HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1990-08-15 " - FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Date
• TOWN OF ITHACA Clerk 4"14mo i
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
AUGUST 15 , 1990
THE FOLLOWING ARE THE APPEALS THAT WERE HEARD ON AUGUST 15 , 1990
BY THE BOARD :
APPEAL OF STEVEN L . HESLOP , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE V . SECTION
23 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE—FAMILY HOME ON A
PROPOSED BUILDING LOT FRONTING ON WOOLF LANE WITH A
LOT WIDTH AT THE STREET LINE PROPOSED TO BE 43 . 73 FEET ,
WHEREAS 100 FEET IS REQUIRED . THE SUBJECT LOT IS
PROPOSED TO BE SUBDIVIDED FROM TOWN OF ITHACA TAX
PARCEL NO . 6 - 23 - 1 - 16 , WITH PORTIONS OF THE LOT FORMERLY
KNOWN AS TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 23 - 1 - 11 . 111 , RESIDENCE
DISTRICT R- 30 .
GRANTED WITH CONDITION .
APPEAL OF TUNG —MOW YAN , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , OF THE TOWN OF
ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE , PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 136
SIMSBURY DRIVE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 -72 - 1
1 . 140 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 , SAID ADDITION WILL BE
12 FEET +/ - TO THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE , WHEREAS 15 '
IS REQUIRED .
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS .
APPEAL OF LINNA DOLPH AND DAVID DUNBAR , APPELLANTS ,
CHARLES GUTTMAN , AGENT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM
ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 AND 19 , OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
TO PERMIT THE KEEPING OF HORSES FOR HIRE AT 1457
TRUMANSBURG ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 23 - 1 -
27 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . THE PETITIONERS PROPOSE
TO BOARD HORSES OWNED BY OTHER INDIVIDUALS , WITH SAID
HORSES TO BE RIDDEN BY THEIR OWNERS , AND THE APPELLANTS
BELIEVE THIS IS A PERMITTED USE BY THE ZONING
ORDINANCE . AS SUCH , THE PETITIONERS ARE FIRST SEEKING
AN INTERPRETATION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
BEFORE SAID VARIANCE REQUEST .
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS .
APPEAL OF THE CODDINGTON ROAD COMMUNITY CENTER INC . ,
ANNE MORRISETTE , AGENT , REQUESTING A SPECIAL APPROVAL
FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THE PROPOSED 1 , 300
+/ - SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION ON AN EXISTING DAY CARE
CENTER LOCATED AT 920 CODDINGTON ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA
TAX PARCEL NO . 6 -47 - 1 - 11 . 3 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 .
THE SPECIAL APPROVAL IS REQUESTED UNDER ARTICLE V .
SECTION 18 , PARAGRAPH 4 , OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE .
GRANTED
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
DateL�
FILED Clerk
TOWN OF ITHACA APPEAL OF THE CODDINGTON ROAD COMMUNITY :ER MC
Date, / I 1p 90 INNE MORRISETTE , AGENT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM TOWN
F ITHACA LOCAL LAW # 7 - 1988 , AS AMENDED , " REQUIRING
ClerkA! PRINKLER SYSTEM TO BE INSTALLED IN BUILDINGS IN THE
OWN OF ITHACA " FOR THE EXCLUSION OF THE INSTALLATION
OF AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SUPPRESSION SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN A
PROPOSED 1 , 300 +/ — SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ADDITION THAT
SERVES AS A DAY CARE CENTER , LOCATED AT 920 CODDINGTON
ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 47 - 1 - 11 . 3 ,
RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 .
ADJOURNED SINE DIE .
APPEAL OF F . J . PAOLANGELI , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV , SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH 10 , OF
THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE TO CONSTRUCT A
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN EXTERIOR BUILDING
HEIGHT OF 37 ' ( WHEREBY 30 ' IS REQUIRED ) AND AN INTERIOR
BUILDING HEIGHT OF 37 ' ( WHEREBY 34 ' IS REQUIRED ) ,
PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED AT LOT # 5 , 6 WINNERS CIRCLE ,
TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 58 - 1 - 8 . 5 , RESIDENCE
DISTRICT R- 15 .
GRANTED
•
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Date
• 1
Clerk
TOWN OF ITHACA
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
AUGUST 15 , 1990
PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Robert Hines , Edward King , Joan
Reuning , Edward Austen , Zoning Enforcement
Officer/ Building Inspector Andrew Frost , Town Attorney
Peter Grossman .
OTHERS PRESENT : Charles Guttman , Esq . , Tung -Mow Yan , Elsie
McMillan , Linna Dolph , David Dunbar , Anne
Morrisette , Pat Kennedy , Jim Hilker , Don
Ball , Francis Paolangeli , Mr . Rollins ,
Patricia Heslop .
Chairman Aron called the meeting to order at 7 : 10 p . m . and
stated that all . posting , publication and notification of the
public hearing has been completed and that proper affidavits of
the same were in order .
The first Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
• APPEAL OF STEVEN L . HESLOP , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE V . SECTION
23 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON A
PROPOSED BUILDING LOT FRONTING ON WOOLF LANE WITH A LOT
WIDTH AT THE STREET LINE PROPOSED TO BE 43 . 73 FEET ,
WHEREAS 100 FEET IS REQUIRED . THE SUBJECT LOT IS
PROPOSED TO BE SUBDIVIDED FROM TOWN OF ITHACA TAX
PARCEL NO . 6 -23 - 1 - 16 , WITH PORTIONS OF THE LOT FORMERLY
KNOWN AS TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 23 - 1 - 11 . 111 , RESIDENCE
DISTRICT R- 30 .
Mrs . Patricia Heslop appeared before the Board and explained
the proposed construction that is being requested . She stated
that the property line is curved because the person they bought
the land from 6 years ago , before the other remaining property
was sold around there , the intention was to have the road bear to
the left , which was the proposed road so they bought the land up
to the proposed road . When the remaining property was bought by
another party , they moved the road over . There was intent to
allow 60 feet for the road but the road is only 50 feet wide at
that point .
Mr . King referred to the survey map that was submitted to
the Board and stated that if it wasn ' t for the curve on the
® northerly line of Mrs . Heslop ' s property , she would have over . 300
feet to the road .
2
Chairman Aron read from a letter to Mrs . Heslop from
Attorney Barney , dated 7 / 16/ 90 and attached hereto as Exhibit # 1 .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Mr . Don Ball spoke to the Board regarding the arc ( curve ) in
the property line . He said that this could be a window of
opportunity for the Zoning Board of Appeals to correct the
problem that was created when Mr . Tim Ciaschi moved the road .
Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Chairman Aron read the adopted resolution from the Planning
Board of August 7 , 1990 , which is attached hereto as Exhibit # 2 .
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 a variance to Steven L . Heslop for
the proposed construction of a single - family home on a proposed
building lot fronting on Woolf Lane , with the following findings
and condition .
1s that it would cause an unnecessary hardship on the
Heslops to require a 100 foot frontage at the street
line on this particular lot which is 2 / 3 acres large .
2 * that there is 150 feet of width which is very close to
Woolf Lane including the 43 feet that is actually
contiguous to Woolf Lane .
39 that it would cause no adverse impact on the purpose of
the Zoning Ordinance to vary the requirement of Section
23 , subdivision 2 , in this case , to permit the
construction of a residence on this lot even though it
has 43 . 73 feet of road frontage rather than 100 feet ,
which Section 23 requires .
4o that the variance be conditioned on Mr . and Mrs . Heslop
conveying to the Town that very small wedge of their
property at the northeast corner , which is actually
lying within the confines of Woolf Lane as recommended
by the Town Planning Board in approving the
subdivision .
The voting on the motion resulted as follows .
0 Ayes - King , Austen , Hines , Aron , Reuning .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
• 3
The next Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
APPEAL OF TUNG -MOW YAN , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , OF THE TOWN OF
ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE , PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 136
SIMSBURY DRIVE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 72 - 1 -
1 . 140 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 . SAID ADDITION WILL BE
12 FEET +/ - TO THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE , WHEREAS 15 '
IS REQUIRED .
Mr . Yan appeared before the Board and explained the proposed
addition that he is requesting .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing . No one appeared to
address the Board . Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Chairman Aron read a letter from Mr . Paul Philipson , 138
Simsbury Drive , attached hereto as Exhibit # 3 .
MOTION
® By Mr . Robert Hines , Seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , That the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant and hereby does grant an Area Variance to Mr . Tung -Mow
Yan to construct a living space within the bounds as set
forth in his application , such that the front corner of the
constructed garage is no closer than 12 feet to the east lot
line and that the rear corner of the living space is no
closer than 15 feet to the lot line , with the following
findings and conditions .
10 that there is practical difficulty and unnecessary
hardship imposed on the applicant with the requirement
that he conform with the side yard limitation .
2e that there was a letter received from the adjacent
neighbor in favor of the proposed project .
3 * there will be trees planted on the lot line between Mr .
Yan and Mr . Philipson . Such plans to be submitted to
Mr . Frost for approval .
4o the extension will be 10 feet wide from the existing
dwelling .
Town of Ithaca 4
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
A vote on the Motion resulted as follows :
Ayes - Hines , Reuning , Aron , Austen , King .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
The next Appeal on the Agenda was the following :
APPEAL OF LINNA DOLPH AND DAVID DUNBAR , APPELLANTS ,
CHARLES GUTTMAN , AGENT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM
ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 AND 19 , OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
TO PERMIT THE KEEPING OF HORSES FOR HIRE AT 1457
TRUMANSBURG ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 -23 - 1 -
27 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . THE PETITIONERS PROPOSE
TO BOARD HORSES OWNED BY OTHER INDIVIDUALS , WITH SAID
HORSES TO BE RIDDEN BY THEIR OWNERS , AND THE APPELLANTS
BELIEVE THIS IS A PERMITTED USE BY THE ZONING
ORDINANCE . AS SUCH , THE PETITIONERS ARE FIRST SEEKING
AN INTERPRETATION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
BEFORE SAID VARIANCE REQUEST .
® Attorney Charles Guttman appeared before the Board on behalf
of Linna Dolph and David Dunbar .
Chairman Aron read from Article V , Sections 18 and 19 of the
Zoning Ordinance and offered his interpretation of its meaning .
Attorney Guttman explained what he thinks the ordinance
means .
After further discussion , Chairman Aron asked for a motion
on the interpretation .
MOTION
By Mr . Robert Hines , Seconded by Mr . Edward King :
RESOLVED , That the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
determines that the relevant section of the Zoning Ordinance
( the keeping of animals for profit and business purposes )
stands the way it is and the Board will discuss the above
matter as a Use Variance .
Ayes - Hines , King , Austen , Reuning , Aron .
Nays - None .
OThe motion was carried unanimously .
Town of Ithaca 5
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
Use Variance Issue
Attorney Guttman stated that it is their position that the
Use Variance is particularly for this site . The applicants have
already submitted to the Board letters and petitions , all
speaking strongly in support of this use there . He said that not
only is it not inconsistent with the neighborhood character but
actually is consistent with the character of the neighborhood .
It serves a neighborhood need there and it promotes the aesthetic
and the country feel of the neighborhood .
Attorney Guttman explained that for many , many years , before
the applicants acquired the property , it had been used for
exactly the same purpose by Mr . Page , the previous owner . Due to
the illness and death of Mr . Page , the acquisition of the estate
took more than the one year allowed period in order to continue
the use within the one year period . The applicants acquired the
property for $ 100 , 000 and despite the fact that there is a
residence on it , it is a small residence which is in need of
repair , the value of the property is as a horse farm .
® Attorney Guttman stated that to prohibit the use as a horse
farm which is what this property has always been used for , would
cause great hardship and difficulty to the applicants .
Chairman Aron read the criteria for a Use Variance .
Attorney Guttman responded to the criteria for a Use
Variance and addressed the hardship issue .
Attorney Guttman referred to the petition that was signed by
neighbors and submitted to the Board . The petition is attached
hereto as Exhibit # 4 .
Discussion followed regarding the environmental issues in
regard to this being used as a horse farm . Attorney Guttman
stated that in dealing with the question of erosion , this place
has been used for a horse farm for over 40 years and Mr . Page was
keeping approximately 40 horses . The applicant is proposing to
keep a maximum of 17 horses . There is approximately a 7 - 1/ 2
acre pasture in the back and there will never be more than 3 to
4 horses there at a time . The horses are stabled approximately
22 out of 24 hours a day . When they are in the stable , the
manure is kept in a pit that Mr . Page had when he was running it
as a horse farm . The pit has what is known as a " blue clay
containment dike " . What that is designed for is to keep the
horse manure right in one pile . The manure is removed at least
once a month or more frequently if necessary .
Town of Ithaca 6
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
Attorney Guttman stated that he has a contract from Stein
Excavating who will be doing the removing of the manure .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Elsie McMillan , 812 Elmira Road , spoke to the Board in favor
of the proposed horse farm .
Pat Kennedy , 320 DuBois Road , stated that she is very much
in support of this project .
Mr . Francis Paolangeli , 125 Ridgecrest Road , addressed the
Board . He explained how manure is removed from race tracks in
the area and how it is handled .
Ms . Linna Dolph spoke to the Board on her experience with
horses .
After further discussion , Chairman Aron closed the public
hearing .
® Chairman Aron referred to the EAF that was signed by Asst .
Town Planner George Frantz on August 15 , 1990 , and attached
hereto as Exhibit # 5 .
Mr . David Dunbar , co - owner of the property answered
questions from Board members .
Environmental Assessment
By Mr . Edward King , Seconded by Mr . Edward Austen :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
make and hereby does make a negative declaration of environmental
significance , with respect to a grant of a variance with
conditions , on the matter of the appeal of Linna Dolph and David
Dunbar to permit the keeping of horses for hire at 1457
Trumansburg Road , Tax parcel No . 6 - 23 - 1 - 27 , Residence District R-
30 .
The voting on the Environmental Assessment was as follows :
Ayes - King , Austen , Hines , Reuning , Aron .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
Town of Ithaca 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
MOTION
By Mr . Robert Hines .
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant and hereby does grant a Use Variance from Article V ,
Sections 18 and 19 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the
keeping of horses for hire at 1457 Trumansburg Road , with
the following conditions .
16 that the management of the applicants or other owners
of the premises be such that waste management be
maintained in a proper and environmentally sound
manner .
2 * that no activity on the premises by reason of lack of
good management be offensive or obnoxious to those in
the community .
3a that in no event shall this permission exceed the
period ending December 31 , 1995 .
Attorney Guttman spoke to the Board regarding the time limit
on the granting of the variance and discussion followed on the
floor .
The following findings were added to the resolution .
10 that the applicant has purchased the property which has
a series of structures which are uniquely adapted to
the use requested .
2a that there is very little economic profit for use of
other activities .
3e that the purchase price was paid in contemplation of
that operation .
4 * that it would be an economic hardship if the land and
structures cannot be used for that particular purpose .
5e that the neighborhood , while growing in residential
character , still has a rural atmosphere .
6e that the proposal is not repugnant to the neighborhood
and the evidence thereof is that the neighbors seem to
Ofeel that it is compatible with its existence .
• Town of Ithaca 8
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
7 * that the restrictions placed on the management of the
facility are such that the environmental concerns will
not be overlooked .
8 * that the use of the land over the past 40 years by a
prior owner has been for a similar related purpose .
90 that the duration is imposed to ensure that the
conditions are in fact carried out .
The motion was seconded by Mr . Edward Austen .
The voting on the motion was as follows :
Ayes - Hines , Austen , Reuning , Aron , King .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
The next Appeal on the Agenda were the following .
APPEAL OF THE CODDINGTON ROAD COMMUNITY CENTER INC . ,
® ANNE MORRISETTE , AGENT , REQUESTING A SPECIAL APPROVAL
FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THE PROPOSED 1 , 300
+/ - SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION ON AN EXISTING DAY CARE
CENTER LOCATED AT 920 CODDINGTON ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA
TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 47 - 1 - 11 . 31 RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 .
THE SPECIAL APPROVAL IS REQUESTED UNDER ARTICLE V ,
SECTION 18 , PARAGRAPH 4 , OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE .
APPEAL OF THE CODDINGTON ROAD COMMUNITY CENTER INC . ,
ANNE MORRISETTE , AGENT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM TOWN
OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW # 7 - 1988 , AS AMENDED , " REQUIRING
SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO BE INSTALLED IN BUILDINGS IN THE
TOWN OF ITHACA " FOR THE EXCLUSION OF THE INSTALLATION
OF AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SUPPRESSION SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN A
PROPOSED 1 , 300 +/ - SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ADDITION THAT
SERVES AS A DAY CARE CENTER , LOCATED AT 920 CODDINGTON
ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 47 - 1 - 11 . 3 ,
RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 .
Mrs . Anne Morrisette appeared before the Board and explained
the proposed expansion of the building and she spoke of the
safety measures that they are taking care of at this time .
Mrs . Morrisette stated that the expansion is to serve
several purposes . One , to help meet a growing need for day care
O services in the area . The Day Care Center takes children from
anywhere but they do give priority to Town of Ithaca or South
Hill children . She said that the plan is to tear off the
existing kitchen and expand on that side 1 , 300 square feet .
Town of Ithaca 9
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
Mrs . Morrisette stated that the Center is in the process of
being licensed as a Child Care Center by the State of New York ,
Department of Social Services . They have had their fire
inspection by the State Fire Inspector and he has required that a
fire alarm system be linked into their smoke detection system ;
that would automatically alert the fire department in case of
fire .
Mrs . Morrisette stated that , as far as a sprinkler system
goes , the Community Center operates on a well , which has been
adequate for their needs for the past 5 years . In order to
operate a sprinkler system off the well , it would require
equipment , a storage tank and a pressurized system , to make it
operate properly . They lack space for a storage tank at this
time and the cost of such a system is prohibitively expensive ,
especially in addition to the State requirements that they have
to comply with . She said that the addition that is being
proposed will include measures to upgrade the safety of the
building .
Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Morrisette how many children she
expects to have at the Community Center for day care .
Mrs . Morrisette stated that she expects 42 children .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Jim Hilker , Burns Road , stated to the Board that the cost of
the addition will be quite expensive and it has been budgeted
into the day care and with the sprinkler system and these
upgrades that the State is requiring , it would almost make it
impossible to put the addition up .
Mr . Rollins , Treasurer of the Community Center , stated that
as far as protection is concerned , smoke alarms save lives ,
sprinkler systems primarily save property .
Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Chairman Aron read from Part III of the EAF , which was
signed by George Frantz on August 2 , 1990 and attached hereto as
Exhibit # 6 .
O
Town of Ithaca 10
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
Environmental Assessment
By Mrs . Joan Reuning ; seconded by Mr . Edward Austen .
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals make and hereby
does make a negative declaration of environmental
significance in the matter of the Appeal of the Coddington
Road Community Center , Inc . for the proposed 1 , 300 +/ -
square foot expansion of an existing Day Care Center located
at 920 Coddington Road .
The voting on the motion resulted as follows :
Ayes - Reuning , Austen , King , Hines , Aron .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
Chairman Aron read from the Planning Board ' s adopted
resolution of August 7 , 1990 , attached hereto as Exhibit # 7 .
MOTION
® By Mrs . Joan Reuning ; seconded by Mr . Edward Austen :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant and hereby does grant Special Approval for the
expansion of the Day Care Center at the Coddington Road
Community Center at 920 Coddington Road with the findings as
presented in the adopted resolution of the Planning Board on
August 7 , 1990 and that no one appeared before the Board in
opposition to the proposed addition .
The voting on the motion resulted as follows .
Ayes - Reuning , Austen , King , Aron , Hines .
Nays - None .
The Motion was carried unanimously .
Further discussion followed regarding the matter of a
sprinkler system for the Day Care Center at the Coddington Road
Community Center , Inc .
Town of Ithaca 11
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
MOTION
By Mr . Edward Austen ; seconded by Mr . Edward King .
RESOLVED , that the matter of the requirement of a sprinkler
system for the Day Care Center at the Coddington Road Community
Center be adjourned until the Board receives more information
from the State on the need of a sprinkler system for said
building and information from Mrs . Morrisette regarding their
budget for the Day Care Center , proving to the Board that there
would be a definite financial hardship were a sprinkler system
required to be installed there .
Ayes - Austen , King , Hines , Reuning , Aron .
Nays - None .
The Motion was carried unanimously .
The last Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
APPEAL OF F . J . PAOLANGELI , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV , SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH 10 , OF
THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE TO CONSTRUCT A
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN EXTERIOR BUILDING
HEIGHT OF 37 ' ( WHEREBY 30 ' IS REQUIRED ) AND AN INTERIOR
BUILDING HEIGHT OF 37 ' ( WHEREBY 34 ' IS REQUIRED ) ,
PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED AT LOT # 5 , 6 WINNERS CIRCLE ,
TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 58 - 1 - 8 . 5 , RESIDENCE
DISTRICT R- 15 .
Mr . Francis Paolangeli explained the proposed house to the
Board .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing . No one appeared
before the Board . Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
MOTION
By Mr . Robert Hines , seconded by Mr . Edward King :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant and hereby does grant the variance for the
construction of the proposed single family residence ,
portions of which exceed the maximum height requirements of
the ordinance , with the following findings .
O 19 the lot configuration and grade presents a practical
difficulty in constructing a house which would
otherwise conform .
Town of Ithaca 12
Zoning Board of Appeals
August 15 , 1990
2 . the height limitation does not impose any aesthetic
burden to any of the neighboring properties .
3 * no one appeared before the Board in opposition to the
proposed construction of said house .
Town Attorney Grossman stated that his law office
represents Mr . Paolangeli in certain matters , however he has had
nothing to do with any aspect of the matter that is before the
Board .
The voting on the motion was as follows .
Ayes - Hines , Aron , King , Austen , Reuning .
Nays - None .
The Motion was carried unanimously .
The meeting was adjourned at 10 : 15 p . m .
® Connie J . Holcomb
Recording Secretary
APPROVED :
Hen Aron , Chairman
O
BARNEY . GROSSMAN , ROTH & DUBOW
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
315 NORTH TIOGA STREET
P. O . BOX 6556
JOHN C . BARNEY ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 - 6556
PETER G . GROSSMAN
TELECOPIER
NELSON E. ROTH ( 607 ) 273 - 6841
DAwD A . Oueow ( 607 ) 272 - 8806
July 16. ; 1990
RICHARD P . RUSWICK ,
ROSANNE MAYER
HUGH C . KENT
RANDALL B. MARCUS
Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov
Chairperson
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Town of Ithaca
126 East Seneca Street
Ithaca , New York 14850
Re : Subdivision application of Steven and
Patricia J . Heslop
Dear Carolyn .
You will recall that at the last Planning Board meeting the
matter involving the Heslops was adjourned to give Mr . Heslop and
Mr . Dan McClure and myself an opportunity to review , in some
detail , the discrepancy in surveys . You will recall that when
Tim Ciaschi developed the Westwood Hills Community , he showed an
extension of Woolf Lane with Mr . Heslop ' s northerly boundary
being tangential to Woolf Lane . Mr . Heslop brought in a more
recent survey by George Schlecht as the basis for his proposed
subdivision which showed Mr . Heslop ' s boundary actually
intersecting Woolf Lane at the northeast corner and providing
approximately 43 . 73 feet of road frontage . The matter was
initially adjourned at my suggestion to allow a meeting of all of
the concerned parties „ to occur .
Since the meeting I have had a long conversation with Mr .
Fulkerson , the • .. surveyor who prepared the Westwood Hills
subdivision . Mr . Fulkerson advises that he made certain
assumptions in depicting the Heslop parcel on the Westwood Hills
subdivision map , based upon an earlier unfiled Dougherty
subdivision map . That earlier map showed a proposed roadway
running along the northerly line of the Heslop parcel . In any
event Mr . Fulkerson assumed that the Heslop line with a 271 . 5
foot arc distance , a chord distance of 267 . 76 feet , and a radius
of 470 . 0 feet would be tangential to Woolf Lane at the northwest
corner of the Ball property . In fact , however , this assumption
may not have been correct because when the mathematics are
figured using that arc length , radius , and chord distance , the
north line appears to intrude into Woolf Lane in the manner
depicted in the Schlecht survey . Mr . Ciaschi and Mr . Heslop
Oentered into a boundary line agreement which incorporated in its
July 16 , 1990
Page 2
terms the chord distance and bearing and the arc distance and
makes no reference to the radius . Mr . Fulkerson advises that
using his computer the arc distance and chord distance give a
radius of 470 feet .
Accordingly , I do not see any need for a major meeting . It
appears that Mr . Schlecht ' s survey substantially portrays the
current status of the land ownership and I would suggest that the
Board proceed with hearing Mr . Heslop ' s application for a
subdivision . Based upon Mr . Schlecht ' s survey there appears to
be 43 . 73 feet of frontage . This obviously is inadequate in an
• R15 zone but this is a matter that can be addressed by the
Planning Board in making its determination whether or not to
permit a subdivision .
I would suggest that in the event the Board chooses to grant
a subdivision that it be subject , of course , to the obtaining of
any necessary variances and further subject to a condition that
the subdivider convey to the Town Qf Ithaca that minuscule
portion of Woolf Lane that is encompassed in that 43 . 73 feet
where the arc intersects into the roadway .
® Needless to say if you , the Board , or any of the other
persons to whom I am forwarding this letter have any questions I
would be happy to discuss it with them . If after receiving this
letter either Mr . Heslop or Mr . McClure still would like to have
a meeting I would certainly be willing to accommodate them .
Veryruly yours ,
� 1
1
JCB : bl �
lot
cc : Ms . Susan Beeners
Town Planner i
Mr . George Franz
Assistant Town Planner
Mr . Steven Heslop
Mr . Daniel McClure
Mr . Al Fulkerson
o
Heslop Subdivision
Backlot of 242 DuBois Road
• Final Subdivision Approval
Planning Board , August 7 , 1990
ADOPTED RESOLUTION : SEQR
Heslop Subdivision
Backlot of 242 DuBois Road
Final Subdivision Approval
Planning Board , August 7 , 1990
MOTION by Stephen Smith , seconded by James Baker :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the consideration cf Subdivision Approval for the
proposes sun vision of �+- / - 2 . 33 acres from Town o { Ithaca Tax
Parcel No . 6 - 23 - 1 - 16 , + / - 3 . 49 acres total area , iccateod
backlot of 242 DuBois Road , with frontage on Woolf Lane ,
Residence District R - 30 ,
2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in
environmental review for the proposed subdivision . The Town of
Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals is Lead Agency in environmental
review for the granting of any necessary variances .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on August 7 , 1990 , has
reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form and other
application , materials .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
That the Planning Board make and hereby does make a negative
determination of environmental significance for this action as
proposed .
Aye - Grigorov , Kenerson , Baker , Miller , Smith , Lesser .
Nay - None .
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY .
ADOPTED RESOLUTION : Heslop Subdivision
Backlot of 242 DuBois Road
Final Subdivision Approval
Planning Board , August 71 1990
MOTION by Stephen Smith , seconded by William Lesser :
oWHEREAS :
l7tblvN 7ULuiVi : 1V11 - �
Backlot of 242 DuBois Road
Final Subdivision Approval
Planning Board , August 7 , 1990
1 . This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of + / - 2 . 33 acres from Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No . 6 - 23 - 1 - 16 , + / - 3 . 49 acres total area , located backlot
of 242 DuBois Road , with frontage on Woolf Lane , Residence
District R - 30 ,
2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board , acting as Lead Agency in environmental review , has , on
August 7 , 1990 , made a negative determination of environmental
significance with regard to the proposed subdivision .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on August 7 , 1990 , has
reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form and other
application materials .
.
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOI:VED :
1 . at the Plann , ng Board waive and hereby does waive cerrain
requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval. ,
having determined from the materials presented that such waiver
will. result in neither a significant a. ltera. tion of the pt; rposA
of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by
the Town Board .
2 . That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final
Subdivision Approval to the subdivision as shown on the Survey
Map prepared by George Schlecht , P . E . , dated April 17 , 1990 ,
upon the following conditions :
a . The granting by the Zoning Board of Appeals of any required
variance from the minumum yard width at the street line .
b . Conveyance by the owner to the Town of Ithaca the small arc
of land lying in the previously understood road
right - of - way in form and substance satisfactory to the Town
Attorney , such conveyance to occur prior to the issuance of
any building permit on the lot facing Woolf Lane .
Aye - Grigorov , Kenerson , Baker , Miller , Smith , Lesser .
Nay - None .
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY .
Mary S . Bryant , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Plannina Board ,
August 9 , 1990
O
•
To whom it may concern ,
I have no objection to the proposed addition to the existing single
family home with a living space to be located approximately
thirteen feet to the side property line at 136 Simsbury Drive , Town
of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 72 - 1 - 1 . 140 .
® Mr . Tung- Mow Yan agrees to plant a few trees along the property
line between our two houses .
Mr . Paul Philipson
138 Simsbury Drive
O
Nh b � -F .
To : To whom it may concern 7 / 29 / 90
From : The Gantner Family
Mr . Page ' s death was a sad occurrence for all people i. n our
neighborhood for two reasons . First: , Mr . Page was a vary
pleasant man who is missed by all . And secondly , the horses and
the horse stable , cahich we felt was an intrl. ris ]. c part of the
character of our neighborhood , was gone .
You can not imagine the delight we all felt when we discovered
that a family had bought the Page property , and were going to
continue the horse stablt� tradition .
® We feel that the horse stable is environmentally unobtrusive and
is in complete harmony with the character of our. neighborhood .
Any attempt to prevent the boarding of horses on that property
will be considered aD unwanted and unneeded intrusion in the -
lives of the people in the neighborhood .
The Gantner Family .
PETITION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF ITHACA , NEW YORK
To whom it may concern,
We, the undersigned, wish to voice our support for Linna Dolph and
David Dunbar to board horses at 1457 Trumansburg Rd. , Ithaca, NY . The
property was used for this purpose for many years under the care of Frank
Page to the benefit of the community, We believe a resumption of the
operation will provide a service while protecting and enhancing the
esthetic nature ' of our neighborhood, which we care so much about We
request that you grant them your approval.
Sincerly,
NAME ADDRESS DATE .
w >u
141 #71 s ac 7/c
i hyo cwtn c � 07/1196
r
i4(W r +kttAAt�Ast�ue6 a ortl `a 90
Joe
1
Wo l 7 -
but � -
of
u ( D
-e_
PETITION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF ITHACA , NEW YORK
® To whom it may concern,
We, the undersigned , wish to voice our support for Linna Dolph and
David Dunbar to board horses at 1457 Trumansburg Rd. , Ithaca, NY . The
property was used for this purpose for many years under the care of Frank
Page to the benefit of the community. We believe a resumption of the
operation will. provide a service while protecting and enhancing the
esthetic nature of our neighborhood, which we care so much about. We
request that you grant them your approval.
Sincerly,
NAME ADDRESS DATE .
4m ';
PP
717
71,flId
0000P /
31.
Ae ls�
� � n
l _ . 3 �� e711 yl�
#PETITION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS , TOWN OF ITHACA , NEW YORK
To whom it may concern,
We, the undersigned, wish to voice our support for Linna Dolph and
David Dunbar to board horses at 1457 Trumansburg Rd. , Ithaca, NY . The
property . was used for this pugDose for many years under the care of Frank
Page to the benefit of the comm unity. We believe a resumption of the
operation will provide a service while protecting and enhancing the
esthetic nature of our neighborhood, which we care so much about. We
request that you grant them your approval.
Sincerly,
NAME ADDRESS �-7DATE.
1 U
�0
La v\ e-
/ v
70 Y 7
P-q1111
IO
ry
PETITION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF ITHACA ,- NEW YORK
To whom it may concern,
OWe, the undersigned, wish to voice our support for Linna Dolph and
David Dunbar to board horses at 1457 Trum ansburg Rd. , Ithaca, NY , The
property was used for this purpose for many years under the care of Frank
Page to the benefit of the community. We believe a resumption of the
operation will provide a service while protecting and enhancung the
esthetic nature 'of our neighborhood, which we care so much about. We
request that you grant them your approval.
Sincerly,
NAME ADDRESS DATE,
t to
l z)
0A r%N
PETITION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF ITHACA , NEW YORK
OTo whom it may concern,
We, the undersigned, wish to voice our support for Linna Dolph and
David Dunbar to board horses at 1457 Trumansburg Rd. , Ithaca, NY . The
property was used for this purpose for many years under the care of Frank
Page to the benefit of the community, We believe a resumption of the
operation will provide a service while protecting and enhancing the
esthetic nature of our neighborhood, which we care so much about. We
request that you grant them your approval.
Sincerly,
NAME ADDRESS DATE .
II ,9
fX
� i 9 / 7" `�
14•164 (ti, ext 12 '
, PROJECT . . NUMBER 617.21 SEAR
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
® For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
PART I — PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor)
1 . APPLICANT /SPONSOR 2 . PROJECT NAME
LINNA DOLPH and DAVID DUNBAR
3 . PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality Town of Ithaca County Tompkins
4 . PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
1457 Trumansburg Road ( see attached map )
5 . IS PROPOSED ACTION: �
❑ New ❑ Expansion 1 C] Modificationlalteration
8 . DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
Board and train their own horses and also board and train other
individuals horses .
7 . AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially _ 10 . 5 acres Ultimately 10 . 5 acres
8 . WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
❑ Yes ❑ No If No, describe briefly Zoning ordinance prohibits the keeping of horses for hire .
Applicant believes that the activities will not be in conflict of such ordinance & is re -
vesting an interpretation to that effect . Arguably the ordinance could encompass this
® 8 . WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? requesting
ZlResldential El Industrial El Commercial Li Agriculture LJ Park/Forest/openspaceOther variance .
Describe:
10 . DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL,
STATE OR LOCAL)?
❑ Yes No If yes, list agency(s) and permlVapprovals
�1.1 , DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VAUD PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
❑ Yes Dlo If yes, list agency name and permlt/approval
\J12 , AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
E) Yes ® No
1 CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
AppllcanUeponsor name: Date:
Signature:
® If the action is in the Coastal Area , and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
OVER
h
0b;
PART II — ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by Agency)
A. DOES ACTIONxCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617. 127 It yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF.
❑ Yea No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative -declaration
® may be superseded by another Involved agency.
❑ Yea No
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, If legible)
C1 . Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly,
SEE ATTACHED
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
SEE ATTACHED
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened orendangered species? Explain briefly:
SEE ATTACHED
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or Intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly.
SEE ATTACHED
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be Induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly.
SEE ATTACHED
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not Identified In C1 -05? Explain briefly.
SEE ATTACHED
® C7. Other Impacts (including changes In usA of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly.
SEE ATTACHED
D. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
❑ Yes E0 No If Yes, explain briefly
SEE ATTACHED
PART III— DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect Identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important or otherwise significant.
Each effect should be assessed In connection with Its (a) setting (Le. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d)
Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that
explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse Impacts have been Identified and adequately addressed.
XCheck this box if you have Identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse Impacts which MAY
occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration,
❑ Check this box If you have determined, based on the Information and analysis above and any supporting
documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result In any significant adverse environmental impacts
AND provide on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Name ot Lead Agency
Henry Aron Chairman
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
/J
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signatu bf Preparer (if difterl!trirom responsi e o icer
_-- Date
2
PART II — ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
PROJECT : Requestst for variance from Article V . Sections 1a & 19 of the Town of
OIthaca Zoning Ordinance . Linna Dolph and David Dunbar
REVIEWER : George R . Frantz . Assistant Town Planner DATE : August 15, 1990
A . Does Action exceed any TYPE I threshold in 6 NYCRR, PART 617 . 12 ?
Yes Nom(— Action is UNLISTED_X_
5 . Will Action receive coordinated review as .provided for UNLISTED Actions In
6 NYCRR, PART 617 .6 ?
Yes No_X_ Involved Agency(les) :
C . Could Action result in any adverse effects associated with the following :
C 1 . Existing air quality , surface or groundwater quality or quantity , noise levels , existing
traffic patterns , solid waste production or disposal , potential for erosion , drainage or flooding
problems? Explain briefly :
Proposed action could have a significant adverse impact on groundwater quality in the area, given
that facility may house up to 17 horses on approximately 9 acres of available land . The impact of
animal wastes on groundwater quality , from 17 horses on a parcel this size , is not known and should
be studied further ,
® Proposed action could also have a significant adverse impact in that it may increase the potential
for soil erosion , given the number of horses which may be kept at the site . Further study on the
possible impact of the proposed action on potential for erosion is recommended .
C2 . Aesthetic , agricultural , archaeological , historic , or other natural resources; or community
or neighborhood character ? Explain briefly :
Aside from potential adverse impacts to natural resources due to possible groundwater
contamination or soil erosion , none are anticipated .
C3 . Vegetation or fauna , fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or
other natural resources? Explain briefly .
None anticipated .
C4 . A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted , or a change in use or intensity of
use of land or other natural resources ? Explain briefly :
Except for those impacts noted In C 1 above , none anticipated .
C5 . Growth , subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed
® action? Explain briefly :
None anticipated .
. C6 . Longterm , short term , cumulative , or other effects not Identified In Cl—057 Explain
briany :
None anticipated .
C7 . Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy )? Explain
briefly :
None anticipated .
D . Is there . or Is there likely to be , controversy related to potential adverse
environmental Impacts ?
Yes Nom(_ If Yes , explain briefly
PART 111 — DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
Given the potential adverse Impacts on groundwater quality, and possible increased potential for
erosion from having up to 17 horses on the site should the requested variance be granted , a positive
determination of environmental significance is recommended for this action .
14. 18.4 (2187)— Text 12
PROJECT I .D. NUMBER 817.21 SEOR
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
PART I — PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor)
1 . APPLICANT /SPONSOR 2 . PROJECT NAME
oddin ton Road Community Center , I c . Building addition
3 . PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality Town of Ithaca County Tompkins
4 . PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
920 Co4d , 1-)y7DP19?d .
►+h 6LCdL AJY .
I/3 mile, Sow X11 v-r . 6 n J Codd i r) 9orL IVT ei / o eu
5 . IS PROPOSED ACTION:
❑ New IaExpanslon ❑ Modification/alteration
6 , DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
' 1254 square foot addition consisting of an office , kitchen and
classroom . Reroof entire building .
7 . AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially _ 1254 s q . f t a44 Ultimately acres
8 . WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
aYes ❑ No If No, describe briefly
9 . WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
& Residentlal ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial 20AO griculture Park/Forest/Open space ❑ Other
Describe:
10 , DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL,
STATE OR LOCAL)?�---,,��
❑ Yes 11:1 No If yes, list agency(s) and permlVapprovals
11 . DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VAUD PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
❑ Yes ErNo If yes, list agency name and permlUapprovel
12 . AS A RESULT OF ,AP ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
C3 Yes �'No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Ctddiogton P^ad Commuln'ty Centex 7 _ � 6
Applicant/aponsor name: 92�j "�yj;;, Rna �i Date:
Ithaca , N. Y . 14850
Signature: S
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
® Coastal Assessment Form More proceeding with this assessment
OVER
1Evkkif
PART ll — ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by Agency)
A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE 1 THRESHOLD IN 5 NYCRR, PART 617. 127 11 yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF.
❑ Yes CK No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.67 If No, a negative ,teclaration
may be superseded by another Involved agency.
® 9Yes ❑ No
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, If legible)
C1 . Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
SEE ATTACHED
C2. Aesthetle, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
SEE ATTACHED
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
SEE ATTACHED
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or Intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly.
SEE ATTACHED
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be Induced by the proposed action ? Explain briefly.
SEE ATTACHED
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not Identified In C1 -05? Explain briefly,
SEE ATTACHED
C7. Other Impacts (including changes In usn of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly.
® SEE ATTACHED
i
D. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
❑ Yes ia,l No If Yes, explain briefly
SEE ATTACHED
PART 111— DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important or otherwise significant,
Each effect should be assessed in connection with Its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d)
Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude, If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that
explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse Impact& have been Identified and adequately addressed.
❑ Check this box If you have Identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse Impacts which MAY
occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration,
❑ Check this box if you have determined, based on the Information and analysis above and any supporting
documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental Impacts
AND provide on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination:
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Name of Lead Agency
Henry Aron Chairman
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responab a Officer
® Signature of Responsible Officer in lead Agency Sian re of Preparer ( if clilkUtnt from reiponst e o icer
Date
� //
x / � � T6
PART II - Environmental Assessment - Request for Special
® Approval for Expansion of Existing Daycare Facilities at
Coddington Road Community Center
Lead Agency : Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
A . Action is Unlisted
B . Action will receive coordinated review ( Town of Ithaca
Planning Board )
C . Could action result in any adverse effects on , to or
arising from the following :
C1 . Existing air quality , surface or groundwater
quality or quantity , noise levels , existing traffic
patterns , solid waste production or disposal , potential for
erosion , drainage or flooding problems ?
None anticipated . Proposed action is the expansion of the
Coddington Road Community Center daycare facilities , a use
permitted by special approval in the R - 30 Residence
District . Some additional traffic is expected be generated
as a result of the proposed action , however it is not
expected to be significant nor result in any significant
adverse impacts to existing traffic patterns .
® No significant adverse impacts with regard to air quality ,
surface or groundwater quality or quantity , noise levels ,
or other potential impacts listed above are anticipated as a
result of the proposed action .
C2 . Aesthetic , agricultural , archeological , historic ,
or other natural or cultural resources , or community or
neighborhood character ?
None anticipated ,
C3 . Vegetation or fauna , fish , shellfish or wildlife
species , - significant habitats , or threatened or endangered
species ?
None anticipated . Location of proposed expansion an
existing community center site , No threatened or endangered
species of wildlife , plant life , fish or shellfish are known
to exist on the site or expected to otherwise be affected by
the proposed action .
C4 . A community ' s existing plans or goals as
officially adopted , or a change in use or intensity of use
of land or other natural resources ?
None anticipated . The proposed action is in conformance
® with the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . It * may have a
1 ,EX / r Af�- 6
positive impact on the community by increasing the
® availability of daycare services in the Town of Ithaca .
C5 . Growth , subsequent development , or related
activities likely to be induced by the proposed action ?
None anticipated .
C6 . Long term , short term , cumulative , or other
effects not identified in Cl - 05 ?
None anticipated .
C7 . Other impacts ( including changes in use of either
quantity or type of energy ) ?
None anticipated .
D . Is there , or is there likely to be , controversy related
to potential adverse environmental impacts ?
No controversy related to potential adverse environmental
impacts is anticipated .
PART III
® Based on review of the materials submitted for the proposed
action , the small scale of it , and the information above , a
negative determination of environmental significance is
recommended .
Reviewer : George R . Frantz , Asst . Town Planner
Review Date : August 2 , 1990 / '
Coddington Road Community Center , Inc . - 1 -
920 Cuddington Road
Report to the Zoning Board of Appeals
Planning Board , August 7 , 1990
ADOPTED RESOLUTION : Coddington Road Community Center , Inc .
920 Coddington Road
Report to the Zoning Board of Appeals
Planning Board , August 7 , 1990
MOTION by Stephen Smith , seconded by James Baker :
WHEREAS :
•
1 . This action is the Consideration of a Report to the Zoning Board
of Appeals with respect to a request for Special Approval ,
pursuant to Article V Section 18 , Paragraph 4 of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the proposed expansion of the
Coddington Road Community Center , located at 920 Coddington Road ,
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 47 - 1 - 11 . 3 .
2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Board of Appeals is legislatively determined to act as Lead
Agency in coordinated review . The Town of Ithaca Planning Board
is an involved agency in coordinated review .
® 3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on August 7 , 1990 , has
reviewed the proposed site plan , environmental assessment form
and review , and other submissions related to this proposal .
4 . The Town Planning Department has recommended that a negative
determination of environmental significance be made for this
action , subject to certain mitigation measures .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
1 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to
the Zoning Board of Appeals that a negative determination of
environmental significance be made for this action .
2 . That the Planning Board , in making recommendation to the Zoning
Board of Appeals , determine and hereby does determine the
following :
a . There is a need for the proposed use in the proposed
location .
b . The existing and probable future character of the
neighborhood will not be adversely affected .
c . The proposed change is in accordance with a comprehensive
plan of development of the Town .
- Coddington Road Community Center , Inc . - 2 -
920 Coddington Road
Report to the Zoning Board of Appeals
Planning Board , August 7 , 1990
3 . That the Planning Board report and hereby does report to the
Zoning Board of Appeals its recommendation that the request for
Special Approval for the proposed expansion of the Coddington
Road Community Center , located at 920 Coddington Road , Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 47 - 1 - 11 . 3 , be granted by the Zoning Board
of Appeals .
Aye - Grigorov , Kenerson , Baker , Miller , Lesser , Smith .
Nay - None .
' CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY .
r
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mary S . Bryant , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board ,
August 8 , 1990 .
" ACA JOURNAL
TtIE 1Tn
State of New York , Tompkins County , ss . : APPEAL of Steven L. Heslop, questing a Special App-pioval
Appellant, requesting a vari- from the Zoning Boord pf, Ap-
once from the requirements of peals for the proposed {k 300
Gall Sullins being duiy p sworn , deposes and Article V, Section 23, of the plus or minus square foot ex-
Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordi- pansion on on existing'?Doy
says , that she/ he resides in Ithaca . county and state all ) rCsaid and that nonce for the proposed con- Care Center located::at ' 920
struction of a single-family Coddington Road, . fiowii of
home on a proposed building Ithaca Tax Parcel No: °6 47-1 -
she/ he is Clerk lot fronting on Woolf Lane 11 . 3, Residence District R-30:
with a lot width at the street The special 'approval ' s'. re-
of The Ithaca Journal a public newspaper printed and published In line proposed to be 43. 73 feet, quested under Article. V;-, Sec-
whereas 100 feel is required. tion 18, Paragraph '4;"of the
Ithaca aforesaid , and that a notice , of which the annexed is a true The ulot is proposed to Zoning Ordinance.
be subdibdivided from Town of APPEAL of theCoddington
Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-23- 1 - Road Community CenterAnc. ,
copy , was published in said paper 16, with portions of the lot for- Anne Morrisette, Agent - re-
merly known as Tax Parcel questing a variance : .;:from
No. 6-23- 1 - 11 . 111', Residence Town of Ithaca Local Law Jf7-
�� District R-30. 1988, as amended, "Requir-
} APPEAL of Tung-Mow Yon ing Sprinkler Systema to'1ie In-
Appellant, requesting a vari- stolled in Buildings `in the
once from Article IV, Section Town of Ithaca" for the exclu-
14, of the Town of Ithaca Zon- sion of the installation of an
ing Ordinance for the con- ' automatic fire suppression
struction of additional living sprinkler system in a, proposed
space, proposed to be located 1 , 300 plus or minus ;square
on the east side of on existing foot building60dition -;-that
single family residence of 136 serves as a Day ,CarIe Center,
nd that the first publicatioe of said notice was on the Simsbury Drive, Town of Itha- located at 920:.'
Coddington
-- ca Tax Parcel No. 6-72- 1 - Road, Town of Ithdco; Tax Par-
day of C "t- l 9 C 1 . 140, ResidenceDistrict R- 15. cel No. 6-47- 1 - 1,1:3;: Residence
Said addition will be a 12' plus District R-30. t ;
or minus to the east side prop- APPEAL of F. J. Paofongeli; Ap-
erty lot line, whereas 15' is re- Pellont, requesting' a variance
quired. from Article IV, Section ' 11 ,
APPEAL of Lihno Dolph and Paragraph 10, of the -Town of
David Dunbar, Appellants, Ithaca Zoning'Ordianance to
Charles Gutman, Agent, re- construct a single family resi-
questing a variance from Arti- dente with an' ezterior . build-
Subs bed and sworn to before me , this day cle V, Section 18 and 19, of ing height of 37' (whereby 30'
the Zoning Ordinance to per- is required) and an interior
Of
19 mit the keeping of horses for building height of 37' (where.
hireof 1457 Trumansburg by 34' is required), . proposed
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Par- to be located at Lot N5, 6 Win-
- BOARD OF APPEALS cel No. 6-23- 1 -27, Residence ners Circle, Town of Ithaca Tax
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS District R-30. The petitioners Parcel No. :6-58- 1 -8. 5, Resi-
WED. , AUG. . 15, 1990, 7P. M. propose to board horses dente Distict R- 15.
By direction of the Chairman owned by -other individuals, Said Zoning Board of Appeals
of the Zoning Board of Ap- with said horses to be ridden will at said time, 7:00 P. M. ,
peals NOTICE .IS HEREBY by their owners, and the ap- and said place, hear. all . per-
GIVEN that Public Hearings pellants believe this is a per- sons in support of s6ch" m6tters
will be held by the Zoning mitred use by the Zoning Ordi- or objections thereto. Persons
Board of Appeals of the Town n a n c e . As such , the may appear by agent . or in
of Ithaca on Wednesday, Au- petitioners are first seeking an person.
gust 15, 1990, in the Town interpretation by the Zoning Andrew S. Frost
Holl , 126 E. Seneca St. (FIRST Board of Appeals before said Building inspector/
Notary P floor; REAR entrance, WEST variance request. Zoning Enforcement Officer
Side ), Ithaca, ' N. Y. , - COM- APPEAL of the Coddington Town of Ithaca
MENCING AT 7:00 P. M. , on Road Community Center Inc. , 273- 1747
the following matters. Anne Morrisette , Agent, re- August 10, 1990
Cer:imission expires jkmy 31 , 1 �
� � s