Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1984-03-14 " I w . TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MARCH 14 , 1984 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Wednesday , March 14 , 1984 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , commencing at 7 : 00 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Edward Austen , Edward King , Jack Hewett , Joan Reuning , Lewis D . Cartee ( Town Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer ) , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , ALSO PRESENT : Councilwoman Gloria Howell , Mrs . F . W . Swartwood , F . W . Swartwood , Mark Davies , Arthur S . Wheater , Terry Clingen , W . C . Swerbenski , Michael Olmstead , Nicholas Revill , Sally Sincock , Gerald A . Sincock , Gust Freeman , Bruce Rich , Gary Turton , Alfred DiGiacomo , Mary DiGiacomo , Charles Bell , Steven Blais , William Downing , Daniel A . Quest , Marcia Andree , Celia Bowers , John Bowers , Jill Grossvogel , Andrew W . McElwee , Chairman Aron declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 05 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 March 6 , 1984 , and March 9 , 1984 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works , upon the Director of the Finger Lakes State Parks Commission , upon the Tompkins County Administrator , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , and upon each of the applicants and / or agents , as appropriate , on March 8 , 1984 . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM FEBRUARY 15 , 1984 ) OF THE COUNTRY CLUB OF ITHACA , APPELLANT , MARK DAVIES , AS AGENT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO ERECT A PLASTIC MESH FENCE GREATER THAN SIX ( 6 ) FEET IN HEIGHT , AT THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE , AT 1011 HANSHAW ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 71 - 7 - 1 . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII , SECTION 65 , AND .ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA . ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 06 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Chairman Aron noted that at the last meeting on this matter the Board was instructed to go to the County Club and view the situation . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the proposal before the Board . • Mr . Albert DiGiacomo , 1025 Hanshaw Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he still has the same objections he had stated at the February meeting . Zoning Board of Appeals - 2 - March 14 , 1984 • Mr . William Swerbenski , 1021 Hanshaw Road , spoke from the floor and asked if the discussion was about the safety as a result of the net being up , or is the discussion about the aesthetics of how it looks out the back door . Mr . Swerbenski stated that he believed the number of errant balls has been reduced from 1 , 200 to 500 , therefore , the fence is doing some good . Chairman Aron asked if there were a representative of the County Club present . Messrs . Mark Davies and Charles Bell responded that \ they were present . Chairman Aron commented that the fence was given permission to be put up about two years ago [ December 1981 ] . Mr . Bell commented that the " driving range " since the beginning was a " practice area " and , at the beginning , there was just individual use with no balls provided . Mr . Bell stated that about ten years ago , in order to let more people practice , the Club furnished balls and , therefore , it was used more . Mr . Bell , commenting that he was a little confused , stated that the Club would like to put a fence up there to protect the neighbors . Mr . Bell stated that if the neighbors , he understood only one , would prefer not to put the fence up there , they would agree with that , adding that they are not pushing the fence , and further adding that they feel it needs to be there to protect the neighbors from injury - - either individual or property . Mr . Bell , commenting that no one should get the impression that they are saving money by stopping balls , stated that they have a sign on the driving range that indicates what clubs they would prefer they hit . • Mrs . Reuning wondered if it were right that the County Club is liable , with Mr . King responding that they would be exposed to negligence , however , that is not the concern of the Zoning Board of Appeals . Mr . King pointed out that the Board of Appeals granted a license to put up the fence because it exceeds the height for a fence , adding that two years ago the Board did this and now the matter is up for review , and further adding that it is nor only the height of the fence but also its effectiveness . Mr . Bell stated that the height makes it effective . Chairman Aron noted that the Board had been told about the Club buying more property and asked if they were intending to do that . Mr . Bell stated that they have about 105 acres right now , adding that that is fairly acceptable for a good country club , to his knowledge , and he has been there for twelve years , and further adding that for three years it was not in their immediate plans to buy lands . Mr . Bell stated that he was not sure where that information came from that it would temporary and that the Country Club would have more land available , adding that they would love to have more land , however , it is not available , and further adding that , if there were something else available , they would be happy . Mr . King wondered if there were any information about houses being there . Reference was made to building permits in 1963 to 1967 , and to the driving range having been there since 1959 - - 180 - 190 yards . Mr . DiGiacomo quoted aloud from a portion of an article in the R z Zoning Board of Appeals - 3 - March 14 , 1984 • Ithaca Journal , as follows : " He said he had offered to plant 30 - foot high trees as a shield . Another neighbor has such a hedge and is not troubled by errant golf balls . But Agard and DiGiacomo do not want the trees , Vignaux said , because they would obstruct the view . " Mr . DiGiacomo noted that " Vignaux " , is George Vignaux , former manager of the Country Club . Mr . Swerbenski stated that he was around at the time there was talk about changing the 9th hole . Mr . Bell offered that they had looked to change the 9th hole . There appearing to be no further comments from the public , Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing at 7 : 20 p . m . Mr . Austen , commenting that he was up there and looked at it , stated that it looked to him as if the fence should be extended farther west toward the club house more . Mr . King stated that he judged , from the information the Board got at the last hearing , that extension westerly would not improve the situation because balls were not veering in that direction . Mr . King noted that this fence is on three telephone poles - - very high poles - - and two sections of fence are in between . Mr . King noted that there was some testimony that balls were lofting over the fence . Mr . King stated that the fence has sagged so it might be a good idea to • have a turnbuckle to tighten it so as to eliminate that , adding that some need the fence and there is evidence that that could be fixed . Mr . King stated that it is obviously a pretty extensive undertaking they have gone under to put this fence up , adding that he could not see asking them to extend it , but that could be looked into . Mr . King noted that there are homeowners in that area unprotected and those people are not complaining , adding that it is down - range that they are getting them . Mr . King stated that he thought the Board should require tightening up and tacking to the bottom , subject to some other evidence that extending would help . Mr . King suggested that the choices are to take the fence down , with Chairman Aron adding , or protect the neighbors , with Mr . King adding , and leave the rest up to the lawyers . Mr . King stated that he thought it would be better to license it for two or three years more . Mr . Austen stated that he agreed that the fence needs to be there for protection , adding that he still would like to see it extended back one pole . Mr . King wondered if there was any reaction from the public to this . Mr . Swerbenski stated that that is his property and actually he does not get them . Mr . Austen stated that he would guess the balls are still in the air as they go by his house . Mr . Bell stated that he would think easterly . Mr . DiGiacomo stated that the balls do not come from the 9th hole ; they come from the range and hit Agard , adding that , also , the range is angled toward the properties . Chairman Aron stated that if there is an angle it is very slight . • Mr . Davies , of the Country Club , stated that he had some diagrams of how the range does slant away from the houses , which he submitted Zoning Board of Appeals - 4 - March 14 , 1984 • to the Chair . Mr . Davies pointed out the range coming away from the houses going , really , toward the 9th hole . Mr . King suggested that the Board review this matter later in the summer . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Jack Hewett : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals extend and hereby does extend the license for the Country Club fence as it is , subject to tightening all lines and securing the bottom , and further RESOLVED , that this matter be brought up for review again at the Board ' s September 19 , 1984 meeting , at 7 : 00 p . m . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Hewett , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Country Club fence duly concluded at 7 : 30 p . m . • ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM FEBRUARY 15 , 1984 ) OF WALTER J . AND JOYCE WIGGINS , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO EXPAND THE KITCHEN AND DINING ROOM OF L ' AUBERGE DU COCHON ROUGE AT 1152 DANBY ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 36 - 1 - 4 . 2 . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XII , SECTION 54 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 31 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . William Downing , Architect , of William Downing Associates , Architects , was present . Mr . Downing appeared before the Board and presented a drawing entitled " Proposed Addition to L ' Auberge Restaurant " , dated March 14 , 1984 . Mr . Downing also displayed a drawing entitled " The Chateau " , dated February 21 , 1984 , and a Survey entitled " Portion of Lands of Walter , Joyce Y . Wiggins to be rezoned " , dated February 8 , 1984 , by George C . Schlecht , L . P . E . & L . S . Chairman Aron noted that the proposed addition contains 1 , 635 square feet . Mr . Downing commented that , according to the Chef , he has always had an inadequate kitchen . Chairman Aron wondered what the " Future Terrace " shown on the drawing was . Mr . Downing explained The • Chateau plans and the terrace . Chairman Aron asked how many additional seats there would be , with Mr . Downing responding , about 35 . Zoning Board of Appeals - 5 - March 14 , 1984 . Mr . King noted that the dining room is to the north and the kitchen is to the south and asked where the existing kitchen is shown . Mr . Downing indicated same . Mr . King wondered if this were to be a two - story addition . Mr . Downing stated that he had not been advised that that is the case , but sometimes people wait upstairs . Mr . King noted that this was a special approval matter , adding that , as the Board noted last time , there is plenty of room ; there is much land . Mr . King offered that this proposal would not impact on the neighbors and noted that there had been no appearance of people here at this meeting . Mr . King commented that he was sure it would be done tastefully . Mr . King stated that the Board now has the square footage , adding that the Board did not know if there would be a second floor , but that is necessary . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant extension of the Special Permit to permit the two expansions of L ' Auberge du Cochon Rouge as shown on the Sketch by William Downing Associates , Architects , dated March 14 , 1984 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Hewett , Reuning . • Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the expansion of the kitchen and dining room of L ' Auberge du Cochon Rouge duly closed at 7 : 40 p . m . APPEAL OF MARCIA ANDREE , APPELLANT , ROBERT LEATHERS , AS AGENT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO LOCATE AN EXISTING STRUCTURE , GREATER THAN 200 SQ . FT . , FOR USE AS AN OFFICE , INTERIOR DECORATION , WITH NO ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES , ON DUBOIS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 24 - 2 - 1 . 2 . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE V , SECTION 19 , PARAGRAPH 2 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly open at 7 : 41 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mrs . Marcia Andree was present , as was Mr . Steven Blais , representing Mr . Robert S . Leathers , Architect , P . C . Mr . Blais appended a proposed site plan to the bulletin board . Mr . Cartee read Section 19 , Paragraph 2 , of the Zoning Ordinance , as follows : [ Permitted accessory uses in Residence Districts R30 shall include the following : ] " A customary home occupation , such as dressmaking , hair dressing , laundering , home cooking ; carpentry , • electrical , and plumbing work or similar manual or mechanical trades operated solely by a resident of the dwelling , provided that no additional person not residing on the premises may be employed therein 'r• Zoning Board of Appeals - 6 - March 14 , 1984 and that no goods or products are publicly displayed or advertised for sale , that there be no outside storage , and that no noise , dust , disorder , or objectionable odor is experienced beyond the immediate property where such use is conducted . The above mechanical trades to be conducted in the basement of the dwelling or in a garage area not to exceed 200 square feet . " Chairman Aron read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Steven Blais , for Robert S . Leathers , Architect , P . C . , under date of March 6 , 1984 , with attached survey . [ Both documents attached hereto as Exhibits 1 and 2 . ] Chairman Aron asked how big the square footage of the house was , with Mr . Blais responding , 1 , 500 square feet , and adding that it is a story and a half . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Blais if he had pictures , with Mr . Blais responding , no , and adding that he thought he did but he does not . Chairman Aron asked if there was living space and could Mrs . Andree move in there . Mrs . Andree responded that she could , but the house is very small , adding that the second story is really one bedroom and there is a very small room on the other side . Chairman Aron noted that Mrs . Andree intended to use the house and the interior as a business and intended to build another house and a barn . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against this matter . Jean Swartwood , 1421 Trumansburg Road , spoke from the floor and stated that this is an R- 30 zone and a home occupation can be in 200 square feet or less in a house . Mrs . Swartwood stated that she thought they would like to keep it an R- 30 and a separate building for a business should not be considered . Mr . Blais asked if he might point to the plan , and stated that he thought the lady ' s objection might be somewhat calmed if one considers the size of the buildings compared to the property and to what the alternatives are . Mr . Blais noted that in an R- 30 zone , the land could be purchased and divided into ten lots , which equals ten houses . Chairman Aron noted that that would be subject to Tompkins County Health Department approval . Mr . Blais , commenting that , in that case , at the least there could be seven or eight properties , stated that , moreover , he would like to stress that the business is a quiet business . Mr . Blais stated that Mrs . Andree wants to pursue an interior decorating business and , in essence , the house that is wanted to be moved is a display of her talents , adding that she would have her office there and it will be furnished in the appearance of the project . Mr . Blais stated that the vineyard is not to be developed ; it . will be retained , and the lawn that would be created would be retained by a retaining wall . Mr . Blais pointed out on the survey map Route 96 [ Trumansburg Road ] going toward Trumansburg , and DuBois Road , • and noted that the Hospital is about one -half mile away in a southeasterly direction . Mr . Blais described the fallow vineyard and commented that part of the appeal of the land is the intent to bring Zoning Board of Appeals - 7 - March 14 , 1984 • it back , adding that the appearance would be extremely benign . Mr . Blais stated that the houses and the barn would look very much like the house across the road which is of the same vintage and style . Mr . King asked about the nature of the connection from the relocated house to the barn . Mr . Blais described the covered walkway , the size of the barn and its purpose . Mr . Blais stated that the purpose of the barn would be to hold furnishings and storage , really . Mrs . Celia Bowers , 1406 Trumansburg Road , wondered what the barn will be made of . Mrs . Andree stated that the house is in Pennsylvania State and is a very simple Greek Revival house , not as grand as Mrs . Bowers ' , adding that , on this much acreage , that little tiny house would look silly and is not big enough to live there and have her business . Mrs . Andree stated that she had originally hoped to take this house and , maybe , put a wing on it , but the house lines are so simple that it would just not look the way it should look . Mrs . Andree stated that she did not want to have it look like an " add -on " . Mrs . Andree stated that , basically , the barn is for storage and garage use and it helps to make the property look right , adding that it would make it look " grander " . Mrs . Andree stated that , basically , she would like to move a Greek Revival barn and , if not , build one , that is , with soffits , board and batten , such that it is as authentic as possible . • Mrs . Bowers wondered what the purpose of the barn is , asking if there were going to be retail sales . Chairman Aron noted that the architect had stated that it was for storage . Mrs . Andree stated that customers will be going through the house , not the barn , and there will be different room arrangements in the house , different furniture arrangements . Mrs . Bowers , commenting that Mrs . Andree would be selling out of the house , stated that , as a neighbor , she would be sorry to see this land zoned commercial . Mr . Michael Olmstead , 1416 Trumansburg Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he thought the plan was good , but he was also opposed to a variance on it . Mr . Olmstead stated that the plan sounds good but as far as the area , it opens the door for other commercial . Mr . Blais stated that the point is that designwise this is , essentially , placing furnishings that would go in a client ' s house and those furnishings are sold into that persons ' s house , adding that the nature of the service that Mrs . Andree wants to offer is a design and consulting service of a particular vintage of furniture . Mrs . Andree stated that she did not think her intention is to set up a commercial type of feeling or situation on this property , adding that Mrs . Bowers has an antique business across the street at the Indian Creek farm . Chairman Aron asked if Mrs . Andree owned the property , with Mrs . Andree responding that she has a purchase offer with DeWitt Historical • Society . Mr . Fred Swartwood , 1421 Trumansburg Road , spoke from the floor 4+' Zoning Board of Appeals - 8 - March 14 , 1984 and stated that he has been there for 28 years and they are having problems up there now with water . Mr . Swartwood spoke of a well , noting that at 50 feet , 75 feet , there is sulphur water , at 150 feet , salt . Mr . Swartwood asked how this will affect their wells and pull their wells dry . Mrs . Bowers stated that she agreed . Mr . Bruce Rich , 253 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and stated that the area is zoned as residential . Mr . Rich stated that a few years ago he spent money and time to stop doctors ' offices . Mr . Rich asked where the driveway onto DuBois Road is in relation to the hill , adding that the hill is not taken care of at all . Mr . Blais stated that the elevations given on this plan are relative elevations ; they are not benchmarked to sea level , . however , the benchmark to " this " corner [ indicating ] of the property at the driveway entrance is eight to ten feet below Trumansburg Road , adding that off Trumansburg Road the road rises and has a fairly even angle of fill . Chairman Aron asked what the highest footage of rise is , with Mr . Blais responding , around three feet gradually . Mr . King asked for a description of the elevation numbers , with Mr . Blais indicating same and noting that the driveway will be in a dip . Mrs . Reuning , commenting that she remembered the Poyer matter , stated that she was concerned about a blind drive . Mr . Blais stated that that is farther on , adding that this section of road is straight and it is possible to grade the property . Mr . Austen described the area in • question in detail and Mrs . Reuning spoke of a crown at the intersection . Mrs . Reuning offered that we have not established how much of an in and out business this might be , and spoke of UPS . Mr . Blais , commenting that he would think that could be asked of Mrs . Andree , stated that it was hard to talk about customers , adding that the business is on The Commons now . Mr . Blais commented that it would be hard to guess with respect to any change in the business into decorating services . Mrs . Andree stated that she would have one full - time employee , noting that they work on a one - to -one basis with customers , and adding that she was not opening up a showroom where people come in and saunter around ; there are appointments and it is a situation where they would take them personally ; they do not wander through the property and then get in a car and drive off . , Mrs . Andree stated that , at best , there would be four people at any one time . Mr . John Bowers , 1406 Trumansburg Road , spoke from the floor and asked about signs advertising the business and if there would be any form of advertising . Mr . Bowers wondered whether a sign would be visible from Trumansburg Road . Mrs . Andree thought it could be visible for people coming up . Chairman Aron offered that that would be similar to the Antique sign across the road . Mrs . Bowers stated that if Mrs . Andree did not have people only by invitation , she did not see the need for this . Mrs . Bowers stated that she has a business across the street . Mr . Swartwood stated that he had no objection to anybody getting • ahead in this world , however , this has been residential for 50 to 70 years and he would like to keep it that way . i + Zoning Board of Appeals - 9 - March 14 , 1984 • Mr . Bowers stated that he was not opposed , in principle , to business , adding that , if the plan was just to move an historical house and use it as a business , he did not think he would have an objection , in particular to the barn for storage . Mr . Rich expressed his concern about turning onto DuBois Road , Mr . Gust Freeman , 258 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and stated that the County , right now , has plans with the NYS DOT to straighten that intersection out - - right on the crest just south of the building shown on the drawing . Mr . Freeman stated that until that is done , he sees a problem in locating here , commenting that it is not printed on the map , until we know from the State , adding that the County has submitted a plan to the State . Mr . Freeman stated that the other thing he would like to address , as a member of the Board representing neighbors , is that at least seven called him last week but they could not come because they had other things planned . Mr . Freeman stated that people are very , very concerned with the thought of making something commercial in the neighborhood , adding that , on the County Board , where he sits , they discuss commercial and try to protect neighbors . Mrs . Andree offered that when she went to the State DOT about purchasing this house , before she got an answer , they had to send to Albany to see whether or not it would interfere with any road plans • that are in the works , and a gentleman called them and they totally approved of where the house will sit . Mr . Freeman stated that the State does not have plans ; the County submitted plans . Mr . Blais noted that a question of architectural style has been raised and one person stated no objection to all buildings of historical character , adding that at least one of his objections would be allayed . Mr . Blais stated that the intention is to design new buildings in the style of old buildings and the architects are quite capable of doing that . Mr . Blais suggested that people go out to Taughannock Farms Inn and see what their firm is doing . Mr . Blais also spoke of a doctor ' s office . Mrs . Andree stated that she was trying to keep to a residential atmosphere and described the herb garden and the perennials shown on the site plan and the alternative seven walls rather than one , and reiterated that she was trying to keep it residential . Mrs . Swartwood stated that she believed the problem is not with the architecture of the building ; the problem is commercial business in a residential zone . Mr . Freeman asked , if the Board grants this , what can the people do - - sue ? Mr . King asked what Mrs . Andree ' s business is now , with Mrs . Andree responding , " Country Pleasures " on The Commons . Mr . King asked if it was retail , with Mrs . Andree responding , yes , and adding that • this is not going to be retail . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present in support of Zoning Board of Appeals - 10 - March 14 , 1984 • this matter . No one spoke . Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 20 p . m . Mr . Austen commented that there was something in excess of 3 , 000 sq . ft . of commercial property and 1 , 200 sq . ft . of residential , adding that it was kind of out of balance . Mr . King stated that he got the commercial flavor of the whole thing and wondered what would happen if the young lady went out of business . Mr . King stated that Mrs . Andree has a right to put two dwellings on that acreage and a right to conduct a home occupation in either or both dwellings , however , whether professional applies here , he was not certain . Chairman Aron noted that the Greek Revival house is going to be a commercial property and the barn used as storage for commercial use where Mrs . Andree could also show materials she has to offer , adding that also it is antique merchandise . Chairman Aron noted that. Mrs . Andree cannot live in the house because it is too small so it is needed for commercial use . Chairman Aron noted that the neighbors in the vicinity are very much not in favor . Chairman Aron stated that there is in this Town commercially zoned places where Mrs . Andree could very well put commercial . Chairman Aron noted that Mrs . Andree did mention that it could be subdivided , but that would be as residential . Chairman Aron offered , as Mr . King had pointed out , if • Mrs . Andree could see her way clear to live in that particular residence and have no employees , that could be a feasibility . There appearing to be no further discussion from the members of the Board , the Chair asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion . MOTION by Mr . Edward Austen , seconded by Mr . Edward King : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals deny and hereby does deny the requested variance on the grounds that the proposal is not suitable for the particular area in which it is proposed to be located . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . Abstain - Hewett . The MOTION was declared to be carried . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Marcia Andree appeal duly closed at 8 : 25 p . m . Chairman Aron stated that the Board would take a ten minute break . • APPEAL OF NICHOLAS REVILL , APPELLANT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO OPERATE A BUSINESS , THE p.. Zoning Board of Appeals - 11 - March 14 , 1984 • RESTORATION OF ANTIQUE FURNITURE , IN AN EXISTING STRUCTURE WITH TWO EMPLOYEES NOT RESIDING ON THE PREMISES , AT 118 RICH ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 50 - 1 - 5 . 81 . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 35 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Revill was present . Chairman Aron read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Nicholas Revill under date of February 29 , 1984 , as follows : " . . . Having been denied permission to operate a business ( the restoration & conservation of antique furniture , musical boxes & keyboard instruments ) at 118 Rich Road . . . 1 . Type of Business Nicholas Revill Restoration is concerned with the restoration and conservation of fine antique furniture - in particular musical boxes , clocks and keyboard instruments . The firm comprises a total of three people ; myself and two employees , one of whom is now being trained as an apprentice after dropping out of high school , the other of whom is at the journeyman stage and is continuing to learn the craft . It should be noted that both parties had been unemployed for some considerable . amount of time prior to being employed by Nicholas Revill Restoration . • 2 . Physical Layout The workshop itself consists of three attached garages partitioned to make three separate bays which are interconnected by interior doors . Beginning with the bay nearest to the front of the property , their dimensions are as follows : 1 ) 23 ' deep by 23 ' wide ; 2 ) 23 ' deep by 15 ' wide , 3 ) 23 ' deep by 20 ' wide , equaling a total working space of 1334 square feet . The workshop is situated 39 feet from the 2 car garage attached to our residence and 59 feet from the residence itself . Our nearest neighbor ' s front yard is situated on the opposite side of the road , . 155 feet from the workshop . The next nearest neighbor is situated on the same side of the road going south 247 feet from the workshop . The lot on the north side is owned by us and indeed there are no other buildings on that side of the road . The forested land on the west side of the workshop is undeveloped and owned by Ithaca College , 3 . Method of Conducting Business Proper restoration techniques dictate that the greatest majority of tools used are hand tools . Because most antiques employ wooden joints we hardly use hammers . In keeping with conservation principles , we do not use a stripping tank and the minimal amount of inflammable materials we use ( less than 5 gallons at any one time ) are kept in locked steel cabinets . We do not want nor indeed accept walk - in trade . Collection and return of customer ' s goods I do personally . The majority of supplies we require are bought by myself either locally or in New York City . We have , however , received in the last eight months , three UPS • deliveries . We do not and never will advertise on the premises because of potential security risks . We have not in fact ever advertised Zoning Board of Appeals - 12 - March 14 , 1984 anywhere except for a listing in the yellow pages . 4 . Reasons for Locating at 118 Rich Road When I first came to this country and set up shop in Ithaca , I rented two garages downtown for a little over a year . This eventually posed two problems . 1 ) Despite the fact that I did not advertise and tried to keep a low profile , more and more people began to find out the nature of my work . Given that I frequently deal with one - of - a - kind items , ( which can never be truly covered by insurance ) security became an increasing worry . 2 ) A business the size of mine with very slow turnover and consequently limited cash flow cannot support high and potentially increasing overheads such as rent . In light of this , my wife and I chose to move to a property where we could both live and oversee the business . Prior to purchasing the property we were told by both the vendor and realtor that I could operate a business as long as I employed no more than two people . Now to my surprise and dismay , I find this is not to be ' the case . 5 . Consequences of Denial of Zoning Variance or Special Permit Restoration is my livelihood . It is the only way I have ever made a living and the only way I know how to make a living . Relocation of the business , having just purchased the property would be financially impossible . There are no firms in Upstate New York doing my kind of work , consequently I would be unable to find employment . Furthermore , my two employees , who previously had been unemployed , would have difficulty finding work of a similar nature in this area . 6 . Plans for the Future If granted a zoning variance , I shall continue to operate in the manner previously described . I have no intention of increasing the size of my staff because to maintain quality control it is necessary to have a small team . In the event of anyone leaving my employ , it is my intention to retrain another individual , preferably someone who does not have future job prospects . As stated above , I do not intend to begin advertising , introduce a lot of power tools , or do anything that would change the character of this residential neighborhood . I live here too . Thank you for your consideration of my appeal . " ( Attachment ] - - " PETITION - - We the undersigned residents of Rich Road , Ithaca , NY , have no objections to Nicholas Revill ' s application for a zoning variance so that he may continue his furniture restoration business at 118 Rich Road . In the last eight months that Mr . Revill has been operating his business at the above address , we have not noticed any changes in visual quality , noise level or vehicular traffic . ( sgd . ) Ann Augustine , 109 Rich Rd . , No disturbance of any kind . ( sgd . ) Kathryn M . Prouty , 512 Coddington Rd . , Never noticed any difference . ( sgd . ) Cheryl Larkin , 111 Rich Rd . , No disturbance . , ( sgd . ) Lucile Macera , 115 Rich Rd . ( sgd . ) Louis Macera , 115 Rich Rd . , No difference . ( sgd . ) Diane Wolford , 502 Coddington Rd . , No noticable noise , or additional vehicular traffic noticed . ( sgd . ) Sally Sincock , 122 Rich Rd . , No disturbance in fact , the Zoning Board of Appeals - 13 - March 14 , 1984 • neighborhood is improved . ( sgd . ) Gerald A . Sincock , 122 Rich Rd . , No objections to business . A Plus in our neighborhood watch . " [ Attachment ] - - " March 3 , 1984 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Late in 1982 , I showed Nicholas Revill and Nina Bassuk the Johanson property at 118 Rich Road , Ithaca , New York , which they subsequently decided to buy . The garages , detached and to the east of the house , were being used by Mr . Johanson for his business , and to my knowledge , it did not occur to any of the parties concerned that the garages could not be used by Mr . Revill for his business - - antique restoration . ( sgd . ) Kit Lambert 5 Highgate Circle Ithaca , NY 14850 Residential Member American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers " Mr . Revill presented the' following letters ( 2 ) to the Board which Chairman Aron read aloud : " Mr . and Mrs . Reginald Collins 126 Rich Road • . . . March 12 , 1984 To Whom it May Concern : We are neighbors of Nicholas Revill and we feel that he and his business are an asset to our community . It is our desire that the Zoning Board approve the requested variance for the benefit of all concerned . Sincerely , ( sgd . Marilyn Collins ( sgd . ) Reg . Collins " " Mr . & Mrs , Gerald A . Sincock 122 Rich Road Re : Zoning variance request Mr . N . Revill , 118 Rich Rd . As property owners of 122 Rich Rd . which adjoins 118 Rich Rd . , we are here to ask you to please allow Mr . Revill to continue his furniture restoration business on his property . This business has not caused any disturbance at all to our neighborhood and there have been notable improvements :made to the property . We respectfully request that the Board approve whatever changes are necessary to allow Mr . Revill to continue his business . Sincerely , ( sgd . ) Gerald A . Sincock ( sgd . ) Sally E . Sincock " • [ The record also contains a full - page feature article from the Ithaca Journal , dated October 19 , 1983 , about Mr . Revill and his Zoning Board of Appeals - 14 - March 14 , 1984 • business . ] Chairman Aron wondered if there were anyone present against this business . No one spoke . Mr . Revill stated that it was necessary to have someone working with him , adding that he needed to have at least two people but that he certainly did not want more . Mr . Gerald Sincock , 122 Rich Road , spoke from the floor and stated that they live on a deadend street and the neighbors feel it is a good idea to have someone in the area all the time and not away at work . Mr . Sincock stated that it is very quiet too , adding that they are feeding six deer . Mrs . Celia Bowers , 1406 Trumansburg Road , spoke from the floor and stated that she is also in the antique business and Mr . Revill is a real asset to the community in general . Mr . Andrew W . McElwee , 123 Judd Falls Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he has been in Mr . Revill ' s shop and it is quiet . Mr . Austen stated that he had spoken to one of the Town representatives up that way and he indicated that he had no objections , had heard none , and was neutral on the matter . Mr . Austen • stated that he had viewed the property and it is certainly a deadend street which goes into woods . Mr . Austen stated that there was no traffic and the area is semi - sparsely developed . Mr . Austen stated that the houses around this property have generous lots . Mr . Austen stated that this is almost a unique situation in that all the neighbors approve of the operation which has gone on without any problems . Mr . Revill distributed slide pictures of his operation to the Board members . MOTION by Mrs . Joan Reuning , seconded by Mr . Jack Hewett : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant a renewable special permit , personal to Mr . Nicholas Revill , to permit the operation of his business , Nicholas Revill Restoration , with two employees not residing on the premises , at 118 Rich Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 50 - 1 - 5 . 81 , as described in his application to said Board for such permission , with the understanding that such special permit is revocable at any time , and with the further understanding that there shall be no increase in size or intensity of this business operation without review and approval of said Board of Appeals , and with the further understanding that there shall be no increase in the number of employees beyond that specified in said application without review and approval of said Board . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Zoning Board of Appeals - 15 - March 14 , 1984 • Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Hewett , Reuning , Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in and the matter of the Revill Appeal duly closed at 8 : 45 p . m . APPEAL OF DAVID AND JILL GROSSVOGEL , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO A WORK STUDIO FOR USE AS A HOME OCCUPATION , WITH A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF LESS THAN 25 FEET AND A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF LESS THAN 15 FEET AND THE STRUCTURE GREATER THAN 200 SQ . FT . IN SIZE , AT 126 JUDD FALLS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 66 - 5 - 14 . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 12 , PARAGRAPH 6 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 751 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 46 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mrs . Grossvogel was present . Chairman Aron read from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Mrs . Grossvogel under date of March 1 , 1984 , and noted the attached site plan . [ Both documents attached hereto as Exhibits 3 and 4 . ] • Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Grossvogel if she had anything to add . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that she would like to point out that " home occupation " is really an inaccurate phrase , adding that her business is at 112 The Commons , Mrs . Grossvogel stated that this has nothing to do with her business , adding that she wanted to use it for her own art work , not as a " business " . Mrs . Reuning offered that , in that case , the Board does not need to even talk about it . Mr . Cartee stated that Mrs . Grossvogel is redoing and changing , possibly , the structure , adding that it is a legal non - conforming structure . Mr . Cartee stated that he did not think his office has the right to issue a building permit for what appears to be going to be a graphic arts studio . Mr . Cartee stated that if it were to be up - dated as a garage there would be no problem , but there appears to be a work shop , electricity , a flush toilet , water - - a 100 per cent rehabilitation of the entire structure . Mr . Cartee noted that Judd Falls Road is very close to this structure . The Board members agreed that the matter should be heard . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak . Mr . Andrew McElwee , 123 Judd Falls Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he was concerned about the putting in of facilities which • seem to indicate an apartment . Mr . McElwee stated that he had no problem with an art studio ; that would be fine , but with very few alterations it could be made a studio apartment and that he would 0 Zoning Board of Appeals - 16 - March 14 , 1984 . quarrel with . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Grossvogel how long she has lived on that property altogether , with Mrs . Grossvogel responding , four years . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that they own another property in Ithaca as well , however , they are permanent residents of 126 Judd Falls Road . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that she could not give the Board any guarantees . Chairman Aron asked if their intentions were to stay , with Mrs . Grossvogel responding , yes . Mr . King wondered what the idea was of putting in all of the plumbing . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that they may not , adding that this is a luxury , however , she certainly needs running water . Mr . Cartee pointed out that it has to be connected to the sewer for washing . Mr . McElwee stated that it is not a fire hazard . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that she is a designer . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that they had a contractor look at it about a year ago and he said the roof might need new supports underneath it and the doors onto Judd Falls Road are unusable as they are covered with sod , so there would have to be a new door on the side facing their house . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that it would have cedar or wood sides and a new roof . Mr . King stated that he thought the neighborhood would be improved if this structure were not in existence . Mr . King offered • that it would be a good idea to just let these kinds of structures die a natural death , or bring them into conformity which , in this case , would be to move it . Mr . King stated that putting plumbing in it is questionable - - even with proper setbacks , it would be questionable . Mr . King noted that Mrs . Grossvogel could go out there and paint in it now . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that she could not do that ; there is no light . Mr . King offered that she could put in a light , but extensive renovations , perhaps , should not be allowed . Mr . McElwee stated that the value of the property runs up , adding that this has got to have a use . Mr . McElwee stated that he had no quarrel with a studio use , but the logical use in relation to the I mprovement is a studio apartment . Mr . Cartee read Section 53 of Article XII , having to do with " Abandonment of Use " , and also read Section 54 , of Article XII , having to do with alterations of non - conforming buildings or uses . Chairman Aron pointed out that , in the winter , an electric heater could be plugged in . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Grossvogel what the necessity is of this rehabilitation , with Mrs . Grossvogel responding that she has no room to do her art work . Mrs . Grossvogel described her house , noting that there is a study for her husband and she has a studio where she teaches at Cornell , and the bedroom is upstairs . Mrs . Grossvogel stated that she had no " necessity " in this particular location such that it is her livelihood . • Mr . King offered that he thought extending this non - conforming use would fly in the face of the Zoning Ordinance . Zoning Board of Appeals - 17 - March 14 , 1984 • There appearing to be no further comments from either the Board or the public , the Chair closed the Public Hearing and asked if anyone were prepared to make a motion . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals deny and hereby does deny the Grossvogel Appeal with respect to the conversion of an existing structure to a work studio . There being no further discussion , the . Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Hewett , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in and the matter of the Grossvogel Appeal duly closed at 9 : 05 p . m . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman Aron declared the March 14 , 1984 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly adjourned at 9 : 10 p . m . • Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Zoning Board of Appeals . Henry Aron , Chairman . • tiu TOWN OF ITHACA ' 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED : - 3 y� Ithaca , New York 14850 CASH ( 607 ) 273 - 1747 • CHECK A P P E A L ZONING : to the For Office Use Only Building Inspector and Zoning Board- of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca , New York Having been denied permission to . I O\JF . A 4005 t CF l i G OO SQ JAg G PElf� r To TH IS F.AtCeL eUP� tJSE AS b3 ,) IL,DI /jt, IM N HOME OCCUPATION at irwm Ij% ) 1b0R (:::5 Ov Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . as shown on the accompanying application and / or plans .or other supporting documents , for the stated . reasM. that the issuance of such permit would be in violation of : Article ( s ) Section ( s ) of the Town of ; Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this appeal from such denial and , in support of the appeal , affirms that strict observance of the Ordinance - would , impose PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and / or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows . iqE HOUSE To e5e 140uED To T/S 78 / . 4crg wLeL. / S GREeK 9FI/II AL S T %rL. E /�OUS4 Comic/ S Ti�iJC T O /itl TNf �g gC� � S l �f � oGvN�w MPCIA ANDREE 1'RUPOsS TO CoNST�'UCr , 7_WO 8eD900M Ale to 0vS6 / A/ 5T SLE To T e P I S TOR I C �avS / N w,y / c /i 7-d L_ I vE A AID To U S r. ' . T14 1415TORI C POIJSF AS Tf/ E: o )cF %GES . of 171E ,< /NTe�/pR f DecoR4Tl(V& CONCeRNo 14E Two #ousES AZ. oA) & w jr14 6A 9A/ , WouLD PncK� E A CPQ'/6,:: . r 0CLUl" 1- TION A41 JGEMEMT OF s`CMFATHETIC WITH 01- DFfZ FARMS APD RI SIDr:= OCES W 74f QJSTfI (. T 5fE�- TDACKs t::� 1ZaM L01- L / NQS A f) 5 t_. I I✓- S , LA v) C E Ce-FE ✓J EKO U S , Dated * �/-� IPC f� lP , `/ y✓ S i g n e d . SJ �L� 1 S r-bf �;EfT S, ZC4 rAfV( EXHIBIT 1 cn Ilk m IIA?o 0 P � O C e ,:o : 0 A fj 1 '• j 4 .��IQ e _ rIjv � 4L • .0 W. PO r CL i l 3 z tie � t ��. � it � p ,1 71 40 i `+t j w ° OL I \ ,J •• PrP 1k :: I �'. SOS y� � A - / Ir • • ��, r �' •, ,� ;� / 'i7 V- 4a r Ci -.4 i• 1 L < y i }- �m' 1 -J• . III . N 00 rkr I ; q'1� / t•LIII e � C Ml q► + c • A rL ° c to may• �;dpo c D n �^ Vr , , Z Ok I Ir '0000 19 , 1 40000 111 I / /0, 0 IMt °III, A Y sp / J•r ' INZ _ F9 J /• I a I is 000"I'.4�` / 1 . row ma ; - EXHIBIT 2 TOWN OF ITHACA FEE : $ 1 . 50 ' / p� 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED : / � O� Ithaca ,. New York 14550CASH ( 607 ) 273 - 1747 • CHECK A P P E A L ZONING . to the For - Office Use Only Building Inspector and Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca , New York Having been denied permission ' to. at Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . as shown on the accompanying application and / or plans or other {supporting documents , for the stated . reason that the issuance of such. permit would be in violation of : Article ( s ) �✓ , Section(s)oz 7 J • of the own of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , the UNDERSIGNED 'respectfully submits this appeal from such denial and , in support of the appeal , affirms that strict observance of the Ordinance would , , . impose PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and / or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows : 6ato W46 r .�.L � 4L� - 7� /46W, .� za., y` <•� - /r 17Dated : -3�/ �� Signed : EXHIBIT - ' 3) j or t T Ado 4.1 E or SwL fr Qw,`g ' � sm^.uez+nm�o'_" - ;.,a , ' �' ' . .; .. . . . •... . . .. - R .. .. . , a. ' �ft. • .ry , t•'. � t V. a 4,.` ^ •. ' {, •- ----'-,---. �. _ . 7 V r f EXHIBIT 4A r • i oj LA ;7, )) It FI r ! 'qCe f • ' . • • I � .YSna:.a..�..5(... fuaYwl. EXHIBIT 4B ` f� vn r� � �