Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1994-02-09 FINAL TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WEDNESDAY , FEBRUARY 9 , 1994 7 : 0'0 P . M . AGENDA Decision - Gary and Donna Hofstead Duffy , Appellants , requesting an interpretation as to the application of Article V . Section 19 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to the operation of the Little Brook Farms Horse Training Facility at 340 Warren Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68 - 1 - 2 , Residence District R- 30 .' Should an interpretation be made that finds the operation in violation of said Ordinance , the Appellants then request a variance from Article V . Section 19 , Paragraph 6 , to be permitted to conduct a riding academy and a facility to board and train horses . Appeal of Steven Heslop , Appellant , requesting a modification of a Special Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on November 18 , 1992 , under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the construction of two 12 foot x 24 foot accessory buildings on a non- conforming parcel of land located at 175 Woolf Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 23- 1 - 16 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it has a lot width at the street line of 43 feet , whereas a 60 foot width is required . Said Board previously approved one 24 foot x 36 foot accessory building . Appeal of Judith Maclntire , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the operation of a " bed and breakfast " facility for up to four boarders or lodgers at an existing single - family residence , located at 217 Eastern Heights Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 57 - 1 -- 8 . 126 , Residence District R- 15 , Said Ordinance permits only one boarder in a single - family residence . The Board granted a three year variance to the Appellant on December 12 , 1990 for said bed and breakfast . Appeal of the Waldorf School of the Finger Lakes , Appellant , Maureen McKenna , Agent , requesting a three year extension of the time limitation authorized by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on June 12 , 1991 , under Article V , Section 18 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the use of a temporary portable classroom ( a 12 foot x 60 foot mobile home ) at 855 Five Mile Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 31 - 2 - 15 , Residence District R- 30 . The current authorization expires on August 31 , 1994 . Appeal of Jonathan Albanese , Appellant , Thomas O ' Reilly , Di -Tech Corporation , Agent requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single - family home with a building height of 36 ± feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) , at 1111 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 19 - 1 - 2 , Residence District R- 15 . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer 273- 1783 FNA TOWN OF ITHACA FILED ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ITHACA WEDNESDAY , FEBRUARY 9 , 1994 G Date ClerkDml- TLZsS� • The following appeals were heard by the Board on February 9 ; 1994 : Decision - Gary and Donna Hof stead Duffy , Appellants , requesting an interpretation as to the application of Article V , Section 19 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to the operation of the Little Brook Farms Horse Training Facility at 340 Warren Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68 - 1 - 2 , Residence District R- 30 . Should an interpretation be made that finds the operation in violation of said Ordinance , the Appellants then request a variance from Article V , Section 19 , Paragraph 6 , to be permitted to conduct a riding academy and a facility to board and train horses . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Appeal of Steven Heslop , Appellant , requesting a modification of a Special Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on November 18 , 1992 , under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the construction of two 12 foot x 24 foot accessory buildings on a non- conforming parcel of land located at 175 Woolf Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 23 - 1 - 16 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it has a lot width at the street line of 43 feet , whereas 'a 60 foot width is required . Said Board previously approved one 24 foot x 36 foot accessory building . GRANTED . Appeal of Judith MacIntire , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements • of Article IV , Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the operation of a " bed and breakfast " facility for up to four boarders or lodgers at an existing single - family residence , located at 217 Eastern Heights Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 -8 . 126 , Residence District R- 15 . Said Ordinance permits only one boarder in a single - family residence . The Board granted a three year variance to the Appellant on December 12 , 1990 for said bed and breakfast . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Appeal of the Waldorf School of the Finger Lakes , Appellant , Maureen McKenna , Agent , requesting a three year extension of the time limitation authorized by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on June 12 , 1991 , under Article V . Section 18 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning . Ordinance , for the use of a temporary portable classroom ( a 12 foot x 60 foot mobile home ) at 855 Five Mile Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 31 - 2 - 15 , Residence District R- 30 . The current authorization expires on August 31 , 1994 . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Appeal of Jonathan Albanese , Appellant , Thomas O ' Reilly , Di -Tech Corporation , Agent requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single - family home with a building height of 36 + feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) , at 1111 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 19- 1 - 2 , Residence District R- 15 . • GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . FILED 1 TOWN OF ITHACA Date 4 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CEerkD d �� %� FEBRUARY 9 , 1994 PRESENT : Vice -Chairman Robert J . Hines , Harry Ellsworth , Edward King , Pete Scala , Town Attorney John C . Barney , Zoning Enforcement Officer / Building Inspector Andrew Frost , ABSENT : Chairman Edward Austen , OTHERS : Steve Heslop , Judith MacIntire , Shannon Albanese , Tom O ' Reilly , Jonathan Albanese , Maureen McKenna , Mariette Geldenhuys . Vice -Chairman Hines called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 P . M . The first matter before the Board is a decision regarding the Duffys ' request for a variance . Decision - Gary and Donna Hofstead Duffy, Appellants , requesting an interpretation as to the application of Article V, Section 19 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to the operation of the Little Brook Farms Horse Training Facility at 340 Warren Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68- 1- 2 , Residence District R-30 . Should an interpretation be made that finds the operation in violation of said Ordinance , the Appellants then request a variance from Article V . Section 19 , Paragraph 6 , to be permitted to conduct a riding academy and a facility to board and train horses . Vice -Chairman Hines read the letter dated January 31 , 1994 from James A . Baker , Mr . King distributed copies of his proposed findings and conditions to the Board , Mrs . Duffy and Ms . Geldenhuys , Vice -Chairman Hines , Mrs . Duffy and Mr . Scala discussed items 1 , 2 and 3 of Mr . Baker ' s letter regarding the number of horses on the premises , the number of weekly lessons , and the weekly number of hours attributed to paid staff . Attorney Barney said that the environmental assessment form was based on slightly different figures . Attorney Barney suggested that the numbers regarding the amount of horses on the premises reflect in the motion that there is a distinction between the number of horses that can be boarded and the number that would be on the premises during the time of peak periods , as when there would be a horse show in the area . Mr . King questioned the number " 50 " for the number of lessons . The Board listened to Ms . Geldenhuys and Mrs . Duffy , but Vice -Chairman Hines indicated that the Board wants to maintain the features of the business and not grant the variance for an expansion of the business . After a general discussion , Mrs . Duffy said that no more than 25 lessons per week ( as the peak number , not the average ) is a responsible figure . Mr . Scala reminded Mrs . Duffy and the Board that the Duffys are in the business of training horses , not giving lessons . Mrs . Duffy clarified the number of people working for them , stating that it would be hard to cut down on the number of people and hours . Mrs . Duffy said that the average would have to be maintained at 100 hours , with the 150 hours coming into play when more horses are on the premises , as would be the occasion at the time of the Elmira Horse Show . Town of Ithaca 2 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • Vice -Chairman Hines reviewed the opinion of the Board that ( 1 ) the peak number of horses to be boarded , at any given time , would be 15 , ( 2 ) the peak number of horses allowed on the premises , at any given time , would be 20 , ( 3 ) the peak number of lessons given per week would be 25 , ( 4 ) that the average number of hours paid staff would work in a given week would be 100 hours , and ( 5 ) that the peak number of hours paid staff would work in a given week would be 150 hours . Mr . King said that these figures should be specifically reflected in the January 12 , 1994 motion , paragraph 6 . Vice -Chairman Hines opened the public hearing . With no one present to speak , Vice- Chairman Hines closed the public hearing . MOTION By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board grant to the Appellants , Gary and Donna Duffy , a limited variance for the operation of their show horse training facility on 340 Warren Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 68- 1 - 2 , as such operations were described in the testimony , the application , and the information submitted , with the following findings and conditions : 1 ) Although called a " farm " , this 1 . 67 acre parcel falls short of the 3 acres required under our Zoning Ordinance definition in portion of the former Earl Sharp farm - - most or all of which is now owned by the Country Club of Ithaca and used as a golf course . The Duffys acquired this parcel in 1986 per deeds recorded in Liber 622 of Deeds at pages 584 and 588 . • 2 ) The property is in an R30 Zone , in which a farm is a permitted use under Section 18 , Paragraph 4 subject to certain ordinance restrictions including limitations on the location of buildings housing animals , and the disposition of manure ; and Section 19 , Paragraph 6 regarding permitted accessory uses forbids ( among other things ) " the keeping of horses for hire " . 3 ) In 1988 , the Duffys applied for a variance from the requirements of Section 19 , Paragraph 6 and Section 20 [ re accessory buildings ] to construct an indoor riding academy , but they did not follow through on the application - - the matter having been adjourned with a requirement that they prepare and submit a long environmental assessment form . Such form was never submitted , and the application was allowed to die . 4 ) In 1991 , the Duffys applied for a Building Permit to allow connection of the two existing horse barns ; with such permit being issued to them on April 17 , 1991 , and improvements made at a cost of $ 50 , 000 . In 1992 the bathroom which the applicants had also installed in the barn could not be used until a Building Permit for that had been applied for , and a new Certificate of Occupancy issued approving it . A trailer was also purchased at the time and other improvements made to the property , including construction of a riding ring , but these did not require a Building Permit and were not submitted for consideration by Town Officials . 5 ) The granting of the initial ( 1991 ) building permit did not involve passing upon • or approving any particular use of the buildings or land . Town of Ithaca 3 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 6 ) According to his current application , Gary C . Duffy is a professional , nationally renowned horse trainer , and generally keeps about 15 horses ( owned by him or others ) on this property to train and / or sell on commission . Merely incidental to the horse training operation , the appellants provide show horse equestrienne riding skills lessons on a small scale , having but 5 students at the time of the application . They indicated that they would prefer to cease giving riding lessons on the property rather than lose the use of the property for the training of horses . Appellants insist that their " riding lesson " operations are not of the same nature as those given at a " riding academy " . 7 ) No horse shows or other events drawing large groups of people have ever been held on the property by the appellants , and they do not intend to do so in the future . 8 ) The available evidence indicates that the appellants have been meticulous in keeping the property and buildings clean , and are regularly and properly disposing of all manure at appropriate sites away from the premises . 9 ) That the appellant believed in constructing the improvements , he was engaging in a completely lawful activity . A hardship obviously had ensued . It was not self- imposed . 10 ) That with the expenditures that he has made , the owner now finds himself with a rather unique facility for which no reasonable economic use can be made except for the purposes it is presently put to and for which approval is • sought . 11 ) That this particular facility is an economic activity which is not an obtrusive element in the neighborhood . It has an element of charm and creates a benefit of living in the community . It has no negative aspects in that respect . 12 ) That the use of the property is to be limited to the uses and the Board imposes the following restrictions : a ) That there will be no more than 15 horses boarded on the premises at any given time . b ) That there will be no more than 20 horses on the premises at any given time . c ) That there will be no more than 25 lessons given each week . d ) That the paid staff averages 100 hours per week , with no more than 150 hours per ,reek . e ) That there will be no signs on the property to advertise or announce the existence of the riding school , stables , or any other aspect of the opera- tion . 13 ) That the use be permitted to continue but only on the condition that the appel - lant obtain a written opinion from a qualified governmental agency as to the need and character of any remedial plantings , structures , facilities or programs to ameliorate potential pollution conditions which are present or may arise as a result of the operation . Town of Ithaca 4 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • 14 ) That such program be implemented and that the nature of the program or facilities be furnished to the Building Commissioner for this Board ' s record . 15 ) That the variance shall be limited in time to a period of 7 years from the date hereof . However , in the event that the appellant does not present to this Board or file with the Building Commissioner a long environmental assessment form six months from this date , that the variance will terminate at the end of that period . 16 ) That this should be operated as a show horse facility . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - King , Ellsworth , Scala , Hines . NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . The second appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Appeal of Steven Heslop , Appellant , requesting a modification of a Special Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on November 18 , 1992 , under Article %II , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the construction of two 12 foot x 24 foot accessory buildings on a non- conforming parcel of land located at 175 Woolf Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel • No . 23- 1 - 16 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non-conforming because it has a lot width at the street line of 43 feet , whereas a 60 foot width is required . Said Board previously approved one 24 foot x 36 foot accessory building . Vice -Chairman Hines , Mr . Frost and Mr . Heslop addressed the modification of the special approval granted to Mr . Heslop by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on November 18 ,, 1992 . Due to misunderstandings , the Board was under the assumption that there would be one building , and Mr . Heslop was under the assumption there would be two buildings . Vice -Chairman Hines opened the public hearing . With no comments from the public , Vice -Chairman Hines closed the public hearing . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Mr . Frost informed the Board that Planner I , Louise Raimando utilized the 1992 environmental assessment form ( eaf ) because there were no changes . Vice - Chairman Hines read part III - staff recommendation of the 1992 eaf and stated that Mrs . Raimando agreed with the previous findings . There was no discussion on the matter . MOTION By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . • RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the property at 175 Woolf Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 23- 1 - 16 . 2 . Town of Ithaca 5 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - King , Scala , Ellsworth , Hines . . NAYS - None . The motion for a negative declaration carried unanimously . MOTION By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board grant the Appellant , Steven Heslop a modification of a special approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on November 18 , 1992 , under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , permitting the construction of two 12 foot x 24 foot accessory buildings on a non- conforming parcel of land located at 175 Woolf Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 23- 1 - 16 . 2 , with the following findings : 1 ) That the deviation does not cause a change in the neighborhood . 2 ) That the remote neighbors would not be effected . 3 ) That the proposal complies with Section 77 , Paragraph 7 , Subparagraphs a- f . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : • AYES - King , Ellsworth , Scala , Hines . NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . The third appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Appeal of Judith MacIntire , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the operation of a "bed and breakfast" facility for up to four boarders or lodgers at an existing single- family residence , located at 217 Eastern Heights Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57- 1-8 . 126 , Residence District R- 15 . Said Ordinance permits only one boarder in a single- family residence . The Board granted a three year variance to the Appellant on December 12 , 1990 for said bed and breakfast . Vice - Chairman Hines invited Ms . MacIntire to discuss the bed and breakfast . Ms . MacIntire told the Board that there were peak times for her business , that being from May through October . She added that she was pleased that the neighbors were supportive of her efforts and the manner in which she maintains the business . Mr . Frost informed the Board that the positive letters from the neighbors were attached . Vice -Chairman Hines opened the public hearing . With no comments from the public , Vice -Chairman Hines closed the public hearing . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Vice -Chairman Hines read part III of the environmental assessment form prepared by Planner I . Louise Raimando . Town of Ithaca 6 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative determination of environmental significance based on the assessment by Planner I , Louis Raimondo , in regard to the MacIntire property on 217 Eastern Heights Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 -8 . 126 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Hines . NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . Vice-Chairman Hines asked how many years the applicant was asking for . Ms . MacIntire said three years , as she had before . Mr . King said he would entertain a use for a longer period of time , such as five years . Attorney Barney asked how long she plans to operate it . Ms . MacIntire said as long as she is able . Mr . King said when they condition it for a number of years , could they make it a shorter term if the applicant no longer owns the property . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Edward King . • RESOLVED , that the Board grant the use variance to Judith MacIntire for the property at 217 Eastern Heights Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 8 . 126 , to continue the operation of a bed and breakfast for up to four boarders or lodgers at the existing single family residence for a period of five years , with the following findings and conditions : 1 . That if the variance were not granted it would be an unnecessary hardship on the applicant who owns and occupies this residence with 4 bedrooms as a single - family home . 2 . That the economic viability of maintaining the house is in jeopardy without the granting of the variance , the applicant having suffered the loss of one addi - tional income which was helping to maintain the property . 3 . That no more than four guests shall be accommodated at any one time . 4 . That there shall be no regular boarders on the property and no guest shall be accommodated more than ten consecutive days . 5 . That there shall be no outside sign on the premises . 6 . That the premises will not be enlarged to accommodate more people . 7 . That there shall be adequate off - street parking provided for guests . • 8 . That the building shall be inspected by Zoning Officer Frost to insure that the building code requirements have been met . Town of Ithaca 7 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • 9 . That the variance shall be limited to a period of five years , at which time it would automatically expire , Ms . MacIntire to have the opportunity to request a continuance of the variance any time after two years . 10 . That the premises be operated as a traditional bed and breakfast facility , not as a boarding house . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Hines . NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . The fourth appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Appeal of the Waldorf School of the Finger Lakes , Appellant , Maureen McKenna , Agent , requesting a three year extension of the time limitation authorized by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on June 12 , 1991 , under Article V . Section 18 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the use of a temporary portable classroom ( a 12 foot x 60 foot mobile home ) at 855 Five Mile Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 31 -2 - 15 , Residence District R- 30 . The current authorization expires on August 31 , 1994 . Vice-Chairman Hines opened the public hearing . With no comments from the public , • Vice -Chairman Hines closed the public hearing . Vice -Chairman Hines said he wanted to hear from Appellant , Maureen McKenna as to why she was before the Board again , for essentially the third time , to ask for an extension . Ms . McKenna , Director of Administration and Development , said there are several changes which have occurred since she last came before the Board with the appeal . 1 ) The Waldorf School has a very able search committee as a result of the school ' s long range planning process . She said the group is a very talented , well - educated group of people who are able to address the problem ( which is something the school was not always able to claim in the past ) . 2 ) The Waldorf School is now two years into its long- range planning process and has identified a lot of steps the school needs to take , beginning with a capital campaign and other things related to handling the school ' s site problem . Ms . McKenna said the site challenge has always been with the school since its inception because the school is a non- profit school with a relatively small enrollment and a small fund- raising base . Therefore , Ms . McKenna continued , finances are always a bit of a problem for the school . 3 ) The teachers are a little less willing to deal with the site constraints , as well as , the financial constraints because the school cannot pay the teachers as well as public school teachers . The school is always trying to figure out the best way to use its very limited resources . The entire site ( the main building and the temporary classroom/mobile home ) was always seen as a • temporary site . The building does not really solve all of the program needs and constrains the program to some extent . 4 ) The parent body is a little bit better able to meet the school ' s tuition demands , as well as , to effectively deal with the level of challenges the school now faces . Town of Ithaca 8 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • 5 ) The Waldorf School is now a bit more firmly established in the community , so the school feels that any capital campaign will now be met with better reception than it would have been met with a couple of years ago . 6 ) The Waldorf School now holds the mortgage on that property which was not the case a few years ago . The school had a complicated deal with a trust and had to deal with several other things . The school always tried to find creative ways to address its financial challenges . 7 ) The Waldorf School is now in a better position to obtain grants for anything that it does to its site . Ms . McKenna , who has been with the Waldorf School for four years , wanted to talk more about the site committee because this has been a problem for the school for twelve years . She said the Waldorf School worked really hard in establishing several site committees that just could not deal with the challenges the school faced . This site committee has met almost every week since November and has really become very well addressed with the challenges the school is facing . She said the site committee came up with some possibilities , including the one she passed around for the Board to see . Ms . McKenna said she has a lot of confidence in the site committee . She said she has been with the school for a long time , stating that the education is wonderful , and the teachers are very , very dedicated , but are not paid very well . She continued that the school has a lot of parents who are not wealthy , despite the fact the school is non- profit , we charge a tuition . The parents have made choices because they believe in the education and the philosophy behind it . She said the group of people is not a wealthy one . Vice - Chairman Hines said the Board , because of the previous applications , is aware of the background . Vice - Chairman Hines addressed Mr . Frost relative to the conditions about inspecting the building . Mr . Frost said the building is inspected on an annual basis , which provides , essentially fire safety and an overview of the buildings . Mr . Frost said although he has not been in the trailer himself in the last year or so , his current assistant inspected the building two or three months ago . Mr . Frost said he would not mind again , as was conditioned in the last meeting , to have a licensed architect or engineer certify the building in regard to structural safety . Mr . Frost said the minutes from 1989 state that there be an inspection by a New York State licensed architect that would occur by October 12 , 1992 or sooner as to the fire safety of the mobile home classroom . He said he was not looking for the fire safety , but it would be nice to have someone certify the structural safety . Mr . Ellsworth wanted to know , that since this is a temporary structure and has been going on for some time , how is the building holding up in its inspection . Mr . Frost said he has not been in the mobile home himself for over a year , but the fire safety inspection did not indicate anything was wrong . Vice -Chairman Hines said that even though this is a temporary structure , it is not a flimsy thing . Mr . Frost said that mobile homes are not uncommon in a lot of rural school districts , and Cornell has even had some type of mobile home - type facilities which have been there , in some cases , for 5 or 10 years . Mr . Hines said aesthetically speaking , the building is hard to see . Mr . Ellsworth clarified where the building was located , and Ms . McKenna said it is the old Inlet Valley School where Routes 13 and 13A meet . is Mr . King wanted to know if there were any structural changes made to the facility , and Ms . McKenna said there was not . She continued that the Waldorf School wanted to also consider it as temporary because the school has been trying to get rid of it for Town of Ithaca 9 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • a long time . Ms . McKenna said that it is only now with the site committee that the school is looking at other options . She continued that the site committee has an architect , two planners and a developer- - a very qualified group of people who are helping to address the problem . Vice -Chairman Hines wanted to know how many children occupy the building , and Ms . McKenna said there is presently an eighth grade ( 9 students ) in there all the time and the other half is used as overflow space for the seventh grade ( 11 students ) . She said it is not constantly occupied but it is variously used throughout the day . Mr . Frost asked if it was no longer used as a music room . Ms . McKenna said it is used for music , overflow space , remedial math and a few other things . Mr . Frost said he is particularly concerned that the building is unsafe structurally because it is on a foundation for a mobile home which tends not to be very permanent . He said that he feels that looking at that every three years with a licensed architect or engineer would seem appropriate . Ms . McKenna said a lot of changes were made to the structure to make it suitable for the Waldorf School ' s use in the first place . Vice - Chairman Hines asked how long the Waldorf School is asking for the variance , and Ms . McKenna said they wanted it for another three years . Mr . Ellsworth said the Waldorf School does not need it after 1996 , and he said he was curious as to why the Waldorf School wanted a three year extension . Ms . McKenna said because she had been before the Board so many times that she hopes that things can move along and the Waldorf School can find the financial resources and capital campaign which is an on- going program . Vice -Chairman asked what she meant by another site , Ms . McKenna said there are four • things the Waldorf School is looking at currently . Ms . McKenna said a temporary solution could be done because there is an immediate need for September . She said a phased- in approach which would be building some kind of structure near the facility and then , eventually , building additional areas to replace the reasons the Waldorf School uses the trailer and to also solve the other problems the Waldorf School has with its program . Ms . McKenna said the Waldorf School could immediately expand on the site and ask the teachers to deal with what is now there , utilizing the trailer . She said that a really nice facility which is very aesthetically pleasing and works with the Waldorf School ' s current building is what the Waldorf School would like to do . Another option , according to Ms . McKenna , is to find a great new site that totally works with the Waldorf School ' s program and is wonderfully acceptable , would probably run $ 750 , 000 . 00 . Ms . McKenna said there are 2 kindergarten classes and grades 1 through 8 . She added that it is not a small school and the program is very rich in the demands . She said it is not just teaching in classrooms , that the Waldorf School has woodworking , and a movement class . Mr . Ellsworth asked the total enrollment , and Ms . McKenna said there are presently 96 children . When the comment was made that there were 20 of the children in the trailer , Ms . McKenna said there were 9 students in there all the time , and she explained how the second end of the trailer is used . Mr . Frost asked if the school still has the site in the City of Ithaca on Hudson Street , and Ms . McKenna indicated that the Waldorf School still owns it . Ms . McKenna said there are two kindergartens on South Hill , Mr . Ellsworth asked for the maximum number that is in the trailer at any one time . Ms . McKenna said probably 11 and 9 , 20 • children . Mr . King reiterated that there would be 20 students plus instructors in the trailer . Ms . McKenna said that was not really the case because at times there would be a music class in there and that would involve 1 teacher and 1 student . Ms . McKenna said that the last time she was before the Board , there was one full classroom and the other half was either a faculty lounge or overflow space or music , stating that it varies throughout the year . Town of Ithaca 10 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • Vice -Chairman Hines said he has no problem with this except for the safety aspect , especially if Mr . Frost can insure him that it could be assured . _ Mr . Frost said that from the fire safety standpoint , ( presuming that the smoke detectors still work and some of the repairs to the stairs have occurred ) he has no particular problem with it . Mr . Frost said that the long term use on the foundation that is intended for a mobile home deserves review every so often . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Vice -Chairman Hines read part III of the environmental assessment form , with the previous recommendations by the Town planning staff . MOTION By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , the Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance for the proposed continuation of the use of the trailer as a classroom facility based upon the review by Planner I , Louise Raimando and the facts stated in the previous environmental assessment in July , 1991 comparing that there has been no significant change in those facts . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - King , Scala , Ellsworth , Hines . NAYS - None . • The motion carried unanimously . Mr . Ellsworth wanted to know if the building is heated sufficiently , and Ms . McKenna said it was actually doing fine and that it is electric heat . Ms . McKenna said it is not really toasty warm but there are two different zones and it is okay because the one room can be turned off if it is not in use . Mr . Frost stated that he wanted to let the Board know that he would not be comfortable in assuring the Board of the building ' s safety . Vice - Chairman Hines said he wanted to know if there was a mechanism by which the building can be known if it is safe . Mr . Frost said that the annual fire safety inspection is done by the town ' s office . He said the last one was done over the summer . Vice -Chairman Hines said that he wanted a mechanism in place , and Mr . Ellsworth said that a structural assessment is also wanted . Mr . Frost said that he did want that type of an assessment and then , within the next 30 days , he would perform another inspection . When asked if there was an architect in the Waldorf School ' s parent group , Ms . McKenna said there were a couple of architects . Mr . Frost said that he would like to meet with an architect on site and fill out a written report with the architect after such a meeting . Vice -Chairman Hines told Ms . McKenna that she should report back to her group that this is going on ten years and it is a long time to be granting extensions . She said she understands that and that the Waldorf School would also like to get rid of it . Mr . King asked what would be a convenient date for the expiration of the permit which will coincide with the school year . Ms . McKenna said the school usually ends by June 15 and • the space is not utilized at all during the summer . Discussion followed regarding dates . MOTION Town of Ithaca 11 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board extend the special approval to the Waldorf School of the Finger Lakes , for the use of the mobile home for two temporary classrooms , as it has been used in the past , this being under Article V , Section 18 , Paragraph 3 , Subparagraph ( b ) of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , the continuation to be through August 31 , 1997 , upon the following conditions : 1 ) That there be no more than 20 students plus faculty in the building at any one time . 2 ) That the Waldorf School have the building inspected by a New York State licensed architect or engineer within the next 30 days upon prior arrangement with the Town Zoning Officer , Mr . Frost , so that Mr . Frost can attend the inspection with the architect or engineer . 3 ) That such professional will give a written report to the Town as to the structural safety of the building . 4 ) That such report indicate that the building is in safe condition for the purpose for which it is being used and that the report be satisfactory in all respects to the Town Zoning Officer . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - King , Ellsworth , Scala , Hines . • NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . The fifth appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Appeal of Jonathan Albanese , Appellant , Thomas O ' Reilly, Di-Tech Corporation , Agent requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section il , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single- family home with a building height of 36 ± feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) , at 1111 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 19- 1-2 , Residence District R- 15 . Vice -Chairman Hines said the height variance was due to the chimney . Mr . Tom O ' Reilly stated he was from Di - Tech Corporation , Mr . Albanese ' s builder . Depending on how you take the elevation , which he has included in the measurement , it is approximately 30 feet to the ridge that is very close to the chimney chase . With the chimney chase and given how the final grade was , that ' s going to be 35 feet or 36 feet . Vice -Chairman Hines said the excess elevation is the chimney or the structure that surrounds it . Mr . O ' Reilly said it is a wood chase chimney . Vice -Chairman Hines asked how these things happen- - they don ' t design houses with roofs of 30 feet . Mr . Albanese said when he picked out the house , he measured from the ground to the roof and found they we were well within the 30 feet and then he realized after talking to his contractor that the chimney chase is included . • Mr . O ' Reilly said , as Andy would agree , at least in the way it is shown in the elevation , it portrays itself as being 4 or 5 feet in an eighth inch scale over the peak , which is well beyond what code is , code is only 2 feet over the peak . Its shown Town of Ithaca 12 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 out of proportion or at least out of the realm of what the code would allow us to build . Mr . Frost said he might have missed what Mr . O ' Reilly was discussing in the beginning . The top of the chimney wouldn ' t count towards the height measurement . Vice -Chairman Hines said it is just the enclosure . Mr . Frost said to the ridge of the roof . Vice -Chairman Hines said when he read the application it seemed as if the problem arose because the chimney went up so high . Mr . O ' Reilly said it was his fault because that was how he illustrated the problem . He was concerned about the chimney , but it is the house itself , depending on the final grade that is established . The house itself is 30 feet or 31 feet . It is a sloping lot to accommodate the walk out in the underneath garage and depends on how that ' s finished , it came out to be very close . Mr . Frost said a number of things need to be clarified on the original application that was mailed to the Board members . There is a site plan as a copy of a subdivision map that was from the Town Planning Board back in 1992 or 1993 . There should be another map , a revised map , because this land was never subdivided . A deed was never filed with the Tompkins County Clerk and since then Mr . Albanese is not looking to subdivide the land and actually the land you are looking at would be parcel A and B . He may have some future plans to subdivide this with a slightly different configuration . Vice -Chairman Hines said the construction is on the land that is to be retained . Mr . Frost said there is about a 25 foot deviation in the northerly direction where on the site plan it shows a proposed building envelope . This building may in fact be 25 feet in a northerly direction . Mr . Frost said the map that is dated June 9 , 1993 is the actual site plan . • Vice- Chairman Hines said Mr . Albanese owns lot A and B and Mr . Albanese said he owns the whole thing . Mr . Albanese explained that he went before the Planning Board and that he got the subdivision approval but never completed it and he has no intentions to do so now . He showed the Board where lots A and B are on the June 9 , 1993 map and that he doesn ' t want to subdivide yet because when someone is interested in buying the lot , they may want the lot in a different dimension than what he has subdivided . Mr . Ellsworth asked if there is any problem with the corporation line being on the corner of the building . Mr . Albanese said it is just the division line between Cayuga Heights and the Town of Ithaca . Attorney Barney said they would need to get a building permit from two different municipalities . Mr . O ' Reilly said it is not in both of them , this envelope is larger than the home . Mr . Albanese said they are specifically keeping it within the Town of Ithaca . Mr . Ellsworth asked Mr . Frost if there was a setback problem on that corner . Attorney Barney said they would have to have 30 feet , but he imagined they could include the land inside the village in the 30 feet . He said it was confusing , we ' ve got one in the city where the building straddles the line , it is a nightmare for the administration of the building code . He said our ordinance talks in terms of the depth of the lot , the back yard of the lot and the lot seems to him to include whatever is there , whether it is in the Town of Ithaca or across the municipal line . Vice -Chairman Hines opened the public hearing . With no one present to speak , Vice - Chairman Hines closed the public hearing . • Vice -Chairman Hines wanted to clarify that the application is for a maximum of 32 feet , plus the chimney . Mr . Frost asked about the left elevation , what direction is that facing , and Mr . O ' Reilly said south . Mr . Albanese said the garage doors are facing the southeast . The decks are facing the marina . Town of Ithaca 13 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Vice -Chairman Hines read from the environmental assessment form . Mr . Albanese wanted to make a statement for the record as to the environmental assessment report . He said the report did treat this as if this was being built in accordance with the subdivision , as approved in 1992 , and according to those plans , but that is in error since the subdivision is no longer part of the plan . Attorney Barney asked about the elevation and Mr . Albanese said the driveway would come up and around the backside of the house and come in from the southeast side . Vice -Chairman Hines asked what plants Mr . Wesley found to be avoided . Mr . Albanese said hackberry , scarlet oak , and a lopseed ( which Mr . Albanese hasn ' t found ) . He said it also states in the report that the subdivision approval specified a footprint to avoid the plants , which wasn ' t true . The footprint was just chosen arbitrarily . Floyd Forman told Mr . Albanese one day just to have his surveyor draw a proposed building location , it had nothing to do with the location of plants . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that this Board make a negative determination of environmental significance for the property at 1111 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 19 - 1 - 2 , as recommended by Louis Raimando on February 4 , 1994 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , Hines , King . NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . Vice -Chairman Hines said the application before the board is to permit the construction of a residence which would exceed the roof height limitation of the Zoning Ordinance by approximately 2 feet , rather than 5 or 6 feet , as stated in the application . Mr . Albanese said his house will be located about 600 yards past the little marina on the right hand side where there is windsurfing . Vice -Chairman Hines asked Mr . Albanese if he acquired title from the Liebermans and Mr . Albanese said no . Mr . Albanese said they own to the south which is now being marketed . He said this came from the Jacobs who were the same people who owned all the Tyler Road property . They took the top half , cut that off , sold it and subdivided it and this is the bottom half which they held onto . Vice - Chairman Hines said his point is that this property is not easy to see from the east . Mr . Albanese said you wouldn ' t see it at all . You could see it from the lake or from west hill . Vice -Chairman Hines said it would be silhouetted against the hillside . Mr . Frost said the Planning Department , when they did the environmental assessment , visited the site and had some concerns about the steep slope and the subdivision approval called for a sedimentation and erosion plan to be approved by the Town • Engineer , so that was reiterated in the environmental assessment form because they felt it was covered in the subdivision . Vice -Chairman Hines said it was covered in the environmental assessment form . Town of Ithaca 14 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • Attorney Barney said what the Planning Board did was make a condition of the subdivision that before any building permit was granted , a sedimentation and erosion control plan for the parcel that was involved , the 1 . 94 acre parcel , be provided to the engineer . Mr . Albanese said that was requested because that parcel is very close to the hillside and the location would have been right next to the hillside , whereas what we are doing now is further north 30 or 40 feet back which is in more of a flat plain . Attorney Barney wanted to know if it would be a problem with providing a plan to Dan . Mr . Albanese asked if they wanted an engineer ' s drawing . Mr . O ' Reilly asked if they were asking for a topographical . He said that would be financially unreasonable . He wondered if Dan would consider a field visit out there and they could discuss it . As it is written there , in respect to the subdivision , it is a great concern , but since it ' s just going to be a single family home up there and the site has moved a little bit north and now it ' s more on a plateau , it ' s not adjunct to this very steep slope which goes down to an existing structure . All of that has changed considerably , and he thought if Dan was to go on site to take a look at the property , Dan would feel a little bit better . Mr . Frost said he wasn ' t sure Dan would ultimately want a topo but there was a concern . Attorney Barney said it is an ineffective condition because there is no subdivision approval being granted . The question is whether that condition or one similar to it ought to be considered by this Board . Maybe a condition that simply says the plans for sedimentation and erosion control be satisfactory to the Town Engineer . Mr . King said he had heard several different figures here on moving the building northerly . Mr . O ' Reilly said the 25 , 30 or 40 feet in this case , in respect to where • we are talking about , moves it considerably away from the slope . It looks like it is in the scale of 25 to 35 feet , it is hard to say because it is not to scale and it is a blown up copy . Mr . O ' Reilly said 25 to 35 feet south puts you on the edge of a ravine or a more pronounced steep slope . He said 25 to 30 feet north puts you almost on a plateau . Where over maybe 70 or 80 feet where the house is going to sit , the elevation of the land only drops 8 feet , back that 30 feet where the house envelope was before , the elevation at 70 feet might drop as much as 30 feet , so the pitch of the land is considerably changed by moving it north . Mr . King asked would it be such an imposition to present a topographic map , US geological , with an outline of your building plotted on it . Attorney Barney said he would leave it up to the discretion of Dan Walker . It may be a walk- through Dan is perfectly content with , with him saying would you stick some bales of hay here and a couple of silt fences here , that ' s all he needs . Mr . Albanese said he had talked to a surveyor about getting a topo one time when he was going through his subdivision hearing , and he was talking in the neighborhood of $ 3 , 000 . 00 . Attorney Barney suggested as a condition that before the building permit be issued , the Town Engineer be satisfied with respect to the plans protecting the sedimentation and erosion control . Mr . Frost said part of the reason he is bring this up is that we were under the impression , until today , that the building was being built on a subdivided piece of land through the Town Planning Board . Today we found out that was not occurring , so Louis Raimando who did the eaf , did her assessment based on several considerations that have changed slightly . • MOTION By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . Town of Ithaca 15 Zoning Board of Appeals February 9 , 1994 • RESOLVED , that the Board grant the applicant , Jonathan Albanese , a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 1 , Paragraph 6 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance as to the height of a house to be constructed on the property at 1111 East Shore Drive , Town , of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 19 - 1 - 2 , being inclusive of the entire property parcels A and B as shown on the map submitted , with the following findings and conditions : 1 ) The height variance is to be 32 feet to the ridge of the roof at the highest point . 2 ) This variance is being granted upon the understanding that the building will be located as indicated on the map dated April 10 , 1992 . 3 ) To revise , the last and fourth time , the survey map of T . G . Miller P . C . dated January 1 , 1994 , it being understood that this site is on a plateau and not near the steeply sloping section of the previous proposal . 4 ) The Town Engineer view the property with the applicant or agent and that he be satisfied with the plans which will be presented for sedimentation and erosion control if he deems such specific plans necessary . 5 ) The Town Engineer favorably report the matter to the Zoning Officer before a building permit is issued . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : • AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Hines . NAYS - None . The motion carried unanimously . With no further business , Vice -Chairman Hines adjourned the meeting at 8 : 48 P . M . GA &"A(W)P, t I&AO Roberta H . Komaromi Recording Secretary Ro ert nes , Vice -Chairman FINAL TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY , FEBRUARY 9 , 1994 7 : 00 P . N . By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday , February 9 , 1994 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , ( FIRST Floor , REAR Entrance , WEST Side ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P . M . , on the following matters : Appeal of Steven Heslop , Appellant , requesting a modification of a Special Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on November 18 , 1992 , under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the construction of two 12 foot x 24 foot accessory buildings on a non- conforming parcel of land located at 175 Woolf Lane , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 23 - 1 - 16 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The parcel is non- conforming because it has a lot width at the street line of 43 feet , whereas a 60 foot width is required . Said Board previously approved one 24 foot x 36 foot accessory building . Appeal of Judith MacIntire , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit the operation of a " bed and breakfast " facility for up to four boarders or lodgers at an existing ® single- family residence , located at 217 Eastern Heights Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 8 . 126 , Residence District R- 15 . Said Ordinance permits only one boarder in a single - family residence . The Board granted a three year variance to the Appellant on December 12 , 1990 for said bed and breakfast . Appeal of the Waldorf School of the Finger Lakes , Appellant , Maureen McKenna , Agent , requesting a three year extension of the time limitation authorized by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals on June 12 , 1991 , under Article V , Section 18 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the use of a temporary portable classroom ( a 12 foot x 60 foot mobile home ) at 855 Five Mile Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 31 - 2 - 15 , Residence District R- 30 . The current authorization expires on August 31 , 1994 . Appeal of Jonathan Albanese , Appellant , Thomas O ' Reilly , Di - Tech Corporation , Agent requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single - family home with a building height of 36 ± feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) , at 1111 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 19 - 1 - 2 , Residence District R- 15 . Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time , 7 : 00 p . m . , and said place , hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent or in person . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer is 273 - 1783 Dated : January 31 , 1994 Publish : February 4 , 1994