Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1995-04-12 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY , APRIL 12 , 199 t" 7 . 00 P . H . ii By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held b the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on g Y g pp Wednesday , April 12 , 1995 , 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 ( Adjourned from March 8 , 1995 ) of Patricia Classen , D . B . A . Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to place a free- standing sign reading " Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . " with a total sign area of 16 . 5 square feet ( maximum 4 square feet allowed ) at 1212 Trumansburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 26 - 3-8 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . Appeal of Michael Herzing , DBA Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop , Appellant , requesting variances from the requirements of Section 4 . 02 - 2 ( b ) , Section 5 . 03- 1 , Section 5 . 04- 1 , and Section 5 . 05- 5 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to maintain freestanding , wall , canopy , and window signs in excess of the limits permitted , at the Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop located at 1103 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 43- 2 - 1 , Business District C . Four wall signs , 2 window signs , 3 freestanding signs , and 1 canopy sign are involved in the appeal . Appeal of R . Andrew Herrala , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct an outside wood deck at a non-conforming single - family residence , located at 201 Sheffield Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 34 . 14 , Residence District R- 30 . Said residence is non conforming since it is located 25+ ' from the road right- of-way ( 30 ' setback 0equired ) . Appeal of Benjamin E . Weiner , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to maintain an outside wood deck located 7 ' 7 " ( 15 ' setback required ) from the north side yard property line at 847 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25- 2- 32 . 1 , Residence District R- 15 . Said property contains an existing two- family residence . Appeal of Lilian Mather Kelly , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V , Section 19 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the use of an accessory building by two non- resident artists on a residential property located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27 - 1 - 24 . 12 , Agricultural Zone ( Residence District R- 30 regulations apply ) . Said ordinance allows for accessory uses on residential properties by resident artists only . Additionally , appellant requests a variance from Article V . Section 18 , Paragraph 10 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the conversion of an existing agricultural building 33 ' 6 " in height ( 30 ' maximum building height allowed ) , into a residence and artist studio to be occupied by the appellant . Said modified building will have a new height of 34+ ' . 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 . Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs , as appropriate , will be provided with assistance , as necessary , upon request . Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing . • Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer 273- 1783 Dated : April 4 , 1995 Publish * April 7 , 1995 ' FINAL TOWN OF ITHACA FILE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Jowt4 OFITHACA WEDNESDAY , APRIL 12 , 1995 pate • der Ls The following appeals were heard by the Board on April 12 , 1995 : APPEAL ( Adjourned from March 8 , 1995 ) of Patricia Classen , D . B . A . Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to place a free- standing sign reading " Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . " with a total sign area of 16 . 5 square feet ( maximum 4 square feet allowed ) at 1212 Trumansburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 26 - 3- 8 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . GRANTED WITH A CONDITION . Appeal of Michael Herzing , DBA Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop , Appellant , requesting variances from the requirements of Section 4 . 02 - 2 ( b ) , Section 5 . 03- 1 , Section 5 . 04 - 1 , and Section 5 . 05- 5 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to maintain freestanding , wall , canopy , and window signs in excess of the limits permitted , at the Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop located at 1103 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 43- 2 - 1 , Business District C . Four wall signs , 2 window signs , 3 freestanding signs , and 1 canopy sign are involved in the appeal . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . Appeal of R . Andrew Herrala , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to be permitted to construct an outside wood deck at a non- conforming single - family residence , • located at 201 Sheffield Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 34 . 14 , Residence District R- 30 . Said residence is non conforming since it is located 25+ ' from the road right-of-way ( 30 ' setback required ) . GRANTED WITH A CONDITION . Appeal of Benjamin E . Weiner , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to maintain an outside wood deck located 7 ' 7 " ( 15 ' setback required ) from the north side yard property line at 847 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25- 2 - 32 . 1 , Residence District R- 15 . Said property contains an existing two- family residence . GRANTED WITH A CONDITION . Appeal of Lilian Mather Kelly , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V . Section 19 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the use of an accessory building by two non- resident artists on a residential property located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27 - 1 - 24 . 12 , Agricultural Zone ( Residence District R- 30 regulations apply ) . Said ordinance allows for accessory uses on residential properties by resident artists only . Additionally , appellant requests a variance from Article V . Section 18 , Paragraph 10 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the conversion of an existing agricultural building 33 ' 6 " in height ( 30 ' maximum building height allowed ) , into a residence and artist studio to be occupied by the appellant . Said modified building will have a new height of 34+ ' . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . • FILED 1 • TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Date C1 I I WEDNESDAY , APRIL 12 , 1995 • Clerk L�a� y4m9 n cA PRESENT : Chairman Edward Austen , David Stotz , Harry Ellsworth , Town Attorney John C . Barney , Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer Andrew Frost , Town Planner II JoAnn Cornish . OTHERS ° Mickey Herzing , Benjamin Weiner , Isaac Bowers , Elizabeth and Patty Classen , Lilian Mather Kelly . Chairman Austen called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 p . m . stating that all posting , publication , and notification of the public hearings had been completed and the same were in order . The first appeal to be heard by the Board was as follows : APPEAL ( Adjourned from March 8 , 1995 ) of Patricia Classen , D . B . A . Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to place a free- standing sign reading "Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . " with a total sign area of 16 . 5 square feet ( maximum 4 square feet allowed ) at 1212 Trumansburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 26-3-8 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . Ms . Patricia Classen spoke and paraphrased " explanation " from the application . Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . With no one present to speak , the public hearing was closed . • Mr . Stotz voiced concern that a variance would open up requests by others , who maintain non- residential uses along Trumansburg Road . It was pointed out by Ms . Classen that many of these signs are , in fact , larger than the 4 square feet permitted . Mr . Frost pointed out that the sign law allows for different sized signs for different uses . The sign for the Shalebrook Development and the hospital are permitted to be larger than 4 square feet . He also noted that the building on this property appears to be residential in use , while other non- residential buildings along the road appear to be non- residential ; therefore , the larger sign could be justified in order to bring better attention to the Classen ' s building . Mr . Ellsworth inquired as to how many people other than employees of the Classen Is visit the building . Ms . Classen pointed out that potential clients and their families , as well as family members of current clients , visit the property to discuss the Classen ' s home health care . A larger sign is , therefore , necessary to direct the public to the property from a road such as Trumansburg Road . Since cars travel at a faster rate of speed than other areas , a larger sign is necessary for site identification . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen read from the Planing Board resolution . He then called for a motion on the environmental assessment form . MOTION By Mr . David Stotz , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . • RESOLVED , that the Board find a negative determination of environmental significance in the matter of the appeal of Patricia Classen , D . B . A . Classen Home Health Associates , Inc . , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law . Town of Ithaca 2 .Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • With no further discussion , Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion , which resulted as follows : AYES - Stotz , Austen , Ellsworth . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . Chairman Austen asked for any other discussion on the appeal , since there was none , he asked for a motion . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . David Stotz . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a variance for the property at 1212 Trumansburg Road per the request for a 9 square foot sign as presented in this plan to the Board for Tax Parcel No . 26 - 3-8 . 2 , Residential District R- 15 , based on the approximate location of the sign being the same as the previous owner , with the following condition and finding : 1 ) There is no detrimental impact on the surrounding neighborhood because of the existence of the number of signs of like or larger size . 2 ) The sign shall not have special lighting except at those times when the premises are occupied . • A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Stotz , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . The second appeal to be heard by the Board was the following . Appeal of Michael Herzing , DBA Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop , Appellant , requesting variances from the requirements of Section 4 . 02-2 ( b ) , Section 5 . 03- 1 , Section 5 . 04- 1 , and Section 5 . 05- 5 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to maintain freestanding , wall , canopy, and window signs in excess of the limits permitted , at the Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop located at 1103 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 43-2- 1 , Business District C . Four wall signs , 2 window signs , 3 freestanding signs , and 1 canopy sign are involved in the appeal . Mr . Frost passed out pictures of the signs in question . He indicated that the Board should refer to the letter he wrote describing the different signs . He noted that the ice machine sign could be exempt as identifying a machine . He added that as stated in the letters going out from his office , there have been a number of signs removed from the original citations . The original letter was written in December by Pat Keller , Assistant Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer . It set forth all the on- site signs . A follow-up letter from himself , dated March 9 , makes note that several of the • signs were removed . He pointed out the Planning Board recommendation . Town of Ithaca 3 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 Chairman Austen asked Mr . Herzing if these are the signs he can , minimally , get by with . Mr . Herzing replied that , at this point , that is true . He added that he has purchased the property around the current business and they are looking to relocate the biggest , freestanding sign . He has hired an engineer to help with this . He said the present signs / locations were temporary until they can get the engineer ' s report . To a degree , he does feel that it is the minimal amount . In comparing them with other convenient stores in the area , they ( Big Al ' s ) are much older , they don ' t have a modern look such as the others do . They did add pumps and a canopy that updated the looks somewhat last year . The building is still the same , however . It ' s the first business in that area you see coming northward on 96B . Chairman Austen referred to a sign on the King Road side that refers to free gas . He wondered how much use is that sign . Mr . Herzing stated that it is a canopy topper sign . It is supposed to be mounted over the pumps , under the canopy . They have found that it was in the way there so they took it off of the hoses under the pump canopy and mounted in on the wall . Sunoco , which is their franchise , really presses them as far as certain things they have to do to keep within Sunoco ' marketing and " dress codes . " Mr . Ellsworth asked if that included rebates . Mr . Herzing said that is correct , there is a financial consideration there . Chairman Austen asked if that is a sign Sunoco requires . Mr . Herzing replied that Sunoco requires it under the canopy ; he has an agreement with sunoco to put it on the wall . It is the same sign as is on the front of the building , but it says something different because they are insert signs . They change on a timely basis . Chairman Austen noted that any time a vehicle is parked in that area , which is a parking area , the sign is worthless because it is blocked at that point . He used Andy ' s pictures to support that statement . Mr . Stotz asked if Mr . Herzing is going to be expanding the property . Mr . Herzing stated that they are hoping to steal some land to change the lines to give the property better parking , a safer environment in and out . They are a busy store . So , they are doing anything they can to make it a safer situation . That ' s the reason they purchased the property in the surrounding area . Chairman Austen wondered which property has been purchased . Mr . Herzing replied that they purchased the property directly behind them and directly southward , it ' s an L- shaped property . So , they are trying to get some of the southward property to change the environment . He continued by saying that one of his concerns is that Sunoco diamond sign . As it sits now , it ' s right in the way of incoming and outgoing traffic . They want to move , push aside , that sign so it won ' t be in the way of traffic at all . The sign has been there for a very long time , he ' s not sure how long . Mr . Ellsworth referred to something Mr . Herzing had given the Board that indicated he has to meet certain Sunoco standards . He noted that a Citgo station has two standards , one for a thruway situation and one for neighborhoods . He then asked if Sunoco has two standards . Mr . Herzing related that , to his knowledge , they do not . He continued with right now they are in 99% compliance with Sunoco ' s standards . For instance , the blue stripe on the building and the color of the building is chosen by Sunoco and the diamond signs are Sunoco chosen . Anything that says Sunoco on it is what is requested by Sunoco . He is not aware that they have two different standards . He would be the first to say that Sunoco does not tell you everything . Mr . Ellsworth asked if the rebate is substantial . Mr . Herzing replied that it is . • Chairman Austen noted that the Planning Board talked about the north wall having only one sign . They suggested this as part of their recommendation . He wanted to know if that is the sign advertising pizza , subs and salads . Mr . Herzing responded affirmatively . He added that he is trying to eliminate the other sign on that wall . Town of Ithaca 4 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • He wants to put up a goal post sign . As opposed to one pole , it ' s a double-pole sign which would have the Sunoco logo , pricing information and it also would advertise the pizza , subs , salads , etc . This would eliminate almost all other signs on the building . Mr . Stotz asked Mr . Herzing if there was any idea when that was going to happen . Mr . Herzing indicated that the process is beginning immediately with them redefining the lines . When that is done and approved , the first thing that will be done is to get approval on the goal post sign . This will be done as quickly as the engineers and Mr . Frost move on these matters . Chairman Austen noted that there is a Diet Pepsi sign on the front , is that a sign provided with Mr . Herzing ' s name on it . Mr . Herzing said that yes it is , and that is a financial consideration . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen referred to the environmental assessment form and asked JoAnn Cornish to give the Board a run down on how the Planning Department feels about this matter . Ms . Cornish said that she did visit the site and took into account the fact that Pat Keller had drafted a letter with the numerous signs that were not in compliance , previous to Mr . Frost ' s letter , and also that several signs were removed . When she visited the site , she was impressed with how in order everything was . The freestanding signs that were under the canopy were lined up and did not appear to be visually obstructive . It was sunny that day and the neon signs were not very visible . She did • not go at night . The signs are large ; there are two neon beer signs on the north wall and they are not in compliance . She imagines that , at night or when the light is not so bright , they are much more visible than they were when she was there . She didn ' t see any problem with what ' s there , given that they are changing things . She added that the matter then went back to the Planning Board for some additional recommendations . Chairman Austen asked if Mr . Herzing had only those two neon signs on the north side . Mr . Herzing said that is true . There are none on the west side . Mr . Stotz asked Ms . Cornish what the requirements are for the neon signs . Ms . Cornish stated that they have to be a single row of lettering and she needed to look up the other requirements . Mr . Stotz noted that one of the signs is too high . Mr . Herzing told them that it is in the shape of a beer bottle . Ms . Cornish agreed and said they are not solid , just outlined . Mr . Herzing informed the Board that , from his knowledge of beer signs , not many fit code . Mr . Frost noted that the sign law is not perfect and they hope to rewrite it . It does not , in many ways , address what is seen today on many commercial properties . He ' s not saying it ' s wrong or right . Mr . Stotz asked Mr . Herzing if they are open 24 hours . Mr . Herzing responded that they are open 18 hours through the week and 19 hours on weekends . Mr . Stotz asked if the signs stayed lit when the store is closed . Mr . Herzing said they do not . There are two exterior lights that act as safety lights for the employees and the cooler lights ( used for interior security ) on the interior of the building that stay on . He also noted that , as Ms . Cornish had noted , on an average day the beer signs cannot be seen even though they are on . This is due to the sunlight . You can see them at 6 ; 00 AM and at night , but not generally during the day . • Mr . Frost said that , for reference , some signs , such as the canopy signs with the Sunoco symbol on top of the canopy - - the sign law says you can have a canopy sign , but it doesn ' t say you can have the one on top of it . They have run into this before with a Citgo store . Again they noted that the law does fall short in being very definitive as to what is allowed . Town of Ithaca 5 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • Mr . Herzing brought up one more consideration that he made to the Planning Board . They are a little unique in Ithaca in that they are a full- service gas station . So , without certain signs , some gas customers will not know what they have in the store because they don ' t get out of their cars . Pay-at- the -pump situations are quite unique . That is another consideration for him in making this appeal . Chairman Austen noted to Ms . Cornish that the staff did make a negative determina- tion in this matter . He then asked for a motion . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . David Stotz . RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative determination of environmental significance based on JoAnn Cornish ' s review of March 13 , 1995 for the appeal of Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop , a full- service station at 1103 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 43- 2 - 1 . Chairman Austen asked for any other discussion . He then added that there is one other convenience store in the area . Mr . Herzing said there is Andree ' s and Rogan ' s . Chairman Austen asked if Rogan ' s is listed as a convenience store . Mr . Frost said it is . With no further discussion , Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion , which resulted as follows • AYES - Stotz , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . Chairman Austen read a letter from the Tompkins County Department of Planning . He also read the Planning Board resolution . Chairman Austen said he didn ' t understand condition #3 which says , " The luminous tube signs be brought into conformity with the Sign Law . " Attorney Barney stated he believes the intent is that you are allowed to have one row , six inches high . Mr . Frost pointed out that the conditions state that Mr . Herzing has two years to comply and the sign law may change in two years . MOTION By Mr . David Stotz , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a variance to Michael Herzing , DBA Big Al ' s Hilltop Quikstop , located at 1103 Danby Road , for the purpose of sign area variances and that these variances be granted in accordance with the recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals by the Planning Board , dated March 21 , 1995 , with the following conditions : 1 . The north wall have no more than one wall sign . • 2 . The west wall have no more than two wall signs . 3 . The luminous tube signs be brought into conformity with the Sign Law . Town of Ithaca 6 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • 4 . There will be no more than two freestanding signs . 5 . No lit sign be illuminated during non-business hours . The vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Stotz , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion passed unanimously . The third appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Appeal of R . Andrew Herrala , Appellant , requesting authorization from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article %II , Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to he permitted to construct an outside wood deck at a non-conforming single-family residence , located at 201 Sheffield Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1-34 . 14 , Residence District R-30 . Said residence is non conforming since it is located 25± ' from the road right-of-way ( 30 ' setback required ) . Chairman noted that the deck is existing . Mr . Frost indicated a before and an after picture . He then added from his perspective , this property has had a long history of property maintenance violations by a previous owner . The picture shows the improvements to the property . The before picture , particularly in the back , shows a shed , garbage , and constant junk cars . The cars would suddenly have license plates , not registered to the cars . The property has gone through substantial improvement . Chairman Austen asked Mr . Herrala how long he has had the property . Mr . Herrala stated that he purchased it in October , 1993 . Mr . Ellsworth asked if it has a nice view of the lake . Mr . Herrala responded that it does if you are standing on the roof . Mr . Ellsworth said he meant on the deck . Mr . Herrala said you can ' t quite see it . Mr . Frost asked Mr . Herrala is he rents the property out . Mr . Herrala said that is correct . Mr . Frost brought the Board ' s attention back to the picture . He indicated where there is a door . He then asked Mr . Herrala if he had taken down a small deck . Mr . Herrala stated that a concrete slab had been poured on the back corner , near the aforementioned shed . There were some rotting posts and they were apparently going to attach a plate under the door . At one point , they had attempted to build a stairwell . It is about a nine foot step out of the door to the ground . Mr . Frost asked as you go out the front , was there something that looked like it could have been stairs when , in fact , there are no stairs there . Mr . Herrala stated that there are no stairs there . Attorney Barney asked if there had been stairs there before . Mr . Frost replied that there must have been stairs there at some point . Chairman Austen noted that the house must be 30 - 40 years old . Mr . Herrala said it was built by Otis Drew and occupied by him . From his understanding , he built the house in the fall of 1950 and finished it in the spring of 1951 . He moved in the summer of 1951 , It ' s 44 years old . He said Vera Circle was named after Mr . Drew ' s wife . Mr . Frost said they do have a building permit application that was denied pending the Zoning Board . He indicated that the front yard is on Sheffield Road . The deck • would be on the side . If they were to look at Poole Road as being the front yard , the side yard would become Sheffield Road and would be required to have a 40 ' setback . So , it ' s more prudent to call Sheffield Road the front yard where its deficiency is 5 ' , versus 15 ' . This building is a single - family residence ; it was a two family . Mr . Town of Ithaca 7 -Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 Herrala said that Mr . Drew lived upstairs part of the year and then rented out the downstairs off and on for a number of years . Mr . Frost noted that it was the downstairs tenant who accumulated the cars and garbage . Mr . Drew spent a good part of the year down south . Chairman Austen asked if there are two kitchens . Mr . Herrala said there used to be , but the downstairs kitchen is now a bedroom . That ' s the window below the deck on the right side . Chairman Austen asked if it is now a four-bedroom house . Mr . Herrala said that is correct . Chairman Austen opened up the public hearing . With no one present to speak , the public hearing was closed . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen referred to the environmental assessment form . Ms . Cornish stated the property has , clearly , been improved . The addition of the deck does not further reduce the non- conformance of the setback . They would like to discourage anyone from building without a permit , but it does make the conditions safer from the second floor . It provides an emergency exit from that second story . Chairman Austen asked if there wouldn ' t be some trouble if there wasn ' t any stairway or porch . Mr . Frost said no , the greater concern is having a door with nothing beyond it . New construction would have those areas sealed off until the deck is completed . There is a door which faces Poole Road , which is their main entrance . Other than that , for emergency egress , the windows are acceptable . Chairman Austen noted that the staff recommendation was a negative determination . Mr . Frost added , again , that the deck does not worsen the non- conformity , since it is really the house , not the deck , that is in non-conformance with the ordinance . Chairman Austen said that , actually , it ' s considered an improvement to the house . MOTION By Mr . David Stotz , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board find a negative determination of environmental significance for the property located at 201 Sheffield Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 34 . 14 , based upon adopting the findings of JoAnn Cornish ' s review dated April 6 , 1995 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Stotz , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . Mr . Frost said this is an authorization of a special approval of Article XII , Section 64 , since they ' re making a change by the addition of a deck to a property that is non-conforming . MOTION • By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . David Stotz . Town of Ithaca 8 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • RESOLVED , that the Board grant a special approval for the property at 201 Sheffield Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 34 . 14 in regards to the non-conforming setback from the road which is approximately 251 , to permit the construction of a deck as set forth in the application , on the north side of the house , with the following findings and condition : 1 ) It is in keeping with the neighborhood . 2 ) The deck will be used as a safety exit in case of a fire . 3 ) That the proposal complies with Section 77 , Paragraph 7 , Subparagraphs a-h . 4 ) A building permit must be obtained and complied with . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Stotz , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . The fourth appeal to be heard by the Board was the followings Appeal of Benjamin E . Weiner , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted • to maintain an outside wood deck located 7 ' 7 " ( 15 ' setback required ) from the north side yard property line at 847 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25-2-32 . 1 , Residence District R- 15 . Said property contains an existing two-family residence . Mr . Frost informed the Board that Mr . Weiner recently purchased the property and the deck was put on by a previous owner without a permit . The previous owner has been before the Board before . There was a building permit that was issued for renovations to this building . This property and building are certainly going through some improvements from its previous condition . In issuing the permit , they had a statement from Mr . Weiner that if he did not get the approval by this Board to maintain the deck , portions of the deck would be removed , if necessary , to comply with the setback requirement . He indicated that the picture going around is hard to depict clearly because the property sits within a gorge . Mr . Stotz noted that it varies 9 ' 8 " from the property line to 7 ' 10 " because of the setback from the deck . Mr . Weiner said the property line is 20 ' from the house , by his best measurement , reaching out into the gorge . Mr . Frost said the property line seems to follow the creek . Mr . Stotz noted the deck varies in width . Mr . Weiner stated that , at its widest point , he believes it is 11 ' 11 " , which is 8 ' 1 " from the property line . Chairman Austen asked how close are any other houses / buildings to the deck . Mr . Weiner said 40 - 50 feet . Chairman Austen asked if the ravine is fairly large . Mr . Weiner said yes , but not in the water flow . Chairman Austen asked if a gazebo seen in the pictures is on Mr . Weiner ' s property . Mr . Weiner replied yes . Chairman Austen asked if the property line is near the power line . Mr . Frost again said that the • property line follows the ravine . Town of Ithaca 9 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • Mr . Stotz noted that the deck looks fairly sturdy . Mr . Weiner stated that it is and that they are doing major renovations on the inside which will sturdy it up even more by building it into the floor studs . Chairman Austen asked Mr . Weiner when he purchased the property . Mr . Weiner stated it was in January , 1995 . Mr . Frost said their intent is to fix up the property and sell it . Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . With no one present to speak , the public hearing was closed . Chairman Austen asked Mr . Frost how long the structure has been on the building . Mr . Frost indicated that it has been there for 3 or 4 years . Mr . Stotz asked if the house was being made into a single- family residence . Mr . Weiner stated that it will be a two- family residence . One wall has to be taken out . The main house will be the upstairs and half of the downstairs . The apartment will be half of the downstairs . The apartment will be one quarter of the size of the house . Chairman Austen asked if there are any other dwellings on the property . Mr . Weiner replied no . Mr . Frost informed the Board that , in examining the survey map , he could not find any other dwellings on the property . It is an irregular- shaped lot but it meets all the criteria for a legal - sized lot , except for the deck . Chairman Austen referred to a letter from the Tompkins County Department of Planning . He noted that it is not unusual to have side lot yard variances along the lake . These are very narrow lots ; most of them are 50 feet , so you cannot build much on them without sacrificing some of the side yard clearance . MOTION • By Mr . David Stotz , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a variance for the property located at 847 Taughannock Boulevard for the requirements of Article IV , Section 14 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to maintain an outside wood deck on the north side yard property line , with the following condition and findings : 1 ) That it be located no closer than 7 ' to the north property line . 2 ) That the property was purchased with this deck in place and moving the deck would be a hardship for the applicant and this is not uncommon to that area . 3 ) There was a letter in support of this variance and none in opposition . 4 ) Access provided to that side of the gorge is otherwise difficult without some improvement such as decks . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Ellsworth , Stotz , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . • The last appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Town of Ithaca 10 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 Appeal of Lilian Mather Kelly, Appellant , requesting a variance from the require- ments of Article V, Section 19 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the use of an accessory building by two non-resident artists on a residential property located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27- 1-24 . 12 , Agricultural Zone ( Residence District R- 30 regulations apply ) . Said ordinance allows for accessory uses on residential properties by resident artists only. Additionally, appellant requests a variance from Article V. Section 18 , Paragraph 10 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the conversion of an existing agricultural building 33 ' 6 " in height ( 30 ' maximum building height allowed ) , into a residence and artist studio to be occupied by the appellant . Said modified building will have a new height of 34+ ' e Mr . Frost brought to the attention of the Board , the fact that this case was heard by the Zoning Board in 1992 and the Board has copies of the minutes from that meeting . On page 2 , they can see the conditions . Essentially , it was the same variance that is before the Board tonight . What is interesting here is that the variance was conditioned at the time with a one and a half year limitation on the variance until June 30 , 1994 for the appellant to obtain a certificate of occupancy . Since that time expired and a certificate was not obtained , as Mr . Frost sees it , everything expired , including what was in the grant for the variance of the artists . In 1992 the Board did approve the non-resident artist to be on the property . It did approve , at that time at least , an existing height of 33 ' . Ms . Kelly will explain why they are raising the roof a little bit more . Ms . Kelly stated that , after observing the building through several winters and being up on the roof at 4 : 00 AM with a shovel , hoping that it wasn ' t going to collapse • on her , she has realized that flat roofs with heat rising from beneath are not functional in this environment . She doesn ' t believe that chickens needed to be heated , so it wasn ' t a problem before . It became apparent , however , that it presents a problem . She realized modifications had to be made to the roof to provide some slope and proper snow handling . Initially , due to financial constraints that she was facing , she decided that she was going to the state of New York and ask for a variance for the inside ceiling height , which once she conformed to energy code would be about 7 ' 1 " on the average . In putting together the proposal for the state of New York , she basically had to go to a contractor and go through the whole process as if she was going to do the minimum required to conform to New York State code . To do that was part of her application and she saw that she could raise the roof . If she worked with local persons with whom she had developed some kind of relationship with over the years , since she came before this Board , she realized the work could be done fairly economically . It will be an expensive renovation , but she figures that , in the long run , it ' s better to make modification to the roof as opposed to not and then having the building suffer damage at some point in the future . Mr . Frost noted that the building was originally a chicken house and that Ms . Kelly bought it to use it as her residence , as well as , her studio . She is an artist , wood worker . A building permit was issued and , for a variety of reasons , including financial , the work was never commenced . Certificates were never issued for occupancy and his office has not condoned any use of the building . Chairman Austen asked Ms . Kelly is she ever lived in the building . Ms . Kelly said . she lives in it at present . Chairman Austen said he was by there yesterday and there were no signs that someone lived there . He asked if the second floor is her residence . Ms . Kelly stated that it is the third floor . Town of Ithaca 12 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • Mr . Frost asked if the general public comes to look at her work at all . Ms . Kelly replied no . Mr . Frost asked if she has wood-working equipment on the first floor . Is she making furniture . Ms . Kelly replied that she was making furniture and she ' s done some prototypes for other designers . She ' s worked with other designers who are not as familiar with wood to help them through their designs . There is a woman in New York City with whom she has worked . She provides prototyping services upon occasion . But , most of what she does is furniture and , at the present time , she is moving more towards pure sculpture as opposed to functional furniture . Mr . Frost said there was a similar artistic flavor to the furniture she was making . Ms . Kelly agreed . Mr . Frost said that some may want to view this as a mechanical trade but , from what he has personally seen , it ' s at a slightly higher level that lends itself to art or sculpture . He stated that she has an accessory building on the property , as she presented to the Board in 1992 , a gentleman who does sculpture with ironwork . Since they are , in effect , redoing that appeal as well , he asked Ms . Kelly to relate to the Board why she needs that person there . Ms . Kelly said that when she purchased the property , it had been used by another artist for a studio . He was a sculptor and a painter . The upper area , where she currently lives , is where he had his painting studio . He had some of the household conveniences , e . g . sine , storage area , hot water heater , etc . , so it was a place that you could stay in if you had to . The first floor was his sculpture area . He had other individuals that , upon occasion , would help him with his sculpture , but they also did their own work . Mr . Frost asked if George Rhodes was one of those individuals . Ms . Kelly said yes . She continued with there is a back building , essentially a pole building , where two other studios were . One was used by a metal fabricator and artist . • He showed his work around here - - David Parker . The other is Duran VanDorn , who also is a metal artist . He is a blacksmith , but he makes sculpture and art furniture . He made the Alex Haley memorial bench , for example , down on Cascadilla Street . Ms . Kelly stated when she moved in , being a starving artist and faced with knowing that she had to undertake a fairly substantial renovation of the building , it seemed helpful to her to be able to derive some income from the back buildings . It also helped maintain the community of artists that were appealing to her . That was what brought her to the building , where she worked with George Rhodes for a period of time . That ' s how she came upon the building - - she was working as a sculptor , helping him in his sculpture studio there . When she moved in , she inherited tenants who wanted to continue working in the building . She surely could use the extra income to put towards supporting herself and the renovations on the building . The situation remains the same , other than the building is now all Mr . VanDorn ' s facility . He ' s been a constant there for many , many years and her neighbors are all familiar with him . They all have a good relationship . Again , he doesn ' t show his work in the building . A customer may come by if they want to purchase something , with prior arrangements of the artist . They really don ' t have walk- in trade . It ' s not a retail facility . Attorney Barney asked if Mr . VanDorn lives there . Ms . Kelly said it is just a studio ; he lives in Trumansburg . Mr . Frost asked if Mr . VanDorn has a reputation that goes beyond New York State , Ms . Kelly said yes , he ' s shown his work in New York City and his work has gone to different countries and so forth . His work with Mr . Rhodes is internationally known . Mr . Rhodes ' work is internationally renown . • Mr . Stotz asked if the accessory building is the same kind of construction as the main building . Ms . Kelly said it is a frame building that is metal clad . It is the usual agricultural pole building . She imagines it was used to store tractors , etc . , at one point . Mr . Stotz asked if there are any wells . Ms . Kelly said yes . Town of Ithaca 13 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 . Mr . Frost asked if either Ms . Kelly or Mr . VanDorn had any fire extinguishers . Ms . Kelly stated that they ' ve never had a fire and they do maintain fire extinguishers on all the properties . There ' s a large concern for fire because of the potential loss . She has filed a drawing of the building , showing the locations of acetylene and other things that are harmful . Those are filed with the fire department . In the event that there is a fire , they have this information about the building and the hazards of the building . Mr . Stotz asked how Ms . Kelly gets back and forth to the third floor . She responded that she goes up the stairs . He then asked where the stairs are - - are they interior stairs? She responded yes . He then asked her if they are enclosed and she stated yes . Mr . Frost commented that , according to his recollection , the stairs needed some improvement to comply with egress . Ms . Kelly said when it was discussed , one of the things that they didn ' t have is proper head room at one landing , and they didn ' t have railings . From her point of view , they weren ' t lit , and she ' s put in railings and lighting for the stairs . As part of her renovation of the building , she wants to construct new stairs , going in the same area where the elevator shaft currently is . They would be fully enclosed . She had an architect draw up the plans for the stairs . Apparently , they are going to comply with all the requirements for stairways . Mr . Frost said that they did issue a permit a couple of years ago . It just never commenced too far . There have been some deviations from those plans . What we had at the time was required , otherwise we would not have issued a permit . If this appeal is approved , they need to be sure they are dealing with a revised building permit . Attorney Barney asked Ms . Kelly when she moved into the building . She stated that • she moved there in 1991 . She didn ' t actually intend to stay in 1991 , she was splitting with her husband and needed an inexpensive place to live . George Rhodes was her friend and he said she could crash there . She ' s very persistent - it was OK with her to live in a " Chock-Full -O-Nuts " can and sneak into the Sheraton pool for a shower . She did that for a year and a half and then she bought the property . Chairman Austen asked if the existing stairwell will come out . Ms . Kelly said yes , it will come out . She has to take the elevator shaft out and she decided that the rear which had been designated for the elevator shaft ( which is in the corner of the building ) would be a good place to construct the stairs , as opposed to trying to modify the existing stairs . They aren ' t great stairs to begin with . Chairman Austen asked if the present stairs are where the skylights are on the roof . Ms . Kelly answered that the dormer is in the part that she occupies . To the right of the dormer is the elevator shaft . Attorney Barney asked where the stairs are now . Ms . Kelly said they go right up the center of the building , there ' s a long flight of stairs . They don ' t double back . Mr . Frost referred to a picture and asked if it was a sliding door or a window . Ms . Kelly said it is a basic sliding , glass , porch door . He asked if she had 2 x 4s across that . Ms . Kelly said it is the gutter . Chairman Austen noted that it ' s not really an emergency exit . Mr . Frost informed the Board that it actually does provide a means of access for fire department ladders . It provides an access to the building . Ms . Kelly said if the renovations go ahead as shown in the drawings , there would be two big windows there , providing for two large ladders . Chairman Austen said that he assumes that would be the height of the new roof - - • right above the windows and then go down towards Mecklenburg Road . Ms . Kelly said that was right . She said the other photograph shows the side that faces the street and the rafters will sit on the top of the cinder blocks there . Chairman Austen said she will have to build up the opposite end of the house so that it ' s all the same height all across the back as the dormer currently is . Ms . Kelly told the Board that the reason why she selected that is because it minimizes the impact of any change . Town of Ithaca 14 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • Mr . Frost referred to the bottom , left-hand corner of another photograph . It shows a view of the back of the studio . It gives some idea of the distance between the frame building and the concrete building . Mr . Stotz asked if he is correct that this is basically a continuation of the variance that was asked for originally . Mr . Frost said yes , but she never got a certificate of occupancy . In 1992 she also had a five -year time limit - - that the variance be approved again in five years . That was a condition in 1992 . That time frame would expire in September 1997 . He thinks Ms . Kelly has indicated a desire , through this new appeal , to extend that deadline . Mr . Stotz asked if he meant beyond 1997 . Ms . Kelly replied yes . Mr . Frost said that the variance for the additional non- residence artists was tied into a five.-year time: frame in 1992 , expiring in 1997 . Now , with a new appeal in 1995 , her desire is to extend it . Attorney Barney asked Ms . Kelly if she is now in a financial position to do the renovation work . Ms . Kelly said she is . Attorney Barney asked her what time frame does she think it will take for the work to be completed . Ms . Kelly replied that she hopes the roof would be completed in a matter of days . Attorney Barney asked if she gets permission from the Board , would she start immediately and then be done within a month . Ms . Kelly said that would be conditional upon gathering together the individuals that would help her and obtaining the materials . Attorney Barney again asked what she sees as a time frame . Ms . Kelly stated that she is only looking to do the roof as that is all she really has financial resources for and to ensure that the interior space in the building complies to code . Mr . Frost related to the Board that she has an electrical system and a plumbing • system that has never been blessed by the Town . Over the years Ms . Kelly has experienced some personal difficulties - -- a car accident and a failed marriage . What the attorney is questioning is that it ' s been three years since the last appeal and nothing has significantly changed . Attorney Barney said that what concerns him is that she now has illegal occupancy . If this Board sees fit to grant a variance to allow her to do what needs to be done , his question is how long before that illegal occupancy will end . The illegal occupancy requires , in addition to the roof , whatever it takes to bring the building into code , both in terms of egress , electrical , plumbing and the rest . Attorney Barney stated in the minutes from 1992 , it wasn ' t all that clear that she was moving in before a certificate of occupancy was issued . Technically , no one should be living in the building absent a certificate of occupancy . So , his question to her is , if this Board Grants a renewal or continual or a new variance , when will there be compliance ? Ms . Kelly answered by saying that perhaps an indication of her seriousness and urgency over this matter is the fact that the preliminary stages of the work have begun . For one , she ensured that all the electrical work was certified until it reaches the third floor . She has a sub-panel . Mr . Ellsworth asked if it had been inspected . Ms . Kelly replied that it had . Mr . Frost said that when it gets inspected , normally his office gets a copy of the certificate when it goes through the underwriters . Attorney Barney said that he is trying to cut to the chase . When can he comfortably say to the Town Board so they don ' t have to start a law suit against her because she ' s occupying a building illegally . That ' s what worries him . What worries him even more is if something goes sour and catches on fire , someone gets caught on the third floor • of the building and there ' s a wood frame stairway that doesn ' t comply with code , and somebody is seriously injured or killed . Does he or the Town have some liability because they knew about the situation . They have a duty to enforce these rules . Giving Town of Ithaca 15 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • her the permit to do it is one thing , but getting it done is the other . He again asked when could they expect full , complete compliance with the building code , with all of the work being done to bring it into compliance with the building code ? Ms . Kelly stated that , weather permitting , she has told people that , if she gets the variance tonight , the work will commence immediately . Attorney Barney again asked when it would be completed . Ms . Kelly said that it is a difficult question for her to answer because she has never renovated a house before . She can ' t really foresee what sort of problems might occur between now and then . Mr . Frost commented that his office has been lenient for some of the reasons Ms . Kelly has indicated - - hardships over the years . He has tried to give her the impression that we could take more serious action . It wasn ' t absolutely clear that she was living there , although there was a suspicion . They ' ve also been going along with the personal difficulties that she has had over the years . He thinks at this point , though , the liability and responsibility that the Town has , needs to be dealt with . Ms . Kelly stated that what she is asking is based on Mr . Frost ' s experience because she has never renovated a structure before . She is not trying to be difficult , but she honestly doesn ' t know how long it is going to take to undertake the construction . Attorney Barney said that he thinks it ' s a matter of whether or not she has the money . These things , unfortunately , take money . Or , does she have the people to do the work on a barter or some other basis . To bring it up to code , he thinks it would take a couple of months . Ms . Kelly replied that was what she was looking for from them - - a reasonable time frame . Attorney Barney also noted that he is not a contractor and he • doesn ' t know what her financial situation is and that ' s why he ' s asking . Mr . Ellsworth told Ms . Kelly that what is trying to be conveyed to her is that if she picks a date and the Board agrees with her , she ' ll have to meet the deadline this time or Mr . Frost is going to come and put everybody out . There ' s been a lot of leniency and , if something were to happen there , the Board is party to the whole deal because they know what ' s going on doesn ' t meet the regulations . Mr . Frost said that between now and the next six months is the prime construction season . How does six months sound? Ms . Kelly said that is more than adequate . Mr . Frost said he isn ' t saying the Board will agree to that . Mr . Ellsworth said that this date is gong to be final ; this time there will be no leniency . Mr . Frost noted that a new house gets constructed , depending upon the contractor , in three months - - six months at the outside . He personally thinks six months is more than adequate . Ms . Kelly stated that she also thinks that time frame is more than adequate . Attorney Barney reminded her that it would mean more than just the roof . It would include the electrical , plumbing , stairs , etc . Ms . Kelly said that she is currently working outside her shop at a regular job to support the anticipated renovations . She has made all the financial arrangements she needs to support it . She ' s gotten the estimates from the contractors as to what it will be for electrical , the construction ( including the stairway ) so she has a very clear view of what ' s involved financially . She has made sure that she has those bases covered . In other words , she had the people and the financial situations on hand before she came before the Board today . She has been trying to line this up so that , if she gets a green light , there won ' t be any delay • in going ahead . The estimates have been completed , the individual helpers lined up , a contractor/ advisor has been selected , and she ' s been working with an electrician to make sure that everything complies up to the point where it goes from the sub-panel up to the third floor . Town of Ithaca 16 Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • Mr . Frost asked about the plumbing . He said his recollection from years ago , he was in the building when there was a bathroom on the second floor , she had plastic pipe which is not approved . Ms . Kelly said that , when she moved the toilet and shower , which were already on the second floor , to the third floor , she tore out all the plastic piping and put in copper piping . So , all the water lines are converted to copper . Attorney Barney asked Ms . Kelly who did that work . She said she did . She added that they existed so she tried to make some progress . Mr . Frost noted that Mr . Rhodes had been before the Board about six or seven years ago and his suspicion is that Mr . Rhodes did some things in there without a building permit as well . Mr . Ellsworth asked Ms . Kelly if she was counting on the rent from the two world- renown artists to carry her through this project . In other words , if one should up and leave , is she in financial difficulty? Mr . Frost said that the situation seems pretty well established as they have been there for ten years . Mr . Frost explained that he has reservations . Fairly consistently , over the last several years , they have been in contact with Ms . Kelly to find out what ' s happening because of what was initiated by the Board in 1992 . He feels that , at this point , that she is starting to get somewhere . He ' s not saying things are going to work out , but it ' s obvious that they ' ve gotten to a point that ' s much closer than they ' ve been in previous years . Ms . Kelly stated that she admits she has put off the work . She consulted an architect and she was ready to go ahead with the project and then she got married . • Thre would have been two incomes in the family and a lot of the financial hardships would not have existed . Mr . Ellsworth asked if she is counting on the rent from this one person to see her through . Ms . Kelly responded by saying that the rent from one person helps offset her living expenses while she works and constructs the building . That one individual ' s rent cannot purchase the renovations . Mr . Ellsworth asked if he were to leave , could she still finish the project by the end of October . Ms . Kelly replied yes . Mr . Frost said that it ' s been about one year since the permits have been issued . Chairman Austen asked Ms . Kelly is she planned on living there wile she does the roof . Ms . Kelly stated that no , she is not planning on that . She has already made other living arrangements for that period . She plans to clear everything out . Chairman Austen asked if there was any reason they could not start immediately . Attorney Barney said it ' s the occupancy that bothers him . If she moves out , she could take 20 years to do the work . It ' s the fact that she ' s living there that causes the problem . Mr . Frost said that was an important point . If she ' s not living there as a residence , they would feel much better about that . She should be aware , though , that depending on what life brings her in the next six months , if something happens , they will have to get more aggressive than they ' ve been in asking her not to live there . Ms . Kelly understands from speaking to the Board this evening more about their position in respect to the problem . While she is occupying this space at the current time without a certificate of occupancy , it ' s certainly not been with any intent to deceive . She ' s tried to stay as much in good faith as possible by staying in contact • with Mr . Frost , Mr . Frost said that if other people were involved , such as children , they would not have been as patient . Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . As no one was present to speak , the public hearing was closed . Town of Ithaca 17 'Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen referred to the environmental assessment form and asked Ms . Cornish to speak . Ms . Cornish stated she doesn ' t see a problem with the height variance . In fact , given the agricultural nature of the neighborhood and the proposed renovations , the building remains much as it is now and has been in the past . It is a very interesting structure . It did not appear that there was anyone living in the structure when she visited the site , although she did see signs of activity in the artist studio . For the height variance it seems fine , it seems like a good idea and they would like to encourage keeping agricultural buildings in an agricultural design mode so that it carries on the flavor of that neighborhood . Although , this is not your typical agricultural building . Other than what ' s been said here regarding the safety issues , which are a big concern , and the legal implications of that - - the physical renovations don ' t seem to pose any problem . The continued use of the back area by the artist who is a non- resident doesn ' t seem to be a problem as long as he also complies with the safety issues . Chairman Austen noted that the building has been in existence since the 1940 ' s because he used to go by there when he was younger . He noted that there are no comments from the neighbors . He read the letter from the Tompkins County Department of Planning , dated March 30 , 1995 . It ' s pretty much the same as was gone over in 1992 , and he thinks everything is still pertinent to this appeal . Now , however , they are talking about raising the roof somewhat to make a shed roof out of it . MOTION • By Mr . David Stotz , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative determination of environmental significance for the property located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27 - 1 - 24 . 12 , based on adopting the findings of the Town of Ithaca Planning Department , dated April 6 , 1995 , for the occupancy of an accessory building by up to two non- resident artists . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Stotz , Ellsworth . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . MOTION By Mr . David Stotz , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a variance for the property located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27 - 1 - 24 . 12 for the use of an accessory building by up to two non- resident artists and that the terms and conditions of the variance are as follows : 1 . That the variance be for a period of five years . • 2 . That the building be used in such a fashion that there is no noise between the hours of 8 PM and 8 AM , seven days a week . Town of Ithaca 18 'Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • 3 . That the variance be conditioned that a certificate of occupancy be obtained for this accessory building within six months , by October 31 , 1995 . 4 . That there are to be no more than two non- resident artists . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Stotz Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . David Stotz . RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative determination of environmental significance for the property located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , for the principal building , Tom of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27 - 1 - 24 . 12 , based on adopting the findings of the Town of Ithaca Planning Department , as reviewed by JoAnn Cornish , dated April 6 , 1995 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : . AYES - Stotz , Austen , Ellsworth . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . Chairman Austen asked for a motion for the variance . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . David Stotz . RESOLVED , that the Board grant a variance from the requirements for Article V . Section 18 , Paragraph 10 , of the Tom of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to allow for the conversion of the principal building of an existing agricultural building , approximate height of 34 ' in an agricultural district for a residence and artist studio to be occupied by the appellant . This property is located at 1478 Mecklenburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 27 - 1 - 24 . 12 , with the following findings and conditions ° 1 . Renovations must comply with all state and local building codes . 2 . The project must be complete and in conformance with these codes by October 31 , 1995 . 3 . The premises must be vacated , if not brought into compliance with code , by October 31 , 1995 . • 4 . That the structure itself otherwise is not in violation . 5 . That the character of the building is of such a nature that it cannot be changed or altered easily . Totm of Ithaca 19 -Zoning Board of Appeals April 12 , 1995 • 6 . That any use of the building as a residence by a tenant renovation would be a benefit to the neighborhood . A vote on the motion resulted as follows * AYES - Austen , Stotz Ellsworth . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . The meeting was adjourned . ' � D Debbie R . Raines , ZBA Recordfn Secretary Edward Auste , Chairman • •