Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2005-09-19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Kirk Sigel, Chairperson; Harry Ellsworth, Board Member; Dick Matthews, Board Member; Ronald Krantz, Board Member; Andy Frost, Director of Building/Zoning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town; Christine Balestra, Planner. ABSENT: Jim Niefer, Board Member OTHERS PRESENT: Michael S. Husar, Cornell University; Pam Kingsbury, Egner Architectural Associates; Gwen Seaquist, Albanese Law Office; Nancy Battistella, Six Mile Creek Vineyard; Thomas Parsons, City of Ithaca Fire Marshall; Michael Moore, 1028 East Shore Drive; Lee C. Lee, 1032 East Shore Drive. Chairperson Sigel opened the meeting at 7:04 p.m. Chairperson Sigel — Good evening. Welcome to the September meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of appeals. This evening, we have four appeals. The first that we're going to take is that of Six Mile Creek Vineyard, the next will be the appeal of Cornell University, followed by Michael and Timothy Moore, and finally Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club. APPEAL of Nancy Battistella, DBA Six Mile Creek Vineyard,Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-66 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to modify an existing vineyard/winery with a building expansion,located at 1551 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56-2-1.1, Medium Density Residential Zone. Said vineyard has previously been granted a variance to allow its use and an interpretation is being requested for consideration as to whether "receptions" are a normal function of vineyards. Otherwise, a request for a modification of the previously approved use variance is also being made. Mr. Frost — I just want to call the board's attention to the memorandum that is in your packets. This has been discussed somewhat in depth with Mrs. Battistella, Town Attorney and the Town Planning Department, and I don't think I need to speak anymore about that. The Memo speaks for itself. Chairperson Sigel — So basically the Town Staff is recommending that we refer this first to the Planning Board for Planning Board review, which I don't see any reason why not to if they feel it is appropriate. It's a situation where it wouldn't normally go to the Planning Board first, so we have to formally request Planning Board review and recommendation. The applicant is aware of that and has agreed to that. Mr. Matthews —So what will our function be? Chairperson Sigel—We're just going to make a motion to refer it to the Planning Board. TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Frost —The Planning Board will do a quasi site plan approval, and then it will come back to the Town Zoning Board for the action. Chairperson Sigel — Once we have their recommendation. It's possible that, you know, things could change a little bit based on their review and input. Mr. Matthews —But the folks had to come down tonight just to be present? Mr. Frost — I thought it would be appropriate, they're aware that's why I wanted to have this case served first, because assuming you agree, this will only take a couple minutes. Ms. Battistella- In case you had any questions. Chairperson Sigel — If you could just come to the microphone just for a second and just state your name and address please. Ms. Battistella- Hi, I'm Nancy Battistella and I'm the owner. And this is Dan Shickel. Chairperson Sigel—OK, did you have any questions or comments? Ms. Battistella - No, we've discussed this with Andy and gone through some process before, so we understand clearly, and we just thought I should come in case there was any questions. But if not, we'll just be going right to the Planning board then, it that was... Mr. Frost—And then they'll discuss stuff with you, then it will come back to the Zoning Board, and the Zoning Board doesn't necessarily have to agree with everything the Planning Board says. And part of what prompted this is you did, though it was 20 years ago, go before the Planning Board and the Zoning Board at that time. So, we're trying to be consistent with development of the winery based on actions 20 years ago. Ms. Battistella- OK, that's fine. Chairperson Sigel — OK, so I will make a motion to adjourn the appeal of Nancy Battistella, until such time as the Planning Board has reviewed the application and made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of appeals, at which point, we will reopen the appeal. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 042: Nancy Battistella, DBA Six Mile Creek Vineyard, Appellant, 1551 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56-2-1.1, Medium Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. 2 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES RESOLVED that this Board adjourn the appeal of Nancy Battistella, until such time as the Planning Board has reviewed the application and made a recommendation to the Zoning Board of appeals, at which point, we will reopen the appeal. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel—OK, thanks for coming down. Ms. Battistella- Thank you. Mr. Frost—For the Zoning Board members for the next meeting, presuming we get there at the next meeting, to bring all of your stuff for tonight with you. ADJOURNED APPEAL of Cornell University, Appellant, Michael S. Husar, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 225 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to construct an Arthropod Research Facility without the installation of a Town required sprinkler system. The New York State Building Code would not otherwise require such an installation. The property is located off of Game Farm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64-1-2, Planned Development Zone #9. Chairperson Sigel—Good evening. Mr. Husar - Good evening. I have spoken with Tom Parsons, our EH&S, we touched base with Andy this afternoon, and the letter we presented this evening indicates that we will, in fact, provide a sprinkler system. On recommendation of our in-house Environmental Health and Safety people, we elected to go with a pre-action system, so we don't have any risk of accidental sprinkler head release, and what we do have to do is to ask if we can have relief from the 100 gallon per minute hose allowance, which is a matter of the water supply not being able to handle both the sprinkler release as designed plus the 100 gallon per minute allowance. Without the hose allowance, we're fine, we have residual pressure, but if we need to include the 100 gallon per minute, we fall short. Chairperson Sigel — OK, and could you just explain what it means to have a pre-action sprinkler system? 3 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Husar - Essentially, the, it requires both a sprinkler head activation and a smoke detector concurrence. So let's say for example we knock a head, we break it, it doesn't automatically start spraying water all over the place, it needs to also say we have a smoke condition so that the fire alarm system concurs. The fire alarm system would then release the valve and the water would flood into the system and go to the open head. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Matthews —What does the fire department... I see the gentleman is here again, what do they say about the reduced pressure and the hazards to the firemen? Mr. Parsons - We've met with the University on this matter a couple of times, in fact, we strongly encouraged them to consider this, they were looking at other options. And our agreement to allow the 100 gallons per minute were looking at the benefits versus the cost of it, and our thought is that because of this occupancy, having a sprinkler system which could contain and control any fire that might be inside the building, might circumvent any need for us to enter the building immediately which might cause an accidental release of some of the biologics that are inside the building. So from our standpoint, we look at the sprinkler system as being a pro-active approach, it would react. Cornell putting in a pre-action system certainly addresses their concerns for an accidental release because that's one of their issues that they brought up in their previous variance hearing. They're concerned about an accidental release, water washing the bugs out. I think we've looked at how they're containing water even if they did have a fire incident. We know the response by the fire department as well as EH&S, we're fairly comfortable that if there were any event in this building, the sprinkler system would easily manage it. The 100 gallons allowance is something that the NFPA 13 Code requires and it would require a variance. IF this were a state variance, you'd have to go for a state variance to allow that relief. We don't allow that usually or grant that because we assume that we'd have to pull off a line, but being that this area has a limited water supply in that area as it is, we feel that if we are going to put our eggs in the basket for the water supply, we'd rather have it go towards the sprinkler system, hoping for initial activation to control anything that we'd have and we wouldn't have the need to pull lines and attach to the hydrant to draw upon this 100 gallon per minute requirement. Mr. Ellsworth—You've got low residual pressure? You're lines are undersized? Mr. Parsons - Yeah, six inch line that runs down off of Dryden road, it runs through a PRZ, they've got about 74 pounds of head pressure down there, the test hydrant which is about 300 feet farther out on the lines has got about 260 I think is what the flow rating was, at 20 residual. They backed it up, so they're marginal. They actually, if you take the 100 gallons a minute, they have enough residual pressure to supply the sprinkler system. It's strictly the 100 gallons for the fire department use is where the numbers... Mr. Frost — Is that totally independent of the siamese connection then? Is that independent of the siamese connection, or is that considered with the hydrant the siamese connection? 4 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Parsons - The siamese connection is something so that if we pull a hose line, it's so that we can support the system at the same time drawing away from the system... Mr. Frost — so you're not just holding the hose and putting the fire out, you're also pumping into the system. Mr. Parsons - Right, and so we don't have any doubts that the sprinkler system would maintain and control anything we have and our concern about this building approval from the very beginning was if they had something that was under control, we didn't want to go rushing in to entering it with the concern of having an accidental release. We feel very comfortable with sprinkler systems and confident that if they had anything in the building that this would control it and maintain it and allow us lots of time to think about and get the experts in to decide how we would enter this building to deal with whatever situation might be going on. We're, quite frankly, from the fire department, were quite happy that this is what Cornell chose to do. Mr. Frost — This morning when Tom and Mike and I talked independently on the telephone, Mike I think that you had indicated that there are some areas that would be a no entry area, or did I misunderstand that? There are some rooms where the fire department would not be entering,period. Mr. Husar - We have five rooms, it's actually the two rearing rooms, the equipment room that has the incubator in it, and the two greenhouses are the five rooms that could conceivably have off hours storage of arthropods, and those five rooms are the ones that we were viewing as we don't want a hose in those, so when we were originally talking about doing a partial system, those were the five rooms we were looking at covering with either a water mist or a halon substitute so that we could control that and have the fire department deal with the rest of it with a hose, and at this point in time we have full coverage, so that's less an issue. Although that's not the place we want to have hoses. Mr. Frost — So if I understand there was an incident and the fire department responded, would they be entering those rooms or would EH&S be there first? Mr. Husar - Our goal is to have EH&S there first, our entomologists are writing a procedural plan for all the eventualities,just a general procedure plan for entry protocols, and then emergency procedures, so for example in an emergency the goal would be to safeguard the work on the bench and put arthropods in safe containment before evacuating. That would be the process. Mr. Frost—Do you have an entomologist here? Mr. Husar- Yes. Mr. Frost — So there is someone of the science here if you have questions, in the audience. 5 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews — What is the Town's liability if we approve reduced pressure, if somebody gets injured in that place? Do we face liability at all? Mr. Barney — Let me put it this way, anybody can bring a lawsuit anytime they want. Whether they would succeed is often a different question. I don't think we would incur any additional liability, we're being asked to reduce the requirements here. These are requirements actually that exceed New York State Building Code requirements, they are local code items here. Mr. Frost—To have the sprinkler. Mr. Barney—To have the sprinkler, yeah. Mr. Matthews —So we wouldn't be found negligent? Mr. Barney—No. Mr. Matthews —OK, thank you John. Mr. Barney—Well, nothing is absolute in the law. Mr. Matthews —I wouldn't repeat that, I wouldn't repeat that. Mr. Barney—But it's on tape now so I want to qualify that. It would be unlikely that you would be found negligent. Mr. Frost — While we're talking about this, I think the expectation, correct me if I'm wrong Tom, is that the Fire Department has the expectation that a year, 18 months from now there will be an increase in the water supply to allow 100 gallon per minute hose allowance. Am I understanding that part? Mr. Parsons - Yeah, our expectation and that is from talking to the University and EH&S is that they have plans to develop the water system in that area. Part of it is that they are kind of waiting to see how the Hungerford Hill Tank, when the new tank gets installed, how that affects the area, but I think they're looking, we suggested some ideas about how to get an adequate flow out to them, they have bigger ideas about how to get more water, which tells me I think they're looking at the area being developed even more in around those buildings as far as the work that's being done. And quite honestly the water supply that they have there presently is insufficient to support fire fighting activities if we had any major fire in any one of those other larger structures that are around those barns out there. As I mentioned earlier, we are only having about 260 gallons per minute, that would handle about a room and contents fire in most of those buildings, but many of those buildings are undetected, unprotected and if there was a fire, it would probably get a substantial start before we get notification, so the water demand out there for other buildings is quite high and the system that is out there is not sufficient enough to support that. So it would be in Cornell's best interest in the long term to advance that, so I don't see there is any reason for them not going forward with it. 6 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Frost — Where, I'm going with this, and this really is for you, John Barney is assuming the town approves this, I'm just making that assumption because they haven't come to a conclusion yet. Then at some point they are going to build a building and myself and the fire department as well as Mike were talking about how to manage this once it is complete, whether I would give them a temporary certificate of occupancy saying if the Zoning Board had the expectation that 18 months from now or 12 months from now that they increase the water supply there. As you may recollect, I don't think any of the board members were here back in the 1980's, we had areas of Elmira Road where we didn't have public water at the time. This board required people to put in a sprinkler system, but a sprinkler system wouldn't meet the flow requirements of the NFPA. We anticipated that there would be public water. I think it was a year or two we did get public water, so the variances approved form some of the businesses on Elmira Road had kind of a time limitation to connect to the public water once it was made available. So if you're following my rambling on here, what I am anticipating if you allow the reduced hose allowance, how would we deal with issuing a certificate of occupancy, be it a time limited certificate, can it be permanent or temporary certificate or that kind of thing. So whether you address that now John or when it comes to some conclusion in this particular hearing, I need some guidance on how to do the variance. You follow? Mr. Barney—No, can you repeat that please? Mr. Frost—I knew you would say that. Mr. Barney—What is the timing for water to get in there for the pressure? Mr. Parsons - I can't tell you, Cornell wasn't able to give me a definitive timeline. It could be next year, it could be the year after. It all depends on how I think the economy is and how their development is. Maybe Mike could help... Mr. Husar - Well, I do know that there is the Hungerford Hill Tank going in and there is some talk about how to best take advantage of that and enhance the supplies that are there. And my thinking is that within the year we will be able to do flow tests on hydrants in the area and see where we stand. There are some folks who are suggesting that by reworking some of the pump stations and doing some engineering magic that they can increase flow down the lines, and it's quite possible we could end up with our hundred gallon a minute hose allowance just on the basis of that. That's my hope. Mr. Frost-No guarantees. Mr. Husar - No guarantees, that is correct. And beyond that I know there is stuff going up that requires water for some of the projects for agricultural needs to irrigate, so I know that they are using the water. Mr. Barney — I wanted, if we put some sort of a time frame within which the variance would lapse, it could be renewed, but basically it would have a time limit of say 4 or 5 7 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES years and at that point if the pressure was up, fine, and if it wasn't up, at least they would take another look at it. Mr. Husar- That would be acceptable. Mr. Parsons —I don't think the Fire Department's looking for 4 or 5 years though. Mr. Frost — Does Environmental Health and Safety, I know Environmental Health and Safety doesn't always think like the administration at Cornell which is spending the money, but is environmental health and safety also concerned about the existing buildings that Tom is referring to as being potential problems in a fire fight or that's not... Mr. Husar- I can't speak for them. Mr. Ellsworth—I suspect the fire department doesn't want to run into this building with a hose and flush it out anyways. With this building, I understand there are other buildings that have... Mr. Parsons - Right, our interest is to not go running into the building unless we absolutely had to. So if we had a sprinkler activation that maintained the fire and [inaudible], we could probably shit off the water because the valve and all the controls are outside of the hazard area, we could actually suspend the water flow and leave the building in basically a self-contained state until we have the experts who are specialists in managing the bugs who could arrive and we could do it in a joint and very coordinated and safe entry. That's what I'm looking for in this, and I think that the scientists right now are developing a plan and we'll be working with them on how we're going to make entry to it and just allude the fact that EH&S in this situation would not necessarily would be going into the building if there was a fire situation right off the bat. They would most likely wait till we would arrive and we would jointly look at it, and a lot of whatever we did would be based on a pre-plan that's worked out between the scientists that are working in the research facility there, EH&S and ourselves. So it would be coordinated, we'd be working together on our actions. Mr. Barney —Now, if I understand it right the water pressure that is there is sufficient to drive the heads for the sprinkler system. Mr. Parsons - Yes it is, with residual pressure. Within safety, and it has safety factors built into it. Mr. Barney—Meaning there's pressure in excess of that that's needed? Mr. Parsons - Right, there's just not enough pressure and flow to supply the 100 gallons a minute like what we need. That additional 100 gallons a minute. Mr. Barney—And what's the 100 gallon per minute for? 8 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Parsons - It's to allow for a hose line that we might hook up to a hydrant and be able to take another 100 gallons a minute out of the system. Mr. Barney —So that's on top of the sprinkler system pressure and then you need another x number to get to the 100 gallons a minute to get to the hose. Mr. Parsons - Right, in my conversations with Cornell EH&S I think we were looking at 160 —170 gallons a minutes, somewhere in that area, with the sprinkler demands, it's when we added the other hundred gallons we got over the edge and that's where the problem... Mr. Barney—You talk about the building, it's the human occupancy is basically daytime, at night, probably the last thing you want to do is to have people running in there as they say because of the potential of the bugs. And if you've got an adequate sprinkler system that's functioning. Chairperson Sigel—Right. Mr. Frost—What type of constructions is this? Ms. Kingsbury - IIB. Mr. Frost—So it does not have a lot of combustibles, it has some combustibles. Mr. Ellsworth—Just the roof trusses is what you said before, wasn't it? Ms. Kingsbury - ...Fire retardant treated wood...[inaudible]. Mr. Frost—So we won't have a highly combustible building. Chairperson Sigel — Would you be comfortable, John, with just granting the variance without any time limit? Mr. Barney—If I were a voting member of the board, yes. Chairperson Sigel — Because from what I've heard from Mr. Parsons, it's not a critical need to get the 100 gallons per minute. And it seems, given the size of this building, that it's.... Mr. Barney—The entire building is now going to be sprinklered, I think I heard you say. Mr. Parsons - The entire building. Mr. Barney—Yes. Mr. Parsons - If I may, um... 9 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Sure. Mr. Parsons - From our standpoint, I guess, to hold some credibility and to hold the university eventually to stand up and do the right thing as far as supplying water into this area, I would request that we look at probably putting a 24, 36 month as Andy suggested a variance relief on this, and if at that point in time, they couldn't meet that, they could go back and ask for an extension on the variance. That would be my suggestion, I think 24 months would give them adequate time to at least develop a plan if not implement the changes that would be needed. Mr. Frost — Can I just ask Mike is Cornell aware, we've had a lot of development going on in this area, albeit some of them are athletic fields, but I don't know it seems to me that this may be, over the future, an area that's being developed. Is Cornell aware that if they keep on having buildings that need sprinkler variances and modifications, they come back in here, it's going to be more difficult to get relief from the local law? Mr. Husar - Well, I know that Andy Anderson has been looking at methods to improve the flow and they're looking at a number of options, and northing has really been decided yet, but they are looking at it, but I know that is the first step towards actually taking a plan of action. Mr. Frost — Because this is not the first building in this particular area that has been before this board, so what I'm trying to suggest is that the next time Cornell has a building, you may not be involved in the project, but maybe you will be... Mr. Husar- I probably will. Mr. Frost — If you have to sit before this board, it's going to be a little bit more of a difficult task to ask for relief from the Town's ordinance. Mr. Husar- I'll pass along that message. Mr. Frost—OK. Chairperson Sigel — I'm also comfortable with, say, a three year allowance to give them plenty of time to explore the option of the new water tank, and I realize it's probably not high on their agenda to put in new water lines right away, but... Mr. Matthews — Is this information shared with the administration at Cornell, if you get an extension like this, a variance like this. Mr. Husar- It will be. Mr. Matthews — If we decide on a three year period of allowance, they get that information, too? Mr. Husar- I pass that up along the food chain. 10 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —OK. Mr. Frost — That food chain, how far does that really go? I mean you have PDC, Planning, Design and Construction, are you under that...? Mr. Husar- I'm under John Kiefer's umbrella, and John would present that to Day Hall. Mr. Frost—So it seems like the message will get there. Mr. Husar- The message will get there. Chairperson Sigel—So, Hunter Rawlings will be notified tonight. Mr. Husar- By way of the Ithaca Journal. Mr. Ellsworth — Don't all projects come before your organization's review? It used to, when I was there. Mr. Husar- Excuse me? Mr. Ellsworth—All projects come before your department's review... Mr. Husar- That's right. Mr. Ellsworth — So if your department's aware of this, that's as far as it needs to go, it doesn't have to go through all of the academic departments. Mr. Husar- But the funding needs to be approved upstairs, so... Chairperson Sigel — OK, any other questions, I'll open the public hearing. If anyone wishes to speak regarding this case, who hasn't already said what they wanted to say? If not, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opened and closed the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—Any other questions or comments? Mr. Krantz—Seems very reasonable. Chairperson Sigel—Seems reasonable. Chris, any comments? Ms. Balestra—No, nothing. Chairperson Sigel—OK, well then... Mr. Frost—Are you East Shore Drive? 11 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Seaquist- Yes, I'm Gwen Seaquist. Chairperson Sigel—We're not quite ready for you yet. Ms. Seaquist- Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Frost—You're anxious. Chairperson Sigel — That's OK. So, if there are no other questions then I will move to grant the appeal of Cornell University requesting a variance from the requirements of chapter 225 of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to construct an arthropod research facility, with the installation of a pre-action sprinkler system, but without the required 100 gallon per minute hose allowance, at Town of Ithaca tax parcel number 64.- 1-2, Planned Development zone number 9. With the following findings that at this time it would be an unreasonable expense for the applicant to install sufficient flow to the area to meet the 100 gallon per minute requirement. Second finding that based on the input of Thomas Parsons who is the Fire Marshall for the City of Ithaca Fire Department, it is appropriate to waive this requirement at least for a limited period of time, and with the condition that this variance be limited to three years from today's date. With the understanding that the applicant can come back and ask for a further extension if necessary at that time. John? Mr. Barney — Yeah, I could suggest that it is probably worth stating that the type of occupancy here does not lend itself to sleeping or human occupancy... Chairperson Sigel—outside of working hours. Mr. Barney—Outside of working hours. That the construction is of a type that is relative non-combustible, has relatively few combustible elements, and that the basic occupancy of the building is basically daytime and occupied by biological insect specimens. Chairperson Sigel — OK. Just to confirm, we don't need to do a SEQR on this it would seem? Ms. Balestra—If you do, there was one prepared. Mr. Barney—Do we not need a SEQR? I would think we probably do. Chairperson Sigel—Oh, OK. Ms. Balestra—I think they need to vote. Chairperson Sigel—So, we'll table that motion. Chairperson Sigel tabled the motion on the floor. 12 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel — and I will first move to make a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to the appeal of Cornell University for a sprinkler variance, for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment form prepared by Town Staff. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 043 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Cornell University, Appellant, Michael S. Husar, Agent, Game Farm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64-1-2, Planned Development Zone #9. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Cornell University for a sprinkler variance for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel—OK, and now I will re-move the motion I just made earlier. Chairperson Sigel moved the motion on the table to the floor. Chairperson Sigel—Second? Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 044: Cornell University, Appellant, Michael S. Husar, Agent, Game Farm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64-1-2, Planned Development Zone #9. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Cornell University, requesting a variance from Chapter 225 of the Town of Ithaca code to be permitted to construct an Arthropod Research Facility, with the installation of a pre-action 13 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES sprinkler system, but without the required 100 gallon per minute hose allowance at Town of Ithaca tax parcel no. 64.-1-2, Planned Development Zone #9. FINDINGS- 1. INDINGS:1. At this time it would be an unreasonable expense for the applicant to install sufficient flow to the area to meet the 100 gallon per minute requirement. 2. Based on the input of Thomas Parsons, who is the Fire Marshall for the City of Ithaca Fire Department, it is appropriate to waive this requirement, at least for a limited period of time. 3. The type of occupancy here does not lend itself to sleeping or human occupancy outside of working hours. 4. The construction is of a type that is relatively non-combustible. It has relatively few combustible elements. 5. The human occupancy of the building is basically daytime and is occupied at night only by biological insect specimens. CONDITIONS: This variance shall be limited to three years from today's date with the understanding that the applicant can come back and ask for a further extension if necessary at that time. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel—OK, thank you, you're all set. APPEAL of Michael and Timothy Moore, Appellants, Attorney Gwen Seaquist, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXV, Section 270- 205 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to modify a non-conforming building/lot with the reconstruction of an existing single-family home, located at 1028 East Shore Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 19-2-16, Lakefront Residential Zone. Variances from Article VII, Sections 270-47, -48, and —49 may also be requested to further reduce size and area requirements. Chairperson Sigel—Good evening. Ms. Seaquist- Good evening. Chairperson Sigel—If you could just start with your name and address. 14 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Seaquist- OK, my name is Gwen Seaquist, attorney at the Albanese law office. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Ms. Seaquist - I'm here on behalf of Mr. Michael Moore, who is right behind me, and his brother Timothy Moore who lives in Washington, DC. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Ms. Seaquist - And they've entered into a purchase agreement for 1028 East Shore Drive. And that purchase agreement is contingent upon the granting of this variance so that they can build a house there. I gave you all a packet of information, and I'd like to start with, if it's OK with you, this is in the back but it might be quicker just to distribute this. So in the back you've got the picture, I wanted to make sure you guys can really appreciate the house we're talking about, which is the one on the bottom of this picture, which looks like something out of Hansel and Gretel. Chairperson Sigel — When I went to visit, I didn't want to step on the property, so I stayed on the neighbors yard. Ms. Seaquist - So that picture of that house is from the lake side, and that is represented of the survey map. It's the red bordered house is the current shack that is on there. And what Mike and his brother would like to do is they would like to be able to build a two story house that is represented by that shack as extended to with the orange as you can see by here, so the footprint of the proposed house is l200 feet on each floor. Now, on the front part, what I call the front, which borders the lake, it's staying at exactly the same distance from the lake as it was originally. And this side of the house is also staying with the same setback. And this is Mr. Thaler's house to the north, and this board recently heard an appeal from a house either one or two more up, the Lee's, you might recall that, so this is that same neighborhood. So really the first problem is on this side of the house, and as you know there's a railroad track running here and then there's like an embankment, and so this is usually where cars park, so the extension here is really going to the backside of all the houses, and this part over here is being extended, you can see just a small amount, maybe a few feet past where the current porch is on the falling down house. So, we're requesting a variance so that he can build a house that's not in conformity, that's true, but I don't know if anyone would be willing to invest in the property unless they were allowed to build something, this is a pretty modest cottage that he is going to set down there with your approval. Mr. Frost — Mr. Thaler has over the years, about once a year, called me, to look at the house to make sure it isn't going to fall down. I haven't been there in more than six months now, but this has been a concern of my office in terms of structural integrity, and it has for the most part, and I haven't been there in the last six months, it has been pretty secure from anyone getting inside. But definitely my office would like to see this house removed. 15 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Is Mr. Barns who signed your letter the neighbor to the South? Ms. Seaquist - Well, these are like the Barns brothers, and they rent this out, and they come and they go. Stewart, I used to live down in this neighborhood, so I know these guys, Stewart's at the divinity school at Harvard and Scott's a real estate agent in South Carolina. So we called Scott and asked him and he said "Oh, go down to the house and talk to Stewart who's visiting" and Mike can report on the conversation but basically Stewart didn't have any objections to it. I mean it's really ugly, and an eyesore and probably a danger. Mr. Matthews — You have a note there, excuse me, it says buildable area for current zoning? Ms. Seaquist- Right. Mr. Matthews —OK? Ms. Seaquist- This down in here? Mr. Matthews —Well the arrow is pointing to the orange. Ms. Seaquist - Right, so if we weren't grandfathered in for at least the current footprint, that represents how much area a house could take up to meet the requirements of the proportion of the building to the lot. Mr. Matthews —You have me confused. Ms. Seaquist- OK. Mr. Matthews —It says buildable area for current zoning. Does that mean the orange area has no requirements for a variance from us? Ms. Seaquist-Nope. Mr. Barney—No. Ms. Seaquist - What that means is if we were to comply with today's zoning requirements, that is... the guy who did the survey just drew that as a representation, it could be in any form. Mr. Barney — The arrow, I think actually, Gwen, the arrow is pointing to a strip of land within the orange, it's not the entire orange piece. Ms. Seaquist- Right, it's this in here. Mr. Barney — and I don't know if you can see it from over where you are, it's a little clearer from here. 16 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —Oh, that little strip. Ms. Seaquist- It's this right here. Sorry, I should have colored it in. Mr. Matthews —Oh. Mr. Frost—What you're talking about there is the lot coverage limitation. Ms. Seaquist- Right, that's how small it would really be. Chairperson Sigel—Not the setback. Mr. Frost—Right, because the zoning ordinance limits the percentage of the land area to be occupied by the structure, which is 20% I think. Chairperson Sigel—It's ten, I think... [many voices at once] Mr. Matthews —So what you're asking for Ma'am is a variance for a side yard setback? Mr. Frost — They're further reducing a deficient side yard making it more non- conforming by reducing the deficiency already, plus the new structure will occupy more of the land area than allowed, so it will do two things, to exceed the ten percent lot coverage as well as to further reduce the deficient side yard. Mr. Matthews —What do the neighbors say? Ms. Seaquist - Well, we have signed letters from the neighbors saying they have no objection to the proposed construction. I believe those are in your packet as well. Mr. Matthews —Thank you. Chairperson Sigel — John, in this case is it appropriate really to do a variance from 270- 205, for the enlarging the non-conforming use, or because we're granting separate conditions or separate allowances for the coverages and setbacks. I mean, they're not rebuilding it in the footprint. Mr. Barney —It really doesn't make too much difference which way it goes —the criteria are the same. Chairperson Sigel — We could grant them the lot coverage variance and the setback variance then they can build this. Mr. Barney — Right, and in a way, they're not enlarging it because they're, as I understand it, tearing it down, aren't you? 17 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Seaquist - We're tearing down this outlined in red and putting in its place a building... Chairperson Sigel—So they could rebuild the existing without a variance. Ms. Seaquist- That's right. Chairperson Sigel — Staying strictly within the footprint. OK, so you are, proposing an approximate 10.3 feet on the North side? Ms. Seaquist - Well, this is the north side here. You mean in this direction? This is currently 10.3 feet. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, the north side yard. Mr. Matthews —And 15 feet is code? Mr. Barney—Side yard are 20 feet, other than a one story garage which is 15. Mr. Matthews —20 feet? Mr. Frost—Again, the lake front zone is a new zone in the Town as of 2003. This used to be just like an R-15 zone up until 2003, in which we developed a lake front zone which has different thresholds than the residential zone does. Mr. Matthews —So what is the requirement? Mr. Barney—20 feet. Ms. Balestra—20 foot side yard. Chairperson Sigel—20 feet side. Ms. Balestra—20 feet. Mr. Matthews —20 feet, that was my question, OK, thank you. Chairperson Sigel—And you are proposing 10.4 feet on the south side. OK. Ms. Seaquist- That one part, yeah. Then over here is 12.1. Chairperson Sigel—Well, that's the old setback, the 12.1. Ms. Seaquist- I'm sorry, you're right. Mr. Matthews —And that is 15 feet or 20 feet also? 18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—Yes. Mr. Krantz—And this is only going to be 12.4 feet from one neighbor on the north? Mr. Barney—It's going to be 10.3 feet on the north and 10.4 feet on the south. Ms. Seaquist - That's remaining the same though on the north as it always was, as it's only changing by two less, well, less than two feet on the south because it's already at 12.1, and it's only going down to 10.4. Mr. Krantz—So there's a house 10 feet on either side? Chairperson Sigel — Well, a side yard, yeah. The house to the south is quite close, it's only 2.8 to their lot line, the house to the north is further, they have that as 12.4. Mr. Krantz — The good part of course is you're getting rid of an ugly dangerous shack and the bad part is it's really getting squished in there, this new house. Mr. Matthews —Well, I think it's already squished in there. Ms. Seaquist - Well, that's what I was going to say. I lived down there myself for 10 years, everybody's squished in. Mr. Matthews —Se he's squishing a relic with something that's a little more presentable. Ms. Seaquist- Yeah. Mr. Matthews —OK. Ms. Seaquist- And relic is a nice term for it. Mr. Krantz—We've got some good words: "squished", "relic" and"shack." Mr. Frost—What's amazing though, and I've motorcycled around all the lakes in central New York, and I was just around Canandaigua Lake, and the amazing houses that have to be well over a million dollars, five foot between the neighboring house. Huge houses, expensive houses, everyone's on top of each other. Mr. Krantz—Florida is filled with gated communities just like that. Mr. Frost—Did you say gatored or gated? Mr. Krantz—gated. Mr. Matthews —So the request before the board is just that we provide a variance for 10.3 feet, no no, 12 feet...? 19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Well, it's basically to allow the construction of that house. Ms. Seaquist - To take this current one down and construct a new house with this footprint. Mr. Matthews —Same footprint as there. Ms. Seaquist- The footprint that is on the map, the 1200 foot footprint. Mr. Matthews — OK, but from the lake the width of the house is the same as the new house will be. Ms. Seaquist - The current house is represented by this red line, here's the lake side, there is an extension of this many feet in there... I don't know exactly. Mr. Matthews —But you already had that because of the little jut out there. Ms. Seaquist- Arguably. Mr. Matthews —You're just adding that left portion and you're adding that rear portion. Ms. Seaquist - That's correct. It is that rear portion where the significant change is. And also notice the lines are basically staying the same, you know, it is centered the same way, it is facing the same way. It has the same setback from the lake. Mr. Matthews — It seems to me they have the neighbors concurring on this, that's a positive. Getting rid of the old shack if I may use that term, I hope the person who built it is not here to be insulted, and a better building is coming in its place. Chairperson Sigel — It seems to be in character with the size and shape of the other homes, or at least the more recently reconstructed homes in the area. I'm a little confused as to the rear yard setback. You have some numbers from the shoreline, but that's not, the actual property line is closer than the shore line, right? Ms. Seaquist - Well, they've got it drawn on here that it's about 20 feet. I would imagine that this is the beach front part in here. This particular house doesn't have a wall as I recall, it just sort of goes down to the land, dirt is falling into the beach. So, it doesn't have a wall like a lot of other places. Mr. Matthews —But they're not changing that? Mr. Barney—Well they are, it's a greater intrusion into the area, that corner. Chairperson Sigel —Because the rear lot line is angled, they're building house out in the part that is not as deep so they are reducing the rear yard setback, although that is not, the 20 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES number that we really need to know does not appear to be labeled. We need to know the distance from the Southwest Corner of the proposed house... Ms. Seaquist- This one right here? Chairperson Sigel — Yeah... to the nearest point on the rear lot line, which, 30 feet is marked from that corner to the shore line, but that doesn't appear to be the lot line. The lot line is some ten feet approximately closer. Mr. Matthews —The lot line is what, Kirk? Chairperson Sigel—The lot line is approximately ten feet closer than the shore line. Mr. Barney —Well, 270-47 says a rear yard on the shoreline side has to be not less than 25 feet in depth, so if you are correct, if that represents the actual property line, there is an incursion into that rear yard. Chairperson Sigel—It looks like about 20 feet as opposed to 25. Mr. Barney—And I'm not clear whether that property line represents the high water... Ms. Seaquist- Well, he says it's a setback from high water tie only. Mr. Barney—High water tie? Ms. Seaquist- tie. Mr. Barney—This is a tsunami kind of thing...? Chairperson Sigel—tie measures approximately high water. Mr. Matthews —What is the significance of this...[tape is flipped]? Mr. Barney — I think 25 feet away from the shoreline, and the shoreline may be where they show it out a ways beyond the property line, but shoreline is defined as the mean high water mark of Cayuga Lake. And this doesn't really indicate, it has a high water tie only, meaning that's where the high water is, then we can ignore the shoreline farther out because it is not our definition of shoreline. So, the survey is a little ambiguous. Mr. Matthews —So the footprint has been moved a little bit because of that extra, they're bringing it out? Chairperson Sigel—yeah, they're bringing it closer to the nearer part of the yard. Mr. Matthews —that corner? 21 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, I mean it looks like actually they're, even the original house is within the required setback a little bit. Yeah, I hadn't actually noticed this F section John, until you... Mr. Matthews —Again, can I go back to origins? What's the requirement that a home, a footprint, be set so many feet from the water line? Why? Mr. Barney—Maintain access for the public. Mr. Matthews —Maintain access for the public? Mr. Barney — So people can walk along the area between the high water mark and the low water mark, that's public land basically. Ms. Balestra—And also to protect the shoreline a little bit. Mr. Barney — Yeah, to keep construction, major construction away from the shoreline a little bit. Chairperson Sigel—To allow a natural area, a buffer... Mr. Matthews —So they impose on that walking area if you want to call it. Mr. Barney—The walking area is actually between the high water and the low water area, so wherever the high water is, it's the beach from the high water line on out. Mr. Matthews — So they're imposing on that by what? Two feet or so? By this footprint going... Mr. Barney—I'm not sure I understand your question? Mr. Matthews —Well, you said there's an area where people should be allowed to walk? Mr. Barney — Yes, that would be on the map that you have here. If this indeed, this tie line is the high water line it would be the space between the high water tie line and the shore line, they're not imposing on that at all. Mr. Matthews —So they're not imposing on that? Mr. Barney —No, but you measure you're 25 feet back from the high water tie line, if it means that is the high water mark for the lake. I don't think it does exactly because the lake shore is not that straight. Mr. Matthews —So then there they are imposing on some width of space there by what? 2 feet? 22 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney —Yes, the 25 feet they're showing across here, that they are building or want to build within that area, to the extent of about 20 feet, we figured, Kirk? Chairperson Sigel—It looks like about 20. Mr. Ellsworth—About 22. Mr. Matthews —Instead of 25. Is that right? Ms. Balestra—Right. Mr. Matthews —So five feet, by a corner piece. Ms. Balestra—Right. Mr. Matthews — It just seems to me that, thank you. It just seems to me that the advantages of the newer home and so forth far outweigh the disadvantage of that little piece of pie cutting into the 25 foot area. I mean that seems reasonable to me. Chairperson Sigel — I'm not necessarily concerned about the particular number as just knowing what the number is so that we can be sure of what we're granting. Ms. Seaquist- Well, I can certainly get that clarified for you. Chairperson Sigel — I mean from the survey it does appear that what is marked this tie measurement along approximate high water appears to be the boundary of the lot. Ms. Seaquist- It looks to me like this is the 25 feet here, this is the 30 feet here. Chairperson Sigel—Right. Lake shore setback from high water tie mark. Ms. Seaquist - So I'm not sure exactly what number... just tell me where you want the clarification so I can let the surveyor know. Chairperson Sigel—Well the shoreline. Ms. Seaquist - He's got the shore line marked up here as of May 17 at this dotted line, so 30 from the shore line, 25 feet from the lot line. Chairperson Sigel — so if that's the shoreline as we define it, then we're fine from the shoreline setback. The 25 foot shoreline setback, they have that marked as 30. Mr. Barney — Yeah, but I don't think that is the shoreline as we define it. We define shoreline as the high water mark. If this tie line is along the high water mark, then... [many inaudible voices] 23 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Seaquist - Just in case that would help, this is the first survey map I actually got of the current, the existing house. Chairperson Sigel—OK, OK, so the existing corner is 22.6 feet. Ms. Seaquist- So that's not marked on here, but that's this one. Chairperson Sigel—Do you have a ruler Andy? [inaudible] Mr. Ellsworth—One inch equals 20 feet Engineer's scale. Chairperson Sigel—We'll try to figure it out just from the map here. Any other questions or comments? Mr. Ellsworth—You have some public here. Chairperson Sigel - Yeah. You're sketches came out kind of faint, how tall is the house? Ms. Seaquist- 30 feet. Chairperson Sigel—30 feet total to the peak of the roof? Ms. Seaquist- Right. Chairperson Sigel—OK, I see that here. [inaudible] Chairperson Sigel—OK, and you're planning decking all across the back? Ms. Seaquist- Are you calling this the back? Chairperson Sigel—No, the lake. Ms. Seaquist- The lake side the back? Chairperson Sigel—Yeah. Ms. Seaquist - He's going to have to come back to do the dock part of it. Andy and I talked about that a couple of times. Mr. Frost—The dock in the ordinance requires Planning Board approval. Chairperson Sigel—OK, let's pass these down, these are a little bit darker. 24 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Seaquist - Sorry about that, I thought a put a lot of originals in there, I don't know where they all are. Chairperson Sigel—OK, if there are no other questions, we'll open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7:59 p.m. Mr. Barney—it's about seven feet intrusion. Chairperson Sigel—Oh, a seven feet intrusion into the 25, so 18 foot. Ms. Balestra—Eighteen. Chairperson Sigel—so approximately 18. Mr. Barney—probably 17 to be safe. Chairperson Sigel—Excuse me, Ms. Lee, did you want to speak? Ms. Lee-No, no, I am just curious to see how he... Chairperson Sigel—OK, OK. Ms. Lee- I was just curious why you are not being so mean to her as you were to me. [laughter] Chairperson Sigel—You're tough on us. Ms. Lee- I think it's lovely. Chairperson Sigel — OK, with no one wishing to speak at the public portion of the hearing, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—So, Mr. Barney has estimated that 17 feet setback will give you some margin on that corner to the rear lot line. Any other questions, comments? Do we have a SEQR for this? Ms. Seaquist- Short form, yes. Chairperson Sigel—I guess it doesn't hurt. Ms. Balestra — I need to disclose to the board that the current property owners are my landlords. And I don't see a conflict of interest, I did prepare the SEQR, but if the board 25 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES finds that there might be a conflict of interest for any reason at all, signed by a different staff member,prepared by a different staff member. Mr. Barney—When this building goes down,poor Chris will have no place to live. Ms. Seaquist- The rents got to be good for what it looks like. Ms. Balestra—Almost free. Ms. Seaquist- We need to talk about your lease. Ms. Balestra — The current owners own several parcels, several duplexes on South Hill and I live in one of them. Not anywhere near East Shore drive. Chairperson Sigel—I don't see any problem. It's going to be one month free. [laughter] Chairperson Sigel — I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the case of Michael Moore and his...in the appeal of Michael and Timothy Moore at tax parcel 19.-2-16 for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment form prepared by Town staff. Second? Mr. Krantz—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 045 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Michael and Timothy Moore, Appellants, Attorney Gwen Seaquist, Agent, 1028 East Shore Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 19-2-16, Lakefront Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ron Krantz. RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Michael and Timothy Moore at tax parcel 19.-2-16, for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: None 26 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel — OK, and I will move to grant the appeal of Michael and Timothy Moore requesting a variance from the requirements of... should I just mention the setback requirements, or the non-conforming? Mr. Barney — I would probably phrase it that I would grant a variance authorizing construction of a new home in place of the existing home on the lot, the north line to be no closer than ten feet to the northern side of the house to be no closer than 10 feet to the north boundary line; the southwesterly corner to be no closer than 17 feet to the ... Chairperson Sigel—No ten feet also. I'm sorry... Mr. Barney—No closer than 17 feet to the tie line measuring the approximate high water line shown on the survey map presented and the south line to be no closer than ten feet to the south boundary of the property. I don't think you need one for the east line, do we? Chairperson Sigel—I don't think so. Mr. Barney — And that they be permitted to exceed the ten percent site limitation to the extent shown on the survey map that was prepared and submitted to the meeting. Chairperson Sigel —OK, with the added condition that the home built be substantially as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant, and with the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied by the applicant. OK, second? Mr. Matthews —second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 046: Michael and Timothy Moore, Appellants, Attorney Gwen Seaquist, Agent, 1028 East Shore Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 19-2-16, Lakefront Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Dick Matthews. RESOLVED that this Board grants a variance, in the appeal of Michael and Timothy Moore, authorizing construction of a new home in place of the existing home on the lot, the northern side of the house to be no closer than 10 feet to the north boundary line; the southeasterly corner to be no closer than 17 feet to the tie line measuring the approximate high water line as shown on the survey map presented; and the south line to be no closer than 10 feet to the south boundary of the property. The appellants are permitted to exceed the 10% site limitation to the extent shown on the survey map that was prepared and submitted to the meeting. 27 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES FINDINGS: The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS: The home built shall be substantially as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Ms. Seaquist- Thank you very much. Chairperson Sigel—Thanks. Ms. Seaquist- Thank you, gentlemen. Mr. Frost — The next appellant is on his way now. I got Tom Murray on his cell phone. He just forgot. [many voices —inaudible] Mr. Frost called Mr. Murray and discussed the procedure with him. Mr. Frost—He'll be here in 15 minutes or so... is that? Chairperson Sigel—What's next month look like? Mr. Frost—There's room. Chairperson Sigel—There is room? I think we'll adjourn it to next month. Mr. Frost—Actually his sign is already up, so adjourning is probably not a bad idea. Chairperson Sigel—OK, any other official business? Mr. Ellsworth—You and I, our terms end at the end of this year. 28 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Not both of us. Mr. Frost- ... I mean, it's gone to the planning board... Chairperson Sigel—I think as a matter of principal, Mr. Murray should appear. Mr. Frost—And I knew when he wasn't here that he forgot, and sure enough he did. Ms. Balestra—So it's adjourned. Chairperson Sigel — Yeah, I will move to adjourn the appeal of courtside racquet and fitness until October's meeting. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 047: Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club, Appellant, Thomas Murray, Agent, 380 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62-1-5, Commercial District. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board adjourns the appeal of Courtside Racquet and Fitness until October's meeting. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel adjourned the meeting at 8:08 p.m. Chairperson Sigel re-opened the meeting at 8:11 p.m. Mr. Barney—We're rolling now? Chairperson Sigel — Re-opened. OK. I move to allow the chairman to set next month's meeting date for a date when at least a quorum will be able to attend. Second. Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second it. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? 29 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 048: Allowing the Chairman to set a Meeting Date. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board allows the chairman to set next month's meeting date for a date when at least a quorum will be able to attend. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Re-adjourned. Chairperson Sigel re-adjourned the meeting at 8:13 p.m. Kirk Sigel, Chairperson John Coakley, Deputy Town Clerk 30