawrence P. Fabbroni (Town Engineer/Building Inspector), Nancy M. Fuller (Secretary). ALSO PRESENT: Herbert N. Monkemeyer, E. L. Rose Gostanian Monkemeyer, Frederick S. Webster, Architect, Joe Novak, Tom Barley, Evan N. Monkemeyer, Gale Austen, Claudia Weisburd, Jerold M. Weisburd, Robert D. Sweet, M. Virginia Sweet, Madelyn Glase, Paul Harvey (WHCU News), Carole Eisenberg (Ithaca Journal). Chairman Francese declared the meeting duly opened at 7:48 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 July 6, 1979 and July 11, 1979, respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of the properties in question, as appropriate, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, and upon each of the appellants and/or agent, if any, on July 10, 1979. ADJOURNED APPEAL OF HERBERT MONKEMEYER FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A PROPOSED MULTIPLE FAMILY BUILDING TO BE USED IN PART FOR AN ARTISTS' GALLERY AND ASSOCIATED ART SALES AND TO BE HIGHER THAN 2 STORIES ON THE ROAD SIDE AT 1059 DANBY ROAD, PARCEL N0, 6-43-1-3.21 ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR UNDER SECTIONS 26, 27, 28, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Chairman Francese declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7.50 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Mr. Herbert Monkemeyer appeared before the Board and stated that he and Mr. Webster, Architect with the firm of Sargent Webster and also of the New York State Board of Examiners, were here to answer questions. Mr. Monkemeyer stated that questions with respect to the art field could be answered by Mr. Barley of the Tompkins County Arts Council, Chairman Francese commented to Mr. Monkemeyer that we went over this last time but we will go over it again. Chairman Francese stated that two variances are being discussed. (1) use variance for art studio activities, that is, display, showing, and sale, which the Town Ordinance says one cannot do in a multiple residence. Chairman Francese noted that the Town Ordinance is a permissive zoning ordinance, meaning unless it is in there, you cannot do it. (2) area variance for the height of the Zoning Board of Appeals 2 July 16, 1979 ® structure. Chairman Francese stated that the Building Inspector has determined that the height of the barn is above the height normally permitted under Section 28, paragraph 2. Chairman Francese stated that there is probably no doubt that this structure exceeds two stories, but, even if there were, it probably should have a variance. Chairman Francese noted the matter also of the rear yard which under the ordinance should be not less than twice the height of the nearest structure. Chairman Francese commented that that could be about 35', thus, the rear yard should probably be about 70', which could be on the edge of a particular problem. Chairman Francese stated that, if the Zoning Board of Appeals were to grant a variance for each of these three items, i.e., one use variance and two area variances, then the Town Board can go ahead with final site approval and this art colony could continue. Chairman Mr. Monkemeyer indicated his concurrence, commenting, as long as they are not in the position of admitting a height of over two stories, and adding, but under the way Chairman Francese is handling it, that is not necessary. Mr. Monkemeyer stated that they were prepared to defend the height matter. Chairman Francese stated that there may be some conditions as according to the Stipulation of April 5, 1979. Town Attorney Barney pointed out that what is being done tonight is contemplated by the Stipulation, adding that in preliminary settlement of the litigation this Stipulation was entered into which called for ® application for rezoning, submission of plans, and, if necessary, solicitation of a variance. Mr. Barney stated that this is basically what we are here for tonight. Mr. Fabbroni requested permission to state for the record that he, personally, as the Building Inspector, sees the question of height before the Board tonight as almost totally separate from the questions of height that the Town has in matters of enforcing the New York State Building Code. Mr. Fabbroni stated that he did not wish to prejudice any actions the Board might take tonight as against any actions the Town might take as far as the Building Code goes. Chairman Francese asked if anyone had any questions for the applicants, Mr. Webster, or Mr. Barley. Mr. King offered that, as the Board forumulates a resolution, he would invite their participation and also Mr. Barney's. Mr. Austen stated that he went up and looked at it and he had no questions. Mrs. Reuning asked Mr. Fabbroni if this building does meet the multiple residence code as far as he knew, further asking if he had examined it in that light. Mr. Fabbroni responded that, at this point, he would have to say no, but, the logical end, based on the Board of Appeals' action here, site plan approval, etc., would go back to the Town Board and upon their action, he would send plans to the New York State Building Codes Review Board. Mr. Webster commented that he agreed to a certain extent with Mr. Fabbroni, but there are trade-offs that would make it acceptable to the Review Board of the Building Codes Council. Mr. Barney stated that he agreed, essentially. Zoning Board of Appeals 3 July 16, 1979 ® Chairman Francese asked Mr. Fabbroni if he had any problem with an approval being contingent upon approval of the Building Codes Council, Mr. Fabbroni described his reservations on this type of contingency, noting, among other things, that if the Board says to him that height is not a big objection and if the Codes Council feels there are adequate trade-offs for life safety, they will feel more comfortable having that kind of statement in hand. Mr. Barney suggested any such approval be subject to approval of the appropriate authorities which may be Mr. Fabbroni. Mr. Tom Barley stated that he was involved with the New York State Council on the Arts and, soon, the National Endowment for the Arts. Mr. Barley stated that the New York State Arts Council has approved this project and the intent to incorporate the gallery space and operate it as a non-profit entity. Mr. Barley explained that this means it goes beyond hanging and selling paintings, it also means educational seminars, jobs, etc. Mr. Barley commented that particularly in the rural part of the State there is a serious need for what Mr. Monkemeyer is attempting to do. Mr. Barley noted again that the NYS Council on the Arts has already approved this, making it entitled to funding, educatinal workshops, and stated that that has a positive bearing on the matter. Chairman Francese commented to Mr. Barley that he [Barley] would say that this art colony would be of substantial benefit to the community. Mr. King offered the following Findings of Fact. ® WHEREAS, the matter before the Board concerns requested variances on approximately 1.38 acres of land on the east side of Route 96B and containing the barn or art gallery, the cottage, and a four -unit farmhouse; and WHEREAS, the matter before the Board has been referred to the Board by the Town of Ithaca Town Board for variances so that said Town Board may consider the rezoning of such 1.38 acres (approximately) of land to multiple residence, and WHEREAS, the Town Board apparently favors the granting of these necessary variances to permit continued use for art studio purposes, NOW, THEREFORE, DO WE, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca, FIND: 1. The land concerned to be that shown on the plot plan which has been presented to the Board. 2. The area is presently zoned Business "C". 3. The land exists in a mixed zone area comprised primarily of Business "C", R-30, and R-9 uses with a multi -family area zoned to the north of the R-9 area. 414. The rear yard, which would be the east side of this plot, to the east of the barn -studio, has a proposed sixty foot (601) width. Zoning Board of Appeals G] July 16, 1979 5. The height of the barn is such that it might possibly require a is slightly larger rear yard, applying Section 28, subdivision 2, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. 6. There is no present use of a large tract immediately to the east of this plot and no buildings existing near the barn -studio which would be adversely affected by permitting the rear yard to be slightly less than that called for under Section 28, subdivision 2, of said Zoning Ordinance. It would appear that the effect of that potential problem in the rear yard would be negligible on the adjacent property. 7. Under these circumstances, in order to permit the Appellant to continue the present mixed use of this area for multi -residence and for art studio or art gallery display and incidental sales activities, the Board finds that it would be necessary to grant (1) an area variance in respect of the rear yard and also such a variance in respect of the height of the building, it appearing that the multiple residence article (Section 28, subdivision 5) generally limits the height of buildings to 112 stories on the road side." and (2) that the continued use would require a use variance to permit the art gallery display and incidental sales activities. 8. This proposition comes to this Board under a Stipulation entered into between the Town of Ithaca and the Appellant Monkemeyers in Cortland County Supreme Court on April 5, 1979. 9. It appears, further, that a further area variance may be required in that the front yard to the west of the farmhouse westerly to the State Route 96B may be less than the fifty feet (50' ) required under Section 28, subdivision 2, of said Zoning Ordinance, but, that the structure has been there for many years. 10. The land is presently occupied by twelve (12) dwelling units, there being four (4) in the house on the west, one (1) in the cottage on the south, and seven (7) in the barn -gallery on the east. MOTION by Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mr. Peter Francese: RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca adopt and hereby does adopt the foregoing Findings of Fact. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Hewett, King, Reuning, Austen. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared by the Chair to be carried unanimously. MOTION by Mr. Edward King, seconded by Mr. Peter Francese: RESOLVED, that, based on the foregoing Findings, the Zoning Board of is Appeals of the Town of Ithaca grant and hereby does grant conditional variances to the Appellant for this 1.38 acre plot to continue its use for no more than twelve (12) dwelling units and with an accessory and Zoning Board of Appeals 5 July 16, 1979 ancillary use of the barn as artists' studios in a manner and method presently used for display and gallery purposes and possible sale of artistic products made of the tenants' art. Art works made by persons other than tenants may be displayed. Such conditions are as follows: 1. That the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca actually rezones this plot to a multiple residence district subject to the variances hereby granted. 2. That there be at no time more than twelve (12) dwelling units inclusive of art studios on the plot. 3. That the buildings be or be__brought into compliance with all applicable building construction codes or approved variances therefrom. 4. That there be compliance with any other pertinent terms of the Stipulation entered into between the Town of Ithaca and the Appellants on April 5, 1979, in the action in the Supreme Court, Cortland County, a copy of that Stipulation to be made a part of this record. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that based on the foregoing conditions, said Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant area variances as follows: (a) Sanctioning the proposed sixty foot (601) rear yard (easterly side) depth. ® (b) Sanctioning the front yard (on the west) being less than fifty feet (50') . (c) Sanctioning the use of the art studio despite the fact that its height may be more than the two stories permitted under the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance Section 28(5). AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that said Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant a use variance to permit the accessory use of the barn -gallery for artistic displays, showings, and incidental sales. By way of discussion, Mr. Monkemeyer stated that they reserve all rights to the non -conforming use which they have had over the years prior to zoning. Mr. King asked Mr. Monkemeyer to be specific as to what use he considered non -conforming. Mr. Monkemeyer responded that the three buildings have been multi -family since before zoning, adding that there have been three or more units on the plot since before zoning. Mr. King asked, "What building on the plot?" Mr. Monkemeyer responded that all three buildings have been residential buildings. Discussion followed between Mr. Barney and Mr. Monkemeyer. Chairman Francese stated that Mr. Monkemeyer's reservation will be shown on the record. Chairman Francese further stated to Mr. Monkemeyer that the Board has heard his reservations and, too, there is a Motion on the floor which has been seconded and he would call for a vote. is Mr. Barney stated that it should be clarified whether the owner wants a variance or not. Chairman Francese stated that he thought Mr. Zoning Board of Appeals 6 July 16, 1979 Monkemeyer has said that he does. Mr. Monkemeyer stated that, in the interests of settling this case and in the interests of the kind of money expended, he would seek the variance. Further discussion of the Motion took place during which Mr. King stated that one further condition he would like to add is that all conditions be met. Following further discussion, Mr. King withdrew his further condition. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Hewett, King, Reuning, Austen. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Francese declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in and the matter of the Herbert Monkemeyer Appeal duly closed at 8:50 p.m. APPEAL OF ROBERT D. AND M. VIRGINIA SWEET, APPELLANTS, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND HOUSE WITHOUT SUFFICIENT ROAD FRONTAGE AT 1401 SLATERVILLE ROAD, PARCEL NO. 6-58-1-12.2, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR UNDER ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 67, AND ARTICLE IV, SECTION 16, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Chairman Francese declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 8:51 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. The Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Robert D. Sweet under date of July 2, 1979, reads as follows: "(1) The only feasible use of our 20.+ acres of hilly back land is as a site for our personal home. (2) Denial will require us to pay $10-$12,000 for a lot with services but without acreage. (3) The neighbors will not be adversely affected because their houses will be about 175' away. (4) The spirit of the zoning ordinance will be upheld." [Plot Plan attached.] Mr. Sweet appeared before the Board and stated that he and his wife would like to build a home for their own use at the rear of 1401 Slaterville Road, Mr. Sweet stated that they have several parcels to the edge of 1401 which is rental property, adding that they used to own 1403 Slaterville Road which they sold to Mr. Novak in 1972. Mr. Sweet stated that there was a slight change in plans because of finances and so the garage has been joined to the house [proposed] and angled straight out. Mr. Sweet stated that the side numbers do not change, however, the 45' shown from the corner where the Novak property turns is now longer -- it is about 601. Mr. Sweet stated that they have a total of about 20 acres of back land. Chairman Francese noted that the only way to get to that back land is through a 12 -foot wide area at the north side running southerly and widening to about 22.5 feet. Mr. Sweet stated that that was correct, adding that they bought that land a long time ago and when they sold 1403 it had a wider lot. Mr. Sweet commented that at that time there was talk Zoning Board of Appeals 7 July 16, 1979 ® of extending Honness Lane, adding that he doubted if he will live long enough to.see one. Chairman Francese wondered, if this is the only way to get to the 20 acres of land, what might happen to some future owner who would have 20 acres of land and only one house. Chairman Francese commented that he or she might have a real problem. Mr. Sweet offered that whoever owned it would have to come here and plead. Mr. Sweet stated that they tried to buy some land from the neighbors, Mr. Baker and Mr. Guidi, and they will not sell. Mr. Fabbroni stated that he would like to comment that the basic problem is that he does not have a 15 -foot right of way without making the lot for 1401 an illegal width. Mr. Fabbroni stated that that is the basis for the variance from a 15 -foot frontage on a road and a legal lot in the rear. Chairman Francese wondered what the land is like behind. Mr. Sweet stated that it is rough and undulating, however, where they wish to build is fairly level. Mr. Sweet stated that the sewer line runs just behind the rear property line of 1403 and because that is the only area fairly level they cut through 13 feet in depth and, so, they can site a house where they are planning it and have gravity sewer to the north. Mr. Fabbroni pointed out that the sewer runs parallel to Slaterville Road and described what Mr. Sweet owns. Chairman Francese asked for Mr. stated that Mr. Sweet owns close to plan for a house he wishes to put on City of Ithaca Watershed. Fabbroni Is opinion. Mr. Fabbroni 20 acres of land, this is the only its and the other neighbor is the Mrs. Reuning wondered about any fire hazards. Mr. Sweet stated that it is 260 feet from the center of the highway and the nearest hydrant is in the center of the Glover property, adding that the house would be about 250 feet away from a hydrant. Mr. King wondered if he were correct about there being a statute for a 25 -foot fire lane. Mr. Fabbroni stated that that was not the figure, adding that that is what the 15 feet is all about. Chairman Francese noted that Mr. Novak, Mr. Sweet's neighbor was present, and commented that Mr. King was also a neighborhood resident. Mr. Novak stated that he just came in case he could answer any questions. Mr. Novak stated that he had no objections, adding that there is a lot of land there. Mr. Novak stated that the most sensible thing he is proposing is using the driveway. Mr. Sweet stated that he owns 1401 in which there have been three apartment units since around 1952. Mr. Fabbroni stated that, on those facts only, there is no problem since the use is grandfathered in. Chairman Francese asked if there were any further questions. There were none. Chairman Francese stated that he would offer the following Findings of Fact: 1. Mr. Novak, the neighbor to the east of Mr. Sweet, appeared and indicated that he had no objection to Mr. Sweet's proposed new residence to the south of his property. Zoning Board of Appeals 8 July 16, 1979 ® 2. Mr. Sweet indicated that he intends to continue ownership of 1401 Slaterville Road, a three-family dwelling. 3. The proposed new dwelling will be served by Bolton Point water and City of Ithaca sewer. 4. There are some 20 acres of vacant land owned by Mr. Sweet surrounding the proposed new dwelling unit and Mr. Sweet indicates that he proposes to build no other dwelling units. 5. This proposed dwelling is a one -family unit in which Mr. and Mrs. Sweet will reside. 6. There is no access from Slaterville road to this property except across a 109.5 -foot section of land owned by Mr. Sweet on which there now exists a three-family dwelling unit. 7. The proposed access to this new dwelling would be over the westerly portion of the lot which is approximately 25 feet wide at its narrowest point between the westerly side of the existing three-family unit and the westerly lot line. At this point, Mr. Fabbroni commented that if the Board does not recognize some lot for the three-family at some point in time if there were a sale there would be a problem. Discussion followed. ® 8. This proposed use presents the distinct possiblity that at some future time the owner may wish to split off a lot with the three -apartment unit at 1401 Slaterville Road, and that this proposed development might make such a subdivided lot not conform to the Statute requirements, but that it appears that there would exist sufficient area to permit a variance for the width of such a subdivided lot. MOTION by Mr. Peter Francese, seconded by Mr. Edward Austen: RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals adopt and hereby does adopt the foregoing Findings of Fact with respect to the Sweet Appeal. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Hewett, King, Reuning, Austen. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. MOTION by Mr. Peter Francese, seconded by Mrs. Joan Reuning: RESOLVED, by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals, based upon Facts found and adopted, that a Building Permit be issued to Mr. Robert ® D. Sweet, as requested, for the construction of his proposed home to be located on premises known as Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-58-1-12.2, as shown in the Sketch attached to his application with the modifications Zoning Board of Appeals 9 July 16, 1979 ® as were noted by the applicant at this public hearing and as set forth in the record. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Hewett, King, Reuning, Austen. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Francese declared the Public Hearing in and the matter of the Sweet Appeal duly closed at 9:20 p.m. APPEAL OF INLET VALLEY LAND CO-OP, INC., APPELLANTS, JEROLD M. WEISBURD, AS AGENT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO BUILD A PRIVATE SCHOOL AT 171 CALKINS ROAD, PARCEL NO, 6-33-1-4, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR UNDER ARTICLE XI AND ARTICLE V, SECTION 4, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Chairman Francese declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 9:21 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Mr. Austen asked permission to be excused and was granted same. ® Mr. Weisburd appeared before the Board and noted that each had a copy of his Appeal dated July 6, 1979. [The Appeal reads: "Having been denied permission to build a private school at 171 Calkins Road, Parcel No. 6-33-1-4,...Article XI, and Article V, Section 18, par. 4...Approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals is necessary." The Board members also had in hand a copy of that portion of the May 15, 1979, Planning Board Minutes pertaining to the Inlet Valley Co -Op. Mr. Weisburd, commenting that he would take it from the top, stated that the land under discussion is located off Route 13 near Early Bird Farm and Mr. Brink's Farm at the bend in Calkins Road, contains 98 acres and straddles Woodcock Creek, Mr. Weisburd described orchards and pines. Mr. Weisburd stated that they have proposed a Cooperative where the land is never to be subdivided but is owned by the Co -Op. Mr. Weisburd stated that people buy lots, or sections, in the form of proprietary leaseholds and there are 10 lots. Mr. Weisburd stated that one lot of the ten is presently being proposed as a small private school for not more than 50 students, commenting that it is all on one side of the proposed new road. Mr. Weisburd stated that the school is proposed for pre -K through 6th grade and presented to the Board preliminary designs for the proposed school. Mr. Weisburd stated that the building itself is about the size of a house which helps in financing and it is proposed to be clapboard and to utilize passive solar devices. Mr. Weisburd stated that there is proposed to be one large floor, a loft, and a basement containing the nursery school. Mr. Weisburd stated that any future addition is not contemplated now and they do not wish to present any such thoughts now, adding that they are not looking for approval for any extension. Mr. Weisburd noted that the ® parking is proposed to be a little different from that shown on the plans and indicated a loop for a bus. Mr. Weisburd stated that there is an existing drive that the Co -Op owns. Mr. Weisburd stated that people have Zoning Board of Appeals 10 July 16, 1979 ® purchased the old farmhouse property, commenting that it is about 1.1 acres and was sold -off as a separate parcel. Mr. Weisburd stated that the Co -Op owns the barn and has access, adding that, if the school does happen, the kids can exit right into the school from the bus which will be a public bus. Mr. Weisburd described the various ways the students might get to and from school such as walking, bus, or car-pooling. Mr. Weisburd also described the staggering of the school hours. Mr. Weisburd stated that one point he would offer is that the way it reads in the zoning code, a school is a permitted use in this area but requires approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Chairman Francese asked if all of this land has been surveyed. Mr. Weisburd stated that it had and pins are in. Mr. Weisburd stated that the proposed school lot has not been surveyed because it is an additional expense and would be coming out of the school expenses. Indicating on the drawing, Chairman Francese asked how people got to a particular lot. Mr. Weisburd stated that it is a private road so no one has frontage on a road. Mr. Weisburd described what he termed a proprietary lease forever. With respect to water, Chairman Francese asked if Mr. Weisburd had established samples. Mr. Weisburd stated that they have established one good well, adding that they have done test holes for the Health Department and the Health Department has approved almost everything. Mr. Weisburd stated that they are waiting on the SPEDES permit approval. Again utilizing the drawings, Mr. Weisburd and the Board discussed a dam with Mr. Weisburd noting that it is to be a concrete dam 20 feet high and ® 12 feet across. Mr. Weisburd stated that the pipes go all the way down to the Brink Farm, commenting that the lease has expired so the rights have expired, and noting that the water has been potable for about 30 years. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the dam goes down into a pond which Mr. Brink maintains for his livestock. Chairman Francese wondered if Mr. Weisburd planned to stop Mr. Brink from using water. Mr. Weisburd stated that they have no such particular intention but they may wish to use water for the barn which will have livestock. Mr. King wondered if Mr. Fabbroni had anything to report from the Planning Board. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the only report about the school, which the Board has, is as a potential site on the Co -Op which was given preliminary approval. Mr. Fabbroni commented that the school was also mentioned last week [July 10, 1979] during the discussion by the Planning Board with regard to final subdivision approval, adding that that meeting was adjourned until tomorrow night [July 17, 1979]. Mr. King stated that he thought the Board should make any approval contingent upon the Planning Board approval. Mr. Fabbroni commented that, personally, he had no problem with the school traffic because with the bus it would be a lot less. Mr. King commented that the Board had no idea of the residential intensity in the area. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there are approximately seven existing homes on Calkins Road, all of which are behind where the entrance to the Co -Op is and most of them to the east. Chairman Francese stated that he would offer the following Findings ® of Fact: Zoning Board of Appeals 11 July 16, 1979 1. The Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca has granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval to subject Co -Operative by Resolution of May 15, 1979. 2. The subject parcel is located in an Agricultural Zone and so Section 51 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance makes applicable thereto the regulations for an R-30 Zone and, therefore, Section 18, paragraph 4, is the applicable section. 3. Mr. Weisburd indicates that most of the students in the proposed private school will either walk or come to school by commercial transportation. However, the nursery school children, about 15 in number, will not be bussed but will be transported using a method of car-pooling. Additionally, the school hours have been staggered with the nursery school children arriving one-half hour after the elementary school children and departing at noon, with the elementary school children having a normal -all -day school day. 4. There are only five to seven existing dwellings along Calkins Road, 5. The proposed development would involve nine residential leasehold sites and the school on the 98± acres. 6. The proposed school is in character with the area in which it is proposed to be located since it is of small size and the neighborhood is lightly populated. 7. Mr. Weisburd indicates that there will be a separate access driveway and egress driveway to the proposed school thereby permitting the bus to drop off children without turning around and insuring that the access and egress to the school be safely designed. 8. Again, the small size of the school would indicate that the traffic load on public streets and water and sewer systems will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. Upon Motion, of Mr. Peter Francese, duly seconded by Mrs. Joan Reuning, and four aye votes, the foregoing Findings of Fact were adopted by the Board. MOTION by Mr. Peter Francese, seconded by Mr. Jack Hewett: RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca approve and hereby does approve that the Inlet Valley Land Co -Operative, Inc., be granted a Special Permit to construct a private school at 171 Calkins Road on the easterly side of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-33-1-4 and as in plans submitted to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for approximately 50 students subject to the following conditions. 1. That Final Subdivision Approval be granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board. ft 11 V Zoning Board of Appeals 12 July 16, 1979 2. That approvals be obtained from all appropriate, responsible State and Local agencies. 3. That this Hearing approval be considered a Special Permit under Section 18, paragraph 4, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Hewett, King, Reuning. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Francese declared the Public Hearing in and the matter of the Inlet Valley Land Co -Op, Inc. Appeal duly closed at 10:10 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion, Chairman Francese declared the July 16, 1979 Zoning Board of Appeals. meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly adjourned at 10:11 p.m. Peter K. Francese, Chairman Respectfully submitted, Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary, Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals.