HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2004-09-20 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
7:00 P.M.
PRESENT: Kirk Sigel, Chairperson; Harry Ellsworth, Board Member; Ronald Krantz,
Board Member; Dick Matthews, Board Member; Andy Frost, Director of
Building/Zoning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town (7:15); Michael Smith,
Environmental Planner.
ABSENT: Jim Niefer, Board Member.
EXCUSED: None
OTHERS: Richard Putnam, 706 The Parkway; George Frantz, 604 Cliff St; Joshua
Peluso, 140 W. Haven Rd; Ben Farr, 8 Hackberry Ln; Rob Champion, 210 Rachel Carson
Way
Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Chairperson Sigel—Welcome to the September meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Board of Appeals. Tonight we have three appeals, and we will take them in the following
order: The appeal of Richard Putnam, The appeal of Heritage Park Townhomes, and the
appeal of Robert Champion. The first appeal this evening, that of Richard Putnam,
appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of
the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a residential building
with a height of 40 + feet (36 foot height limit) at 206 Eldridge Circle, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 46-1-15.46, Low Density Residential Zone. Is there someone here
regarding this appeal? OK,please take a seat and state your name and address for us for
the record.
Richard Putnam—My name is Richard Putnam, my address is 706 The Parkway, Ithaca,
NY.
Chairperson Sigel—And could you just give us a brief summary of what you're asking
for and why?
Mr. Putnam - Well, when we got the building permit on the house, we talked to Kristie
Rice, the assistant director of Building and Zoning, and we wanted to have a walkout
basement, and she suggested that we could do some privving, like a window well and
come out and still meet the height requirement, because we knew we were going to be 1
foot 8 over the limit. And so we built the house and dropped it down further, because I
wanted to get it down to undisturbed soil, and when the house got down to the existing
grade, and when we got the house down, the slope of the house came away and to fill it
back up and come up, I would have to bring in more fill and cut down more trees in the
back yard. The house is down in an existing slope; you can see that on the drawing that I
provided.
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah. So the rear of the house, or I should say the floor of the
basement is approximately at existing grade where it would meet the back of the house, is
that true?
Mr. Putnam - The floor of the basement is...
Chairperson Sigel—It seemed to me you had a lot of fill around the sides and the front of
the house.
Mr. Putnam - They put in the road in Southwoods when we bought the lot and they took a
lot of fill off the road when they cut down the road, and we had a lot of fill that came in
and was there, and it was hard to tell exactly where existing grade was until we started to
dig for the foundation. So, what I want to dig down and find something solid to put the
house on, we got down to undisturbed soil with our nine-foot wall and we were down a
little lower than I intended to build the house.
Chairperson Sigel—When I was back there, where the trees were, obviously the base of
the trees were at existing grade before all this started, it seemed like the floor of the
basement is meeting what was originally at least approximately what was the slope of the
land.
Mr. Putnam - The floor of the basement right now is approximately about a foot above
the existing trees that are there, and we put a frost wall below that because we were going
to be close, we went an additional four feet in the ground on the back of the house, and
we intended bring up in the area of the door some privving and have a walkout, but I
didn't really want to cut down anymore trees there.
Chairperson Sigel—So you'd have to bring in quite a bit of fill then obviously to get to
where you didn't need the height variance.
Mr. Putnam - Well, not a lot, I mean the lots are big, it could be graded around a little bit,
but I would have to cut down more trees or bring it in and push it against the trees and the
trees would die, and we're building this as a speculative house, and I wouldn't want to
cover up the bottom of the trees and have them die and have the person who buys the
house have to cut them down in two years when they die. So we can take them out now
and box this around, or try to keep the existing grade of the property going the way it
wants to go for drainage.
Mr. Matthews - I'm confused.
Chairperson Sigel—Do you want to ask...?
Mr. Matthews - I just don't understand what you're trying to accomplish.
2
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—What he wants to do is be permitted to leave it the way it is right
now, if I'm correct.
Mr. Krantz - With a height variance, so he doesn't have to cut more trees down.
Mr. Putnam - Well, I've asked to leave an opening, approximately five foot wide and
taper that on the slope and keep the existing grade of the lot the way it is rather than
bringing in a lot of fill,just for drainage and to keep water away from the house. We're
certainly lower, the way the lot slopes, we're lower than any of the other houses would be
in the neighborhood. Anywhere in Tompkins County has got a lot of height differential
in a very small lot, so we're trying to leave the lot natural rather than bring in a lot of fill
and back fill against the grade. Part of the problem you run into now, with the roof
pitches they put on houses now, it's tough to keep underneath the current height
requirements of the town of Ithaca. I think when that was passed,people were building
flat roofs and at the time you had deck houses or flat roofs, and this day and age you see a
lot of houses with 8/12, 12/12 pitches and the house gets up there. It doesn't take a very
wide house to get close to the height requirement.
Mr. Matthews - So clarify for me, you want a height variance, and what happened was
when you dug for this house and started building it you found out that you were going to
be higher than you should be.
Mr. Putnam - What we found was, when they built the road in Southwoods, is that they
pushed a lot of soil off, we built the house probably a foot and a half, maybe two feet
lower than we thought we were going to. I would normally like to build the house higher
than the road. We had a permit for a nine-foot basement, I didn't want to spend the
money for 11 or 12 feet. When I build the house, I like to get the house down to existing
soil that will bear the weight of the house. We got down to existing grade and another
foot so we were on good bearing soil, so that's where the house ended up. So the top
front of the house is a little bit below the row height, and we had to create a swale in the
front to get water to drain away and go down the sides of the house. So, you can't really
tell that until you build the house, until you get the backhoe in, where you're going to
find good solid soil to set the house on.
Mr. Matthews - I understand.
Mr. Putnam - When we determined what was undisturbed soil and build the house, it was
essentially a foot and a half or two feet lower than we thought we would build the house
and rather than do what we applied for in the building permit, I thought it would be best
for the house and the lot and the future owner to leave the existing grade of the lot the
way it is. It certainly does not show from the road or I don't think because any of the
houses across the street from us, I don't think it would impede anyone's view of
anything, and I felt it would be best to leave the open area with a walkout door.
Chairperson Sigel—Do does that... do you understand?
3
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Matthews - I do and I don't. He said he had to go lower in building the house, but
he's asking for a height variance.
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, I agree, I don't necessarily see the connection between
lowering the house and needing a height variance. But setting that aside for the moment,
basically he put a house in on a lot that was fairly steep, where the floor of the basement
pretty much meets grade at the back of the house, and you know in that kind of a
situation, it is clearly easier to have a walkout basement than bring in a lot of fill. He
would have to basically pile up dirt around the back of the house to meet the height
requirement.
Mr. Barney - I don't actually know. You're never going to meet the height requirement.
It's the greater of the interior dimension or the exterior dimension, and the interior
dimension is always going to be measured from the basement floor. So, it's thirty-seven
feet eight inches from the day you designed this house, no matter how far down in the
ground it went.
Chairperson Sigel—But that's. You get 38 feet for the interior.
Mr. Barney - Correct, so you're all right. It's the exterior you're worried about, so it's 36
and 38, so...
Mr. Putnam - It was my understanding it was from grade to the highest point on the
house.
Chairperson Sigel—Right, for the exterior measurement.
Mr. Barney - There are two measurements, and you have to meet both, or you can't
exceed either. One's and interior, one's an exterior.
Chairperson Sigel—The interior measure is 38 feet from the lowest floor, which will be
your basement floor to the top of the house, you would have 38 feet, and then from your
lowest exterior grade to the top of the house you get 36 feet. So I assume that, you show
on your drawing that from the bottom of the basement door to the roof is 7'8", so
assuming that the bottom of that door is at the same level as the floor of the basement,
then your interior height is fine, because it's under the 38.
Mr. Putnam - And I guess I missed that in the whole building code. So in this particular
house because of the width I couldn't build that house with a 12/12 roof pitch, which
would have added another 4 feet.
Chairperson Sigel—Right, well you would have needed a variance to do that.
Mr. Putnam - OK.
4
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—So as it is, you are looking for a variance for the exterior height.
You could eliminate the need for a variance by not having the door there and by just
piling up some dirt.
Mr. Ellsworth - Or by putting a different pitch on the roof.
Mr. Putnam - I can't change that at this point. A dump truck of dirt we can do.
Mr. Ellsworth - Anyway, that's where we are.
Chairperson Sigel—Right, while obviously it would be nicer if the applicant had come
before us before he had built the house, I think in this situation that we have customarily
granted variances of a modest extension like this, in the case where the lot is sloped in the
back.
Mr. Ellsworth - It seems to me he's trying to do the best for many different things, but
let's see what the public has to say, if there's any of them here.
Mr. Krantz - No views are being impeded.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, we'll open the public hearing, if anyone wishes to speak.
Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 7:20 p.m.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, if not, we'll close the public hearing.
Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 7:21 p.m.
Chairperson Sigel—Any further discussion? Dick, any questions?
Mr. Matthews -No, I think I'm clear now. In this particular development, I think if he
goes up another twenty feet, the people will be quite happy because then they don't have
to listen to the power station. So, have at it.
Chairperson Sigel—We won't tackle that issue tonight. OK, it being an area variance,
we don't have to deal with a SEQR. Mike, any comments otherwise?
Mr. Smith -No.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. I will move to grant the appeal of Richard Putnam requesting a
variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a residential building with a height not to
exceed 38 feet (where there is 36 foot height limit) at 206 Eldridge Circle, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 46-1-15.46, Low Density Residential Zone. Second?
Mr. Krantz - Second.
5
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—All in favor?
ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 045: Richard Putnam, 206 Eldridge Circle,
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 46-1-15.46, Low Density Residential Zone.
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz.
RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Richard Putnam, Appellant,
requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the
Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a residential
building with an exterior height not to exceed 38 feet (where there is a 36 foot
height limit) at 206 Eldridge Circle, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 46-1-15.46,
Low Density Residential Zone.
FINDINGS:
The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied.
CONDITIONS:
None.
The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows:
AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews
NAYS: NONE
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, you're all set.
Mr. Putnam - Well if I do it again, I will be here before I build the house. I apologize to
you guys. It just sort of worked out that way, and I thought I was doing the best job on
the house. Thank you.
Chairperson Sigel—Well, at least you came before you tried to get the owners in there.
APPEAL of Heritage Park Town Homes, Owner, George Frantz,Appellant,
requesting variances from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the
Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct residential buildings
with building heights of 43 +feet(36 foot height limit) at 318 and 320 Old Gorge
Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 46-1-15.27 and 46-1-15.28, Low Density
6
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Residential Zone. A request for variances from Article VIII, Sections 270-60 and
270-62, and Section 280A of New York State Town Law, may also be requested, as
construction may commence prior to the completion of Town approved roadways.
Mr. Matthews - Kirk, may I ask Mr. Barney a question?
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah. Dick was concerned about a possible conflict, and I suggested
he ask you when we started here.
Mr. Matthews - OK, the developer, Mr. Ronsdale, who Mr. Frantz represents. I've
known him at least since he was in high school. I've known his mother and father and
his grandparents. I don't know if that qualifies me to recuse myself or not.
Mr. Barney - Is the knowing in a sense of a close,personal friendship, or just a knowing
of?
Mr. Matthews -No, I wouldn't call it that, I guess you might call it a neighbors
relationship.
Mr. Barney - I think you have to make a decision in your own mind whether that
relationship would affect your ability to vote impartially on an application. Whether you
would feel in some respects uncomfortable rejecting an application you felt you might
otherwise find to be the case, or feel a reason to grant an application that you would
otherwise deny if it was someone you didn't know. But aside, I think that's internal with
you. I don't think that the very fact that you know somebody disqualifies you. LI should
probably announce that at one point we once represented Mr.... Heritage Homes folks.
Mr. Matthews - And there's another piece to it too. I probably should have brought this
up with the previous gentleman, Mr. Putnam. But the owner of the properties, and where
the developments are taking place, is right across the street from my home, and for years
I enjoyed the privilege of using that land for hunting. Mr. Quigley allowed me to use it
over the years, and allowed me to post it and watch over it for him. Watch the water run,
I suppose. And also I enjoyed firewood. They gave me firewood when they cut down
the road and so forth. Would that be considered a conflict?
Mr. Barney - The test of a conflict, the basic test is whether you get some remunerative,
economic benefit to your vote one way or the other. And there, as I understand it I guess
you probably wouldn't.
Chairperson Sigel—The cutting down of everything is a done deed.
Mr. Barney - Yeah, there's not. If you grant or deny this variance, is there some kind of
pecuniary benefit to you that you would not otherwise have. And if the answer is no,
then I don' think you're right in the center of the conflict. But some people recuse
themselves when they feel there's enough of a relationship if they're concerned about the
appearance of a conflict even if there isn't an actual one. And that again is a more
7
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
personal decision that you must make on your own, than one the law point to. From what
you tell me, I don't think that legally I would say you must recuse yourself.
Mr. Matthews - OK, I'll stay.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. Good evening, Mr. Frantz. Hello. If you could give us your
name and address for the record.
Mr. Frantz - Good evening. OK, my name is George Frantz, I live at 604 Cliff Street,
Ithaca, NY 14850.
Chairperson Sigel—And now, you are asking, are these variances only for the exterior
height?
Mr. Frantz - Actually interior and exterior, because the height of the two homes from the
basement floor to the peak of roof is 42 feet 8 inches.
Chairperson Sigel—OK.
Mr. Frost- George, is the interior height and exterior height the same?
Mr. Frantz - Yes, as proposed with the rear walkouts.
Chairperson Sigel—OK.
Mr. Ellsworth - Where is Old Gorge Road?
Chairperson Sigel—It's in the new Southwoods development.
Mr. Frantz - Old Gorge road, I guess we don't have a map of Southwoods.
Mr. Ellsworth - I got out the Ithaca area map and it's not listed.
Chairperson Sigel—It's actually shown on the back of our packet here.
Mr. Ellsworth—Oh, I didn't go far enough.
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, the Southwoods goes right off of King.
Mr. Ellsworth - Oh, OK.
Mr. Smith - It's no t actually a public road yet.
Mr. Ellsworth - Oh, OK.
8
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Frantz - It's under construction at this time. And again, we're dealing with the same
topography on this site, it's a 6-10% slope. And the other issue of course is trying to
build a contemporary home in the town of Ithaca today with the types of roof pitches that
the market desires with the type of interior ceiling height (i.e. 8 or 9 feet) that the market
desires, and that has resulted in two homes that are 42 feet 8 inches in height from the
basement floor to the highest point of the roof. In addition, this is the one at 318 Old
Gorge road. What we'd like to do instead of having a porch on the back walking out to a
patio, we would actually like to create a balcony and have a ground level patio coming
out of the basement, and have windows going across the rear of the basement to create
that recreational, family room with the basement of the house, directly walking out onto
the patio. And we can actually do this without anybody from the street knowing that
there is a walkout basement. Again we are utilizing terrain so that at the front of the
house... in fact the house at 318, because the topography is several feet below the grade
of the street, or would be several feet below the grade of the street, we're keeping the
terrain fairly flat and then dropping off at the side of the house. Here on the other side,
this would be the right hand side if you were looking at the house from the street, again
the garages and the like, actually we were hoping to have a three-car garage. That and
this particular master bedroom suite, totally mask the view from the street of the right
hand side. And then at the back, again this is the ground level,just dropping down to the
walkout area, two and a half, three-foot retaining wall graded up. So, anybody over here,
which would actually be the house at 320 Old Gorge Rd, really would not be perceiving
this as being a walkout area.
Mr. Matthews -What about the people in the back of the patio?
Mr. Frantz - Looking straight at it from the back, this is 90 feet plus from... in fact, these
windows, this window of the house is at lease 90 feet from the property line, and we're
proposing to maintain the woodland behind the house. The walkout area itself is another
ten or fifteen feet further, so there is over 100 feet of buffering between this and the rear
property line of the lot to the north. And we're proposing to maintain as much of the
woodland as... The house is, this is the side that's closest to the side yard, and we've
shoved the house in that direction, in the easterly direction, because we have this
particular wing that again will mask the walkout area from any future neighbors on this
side.
Chairperson Sigel—It looks to me like, from your topography lines, at 318 you've got
maybe a 3 foot drop from the front to the back, and at 320, maybe only a 2 foot drop at
best.
Mr. Frantz - No. Okay, this point here, this is 318 front quarter is roughly level with this
line, so you actually have 1,2,3,4,5,6 feet of drop from the front of the house.
Chairperson Sigel—You get six feet from the front to the walkout patio?
Mr. Frantz - Yes. This particular line right here, starting with that.
9
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—The one marked 107?
Mr. Frantz - Yes, the line marked 107, then it's 1,2,3,4,5,6 feet drop from 107.
Chairperson Sigel—That would put you back, almost at the back property line according
to your map. I mean, 101 is well beyond your 50-foot setback.
Mr. Frantz - Well, what we're doing is creating a hollow in the back of the house.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, I'm talking about how far of a drop from the front of the house
to the back edge of the house. It looks like only about 2-3 feet.
Mr. Frantz - OK, because there's a retaining wall extending upward from this corner of
this house.
Chairperson Sigel—I'm not talking about in your plan as drawn, I'm talking about the
land as is existing. I mean, obviously from the front to the back, you're proposing a
much larger drop because you're going to dig out. But existing it looks like it's only a 2
or 3 foot drop.
Mr. Frantz - 2 to 3 feet, 2.5 to 3 feet.
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah. So you're digging out quite a bit of earth to create the
walkout.
Mr. Frantz - We're going to create... yeah, we're digging out to create the walkout, so it
will be sunken below.
Chairperson Sigel—In both cases, in both houses.
Mr. Frantz - yes.
Chairperson Sigel—I mean, typically when we get these kinds of requests from the
exterior height variance, you know, it's a situation like the previous appeal where there's
a natural slope where all or most of the drop is already existing on the lot and the person
is looking to not add fill.
Mr. Frantz - We're not adding fill.
Chairperson Sigel—No, you're taking it away.
Mr. Frantz - I haven't done the final calculations, but it will probably go to the front of
both houses to sort of flatten out the front lawn areas.
10
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Ellsworth - Does today's market really require a 9.5 feet drop on 12 feet horizontal,
rather than a 7 or 8 on 12? Previous guy had 12 on 12, which is a 45 degree angle. I
mean, how do you know what the public really needs? Years ago it was 4 on 12.
Mr. Frantz - Right. This house is actually from the front, the same as the house on
Eldridge circle that I understand got a height variance. The one that Joe Quigley built.
The only difference actually between this house and that is that we have the master
bedroom suite on the ground floor, and Mr. Quigley has it up here on this corner of the
house. But, yeah, the market,people don't need it of course, but this is the design that
has become very desirable throughout the country.
Mr. Ellsworth - 9 and a half on twelve, not eight. Do people actually come and tell you
they need nine and a half on twelve?
Mr. Frantz - Well, I guess just from the way these houses are selling throughout
Tompkins County.
Chairperson Sigel—I'm guessing that people don't demand that ratio, but that people find
this style desirable.
Mr. Ellsworth - Well, but you know where I'm going here don't you?
Chairperson Sigel—Well, yeah. Personally, I don't have as much of a problem with the
interior height, which is necessitated by your floor heights and your roof height, but I am
bothered a little bit more by what I see as going out of your way to create the exterior
height problem. You know, the need for the exterior height variance.
Mr. Frantz - Again, we have this design approach of attempting to utilize the basement,
especially when the topography allows us to, but to utilize the basement of the home for
something other than storage.
Mr. Ellsworth - You really mean the walkout basement, rather than the storage. I mean
lots of people utilize their basements without having walkout capabilities.
Mr. Frantz - Right, but again what we're doing is replicating the windows.
Mr. Ellsworth - Yeah, it's an architectural feature.
Mr. Frantz - Well, but again, it opens up the basement of the house and makes it an
attractive living space, recreation space.
Mr. Matthews - Can I ask a question?
Chairperson Sigel—What was the intent and spirit for having a height requirement to a
house?
11
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Barney - Mass. To keep the mass under control.
Mr. Matthews -Pardon?
Mr. Barney - To keep the mass of a building under control. Of course, the zoning
ordinance was adopted initially in 1954 I think, when the houses that were the rage at that
point were ranch style, fifteen foot houses. Over the years, the style of building houses
has changed. I think we're at an era right now where the very steep pitched roofs are the
architectural feature that seems to be the houses of the 2000s if I may call it that.
Mr. Ellsworth - A few years ago, we raised this to 36 feet also, from 34 or whatever it
was.
Mr. Barney - But it's really to keep a skyscraper from going up in a residential
neighborhood.
Mr. Ellsworth - And they have a lot of view problems with neighbors and so on and so
forth.
Mr. Barney - Shade and blocking.
Mr. Ellsworth - We raised it to 36 at my request because we had lots of people coming
before us at, whatever it was, 34 before.
Mr. Matthews - I understand. And that's a relatively recent change.
Mr. Barney - Well, the 34 to 36 is. The definition is probably a ten year old definition of
how we define height, the dimension I think changed a little bit, and even before that we
had a height limitation, it just wasn't defined in quite this way.
Mr. Frost- I think it's 5,6,7,8 possible years since we changed it.
Mr. Matthews - It's not an antiquated rule.
Mr. Barney - No, there have been height limitations since day 1 in the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Frost- But the current height has been around for more than five years, maybe 8
years. I would say just from listening to this conversation, when I think back over a lot of
the houses I've given permits for, over the last ten years, most of them are usually pretty
steep, in general not 9 on 12 but they're usually steep cathedral ceilings. We rarely will
ever see a single story house unless it's a modular home.
Mr. Frantz -Part, again, from the standpoint of the design profession what's happened is
the Victorian era is very popular, has been popular in the last ten years.
Mr. Ellsworth - It's back.
12
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Frantz - It's back, yeah. As well as,people may not be able to live in Cayuga
Heights, but they would like to have a house that looks like a house in Cayuga Heights.
We're getting the steep pitched roofs and houses on a hillside.
Mr. Ellsworth - Well after last winter's ice, I can appreciate the steeper roofs, but there're
two sides to every story.
Mr. Matthews - I don't want to get into questioning Mr. Frantz's veracity, but he's
making statements that people want this and people want this, but we don't know that.
There're no studies being quoted. He's saying it, and I have to trust him that he's, but
he's also coming here pitching the product, so I'm being very reluctant to accept what
he's saying.
Mr. Barney - My comment is not based on what Mr. Frantz is saying, not that I doubt his
veracity, but it's just observation. You go around and look at Lakewatch and those areas
in Lansing that are the more, higher, I guess upscale is the term these days. All of them
are these monstrous houses that go up, thousands of feet. But very steep pitched roofs
and a lot of little nooks and crannies and that sort of stuff. That seems to be what
designers are designing in the way of new homes today to make them distinctive from my
little ranch home that I've had for 30 some-odd years now.
Mr. Matthews - But again Ithaca saw this trend and five years, Andy says, it was
changed.
Mr. Frost- With the height.
Mr. Matthews -And now the developer is suggesting that we have to increase it another 5
feet. There was a spirit of intent to raising it to 35 or 36 and I think that has to be
considered here tonight.
Mr. Smith - With the pitch of the roof, the exterior height, if you didn't excavate down 6
or 7 feet, the exterior height would still, with that pitch, work. It's because you're going
down six or seven feet on the outside. The interior height would still be a problem, but
the exterior, even with the steep pitch would work if you weren't excavating out 6 or 7
feet.
Mr. Barney - But generally speaking, whenever you go to these pitched roofs, even the
interior one would be a headache because there you're measuring from the basement
floor to the top of the peak, and the peak is now like this instead of this, you've now
added 5,6,8 feet depending on the span of the roof, to the height of the building.
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, well, John, I wanted to ask you to comment on actually the
test that we're supposed to make for an area variance, and maybe I'll just begin by
reading it, maybe for the other members' benefit. "In making its determination, the
zoning board of appeals shall take into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the
13
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
variance is granted as weighed against the detriment to the health safety and welfare of
the neighborhood or community by such grant." Now my question to John is, I assume
that is the primary test, and that then the considerations that follow are just sort of
suggestions as to what goes into that calculation.
Mr. Barney - Correct, but those are in a sense the tests that you apply in reaching the
conclusion that you are being asked to reach in terms of...
Chairperson Sigel—Right, and then there are 5 suggested things to think about when
considering that test: whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of
the neighborhood; whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some
method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than the area variance; whether the
requested area variance is substantial; whether the proposed variance will have an
adverse affect on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district; and whether the alleged difficulty was self created, which consideration shall be
relevant, which shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance.
Mr. Matthews - And I'm glad you read that, because we're here representing people who
aren't here.
Chairperson Sigel—Correct.
Mr. Matthews -And they don't know, or they haven't considered what's taking place
tonight. Their houses aren't built yet across the street, they have no idea when they
purchase that property that across the street from them is a house way up high. And I
think we represent those folks.
Mr. Barney - Well, let me backtrack. Number one, the people adjoining this property
have been notified of the pending application, by mail, so they have an opportunity to be
here. We also publish a notice, although I will be the first to admit that probably unless
you are a devotee of the legal ads, you probably wouldn't see the notice. But there is
actually a notice sent to those people adjoining the property. There is also supposed to be
posted a sign on the property advising that there is an application pending with respect to
that particular property which is designed to alert the general neighborhood or anyone in
the vicinity that is interested, that there's something going on, when they're out walking
their dog they can pick up the information at no charge. So to say that nobody knows is
not necessarily completely accurate, or that you represent those other people. You don't
really represent one side or the other, you're here to make a balance of the developer
versus the public at large. Which, can be in a broad sense, the entire Town of Ithaca or in
one aspect, it is clearly the neighborhood because that is what the criteria say. But, we
have two different kinds of variances. The use variance, the requirements for obtaining
that are pretty strict, and you really have to show, because you're changing a use that the
legislature established, you really have to show that you can't get a reasonable return out
of your property with any use that is authorized under the law. In which event, then, you
are actually entitled to a use variance. So that's a fairly high standard, and the test says
it's got to be administered by looking at actual financial data, grouped by dollars and
14
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
sense. That's why use variances, I tend to talk to this board it's a fairly stiff test, if
someone wants to come in here and put a gas station in a residential zone, they have to
show that that piece of property can't yield a reasonable return as a resident. An area
variance is a little different because there you're really taking the safety valve of the
zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance by necessity has to be written with lines drawn,
but is there anything magical about 36 feet being a height limitation as opposed to 36 and
a half or 37 feet or 35 feet? Probably not, that just happens to be the number that was
chosen. And I don't think people are going to get overly excited if there's a variance
upward or downward of that by some reasonable amount. Now, granted, if someone
came in here and said I want a 72 foot house with a 36 foot variance, is certainly a
different situation than when someone wants a 3 or 4 foot deviation. There you're
balancing is, here you have a piece of property that basically in this round, I don't know
what the status of the lot is other than the two Mr. Ronsdale has been working with. But
if they are undeveloped at all, the next person that is going to come in is going to see
what this house looks like, because it's going to be up there and standing when they make
their purchase decision. I'm not sure we should worry too much about the next door
neighbor.
Mr. Matthews - I am going to disagree with you a little bit, counsel.
Mr. Barney - OK, it wouldn't be the first time.
Mr. Matthews -You said, I'll paraphrase what you said, that people aren't going to get
too upset if it's a couple of feet up or a couple of feet down. But recently we had people
up on top of the hill coming here and they were very upset that LI believe heritage was
building a house next door and we denied them building that house higher than the
residence on either side. And it wasn't that much that Heritage was asking for: I think it
was 4 feet. So people do get upset when it goes above the height of their house or the
houses next door, for whatever reason. So this time, there's a request for a considerable
height variance, and again you say people have been notified, and I know that does
happen, but the average home buyer doesn't recognize seven feet higher as meaningful
until they get there.
Mr. Barney - I guess, and I don't want to argue... these are your decisions to make, not
mine. My role here is to try to respond to a legal question. In terms of the prior... I don't
remember the details of them, but there you had an existing neighborhood presumably, as
represented by people that are actually living there, and have their addresses there, and
have their houses there, and they want other houses that are in the same character as the
houses they had there. I'm not sure that's what you have here. Here the character of the
neighborhood is being established by what the applicant may be trying to request here.
Mr. Matthews - That's correct.
Mr. Barney - And don't get me wrong, I'm not lobbying for or against a particular
application. But if people come in and say, or you have the applicant come in and say "I
want to build a house a little bit larger", you look at the surrounding neighborhood, and
15
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
it's either virtually all unapproved lots, or it's lots that themselves have been granted
variances for one or two or three or five or whatever the number of feet it. The question
you have to ask yourself under these criteria, are you changing the character of a
neighborhood in a way that is significantly adverse to the existing neighborhood, as
opposed to what this applicant needs or feels he needs in order to build this house.
Mr. Frost- If I can just throw in... and I'm not trying to speak for or against either. I
think the case up on Saunders road, which is what you are referring to, was somewhat
unique. In most cases in my eighteen some-odd years with the town, usually height
variances don't trigger that kind of emotional outburst as other requests for approvals
from the zoning board do. But I do think the Saunders one, while might be a reasonable
example on your part, is somewhat unique compared to the history of height variances
that this board does grant.
Mr. Krantz - Height variances of course concern one on the lake of course, but this is an
entirely different setup.
Chairperson Sigel—George?
Mr. Frantz - Yeah,just some more details regarding the Saunders road issue. There what
upset the neighborhood was the bringing in of fill onto the site. The board did grant us
the variance for 6 Saunders road,provided the roof line did not exceed the roof line of I
believe it was 4 Saunders Road. Because of bedrock conditions, we could not do that, so
we had to re-design the house. OK? In this particular case, as far as the future residents
living across Old Gorge road from either 318 or 320—they're going to see homes that are
34 feet 35 feet in height, because the front of the house is going to be as shown in the
illustration here. We're not changing the gradient at the front of the home, nor are we
raising the home above the gradient much more than a foot or two to make clearance for
the porches. So, I have been very careful to design these two houses in a manner that the
walkout is not going to be visible from the street, that people from the street, from the
future homes built across the street are going to be looking at, in the case of 320, this is
what they'll be seeing. Of course they'll be looking through a lot of trees also. But this
is what they'll be seeing. They're not going to even know that this is back there.
Chairperson Sigel—What is the height again, from the front and the sides?
Mr. Frantz - I think 34 to 35 feet from the front, the view from the street. 34'6", and
again it's the same. This is 318, 320 is the same. This is the front of the house with the
hill sloping down to street level. This is the side which is going to be viewed through
sixty feet or so of trees.
Mr. Matthews -What's the distance between the rear, where that walkout is, and that
intended house next door? You say there's wood between...
Mr. Ellsworth - That was front.
16
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Matthews - Will the people who build the house in the next lot down the road as it
were, south, south of this house. They're going to be looking at that walkout basement.
Mr. Frantz - Yes.
Mr. Matthews - OK.
Mr. Frantz - Those people will be the owners of 318.
Mr. Matthews - What's the distance between that walkout patio to the lot line?
Mr. Ellsworth - To the lot line?
Mr. Frantz - The distance from this walkout patio to the side lot line is 50 feet.
Mr. Matthews - And then those people will construct a house with we've got to assume
another 50 feet.
Mr. Frantz - It will be roughly 45 feet. The house at 318 Saunders road, the front corner
of the house is about 45 feet from the lot line.
Mr. Matthews - That's the lot south of you?
Mr. Frantz - Yes. Essentially the street curves around like so, and this is 320 and this is
318 right here.
Mr. Matthews -Yes, I'm very familiar with that. I know every tree there.
Mr. Ellsworth - When you started the presentation, you talked about another project that
passed the height. Was that Saunders road? You gave a name of the owner, and you said
there house was a little different.
Mr. Frost - He was referring to another parcel on Southwoods development.
Mr. Ellsworth - What's that?
Mr. Frost- Another parcel, another owner on Southwoods development.
Mr. Ellsworth - Oh. It wasn't this case we were talking about that...
Mr. Frantz - Another owner. My understanding from speaking to the contractor was that
they also received a height variance.
Mr. Frost- We have issued a few, I can't tell you how many.
17
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Ellsworth - I know, but they're all kind of different. Just because we're issuing a
few, doesn't mean we're issuing them for everyone.
Mr. Frost-No, and I agree with you.
Mr. Frantz - The difference between this house and the one on Eldridge is that this one
has a walkout. He required, the 42' 8"interior height variance.
Chairperson Sigel—So, I think I had missed this initially. The house, you said is going to
be higher than the road?
Mr. Barney - I had the same question on the other house George, it looks like it's sitting
up on a knoll.
Mr. Frantz - The house at 320 will be higher than the road, because... well, let me put it
this way, the house is lower than the road here, at what's considered the...
Chairperson Sigel—Lower than Old Gorge?
Mr. Frantz - Yes, lower than Old Gorge. But Southwoods drive, I believe it is, actually
the road drops fairly rapidly, so what happens is the house is actually lower than Old
Gorge at this point, but because of it's length and the gradient...
Chairperson Sigel—It becomes higher than Southwoods to it's northern end?
Mr. Frantz - Yes.
Chairperson Sigel—OK.
Mr. Frantz - And it's not that much higher. In fact, the northern end of the house, it is
really only a couple of feet I think higher than Southwoods drive. It's a fairly gentle
slope down from the front portion to the street.
Chairperson Sigel—OK.
Mr. Smith - I have to run to another meeting, but I just wanted to make one comment on
the SEQR. The SEQR, because there are the two actions, the area variance and the road
frontage. The SEQR refers more to the road frontage. But I did want to mention that I
did put in there about the amount of excavation, and that both properties are located in a
Unique Natural Area also, so, any sedimentation and erosion control will be important
with the amount of excavation they are doing,plus being in the UNA.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. Thank you. I guess we'll open the public hearing at this time.
Chairperson Sigel opens the Public Hearing at 8:00 p.m.
18
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—Does anyone wish to speak about either of these properties? If not,
we'll close the public hearing.
Chairperson Sigel closes the Public Hearing at 8:01 p.m.
Chairperson Sigel—Well, gentlemen, I have to admit, I've been a little conflicted in this
case. I'm inclined to think that it's a little unreasonable, and yet when I read the strict
requirement for an area variance, I find it hard to conclude that the benefit to the
applicant as weighed against the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood.
Mr. Ellsworth - That's a little, some of the others are more...
Mr. Krantz - I agree with you, but seven feet is just a lot. We've raised... it's been raised
from 34 to 36, but on the other hand it doesn't seem like there are going to be any real
objections, it's not impeding a view again
Chairperson Sigel—Part of that, I mean as Dick has mentioned,part of the reason is there
are no other houses there, so we don't have the other houses to look at.
Mr. Barney - Is that indeed the case, I wasn't sure?
Mr. Ellsworth - It's a new road.
Chairperson Sigel—Well none of the bordering properties have anything even started on
them, right?
Mr. Frantz - Right. The road is, I haven't bee up there this week, but it's close to being
prepped for paving. The goal of the contractors have, well, they better have it paved this
fall.
Mr. Ellsworth - Before the end of October.
Mr. Frantz - There are no other homes in the immediate vicinity. In fact, the nearest
home is down on the other side of the circle, currently being finished off.
Mr. Ellsworth - How many lots away? 4 or 5 lots away?
Mr. Frantz - Well, 2, 1 or 2 deep lots away. And actually I understand they also got a
height variance because they have a walkout.
Mr. Krantz - The other question is how are you going to turn down future applicants that
want to build houses on that road?
Chairperson Sigel—Well, this certainly establishes the tone, and then it would be hard to
argue, certainly in the future, that another house of the same height would be detrimental
to the neighborhood when the neighborhood is homes that are tall.
19
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Krantz - And you have an ordinance which states 36 feet.
Chairperson Sigel—Well, we're dealing with 2 heights. The interior height is allowed to
be 38, and so, the design of their floors and the pitch of their roof dictates that they have,
what is it, 42 and a half from the basement floor up to the roof. And then the separate
issue is the exterior height, which is created only by the sunken patio, by the walkout
basement. So I think we have two issues, one, do we want the house to be the house that
it is, as tall as it is. And then the second is to allow the walkout basement. And I'm
inclined to vote for them because I just don't see the detriment to the neighborhood.
Mr. Ellsworth - Well there are others that are more pertinent to this case.
Chairperson Sigel—Criteria for the variance? Well, the things that are listed, and John
correct me if I'm wrong, are basically just things that you use.
Mr. Barney - Well, they give you a laundry list of things you can consider, that you
should consider, no one of which, do I think which is necessarily totally throwing.
Chairperson Sigel—It's not like a use variance, where if you fail one test, you're out.
Mr. Barney - The economic test.
Chairperson Sigel—So in this case, one of the things to consider is whether the request
for an area variance is substantial. That's a consideration. Whether you think it's
substantial, doesn't mean it's necessarily disqualified.
Mr. Barney - It comes back to the original sentence in the paragraph is really what you're
balancing, it's the detriment to the applicant versus the detriment to the community as a
whole.
Mr. Krantz -invisible neighborhood.
Mr. Barney - Well, but I think there is a point that there are people who will eventually
come there too.
Mr. Krantz - Is this at the high point?
Mr. Barney - I'm not in a position to say to you that three feet is probably not a
significant detriment to the neighborhood but seven is. That's the role that you folks
need to play.
Mr. Krantz - Are these two properties, are either one of them the high point of the road?
The new road?
Chairperson Sigel—Well, across the street is higher.
20
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Frantz - The gradient comes up, the gradient actually continues up across old Gorge
road.
Chairperson Sigel—So the homes across the street are going to be higher.
Mr. Frantz - Yeah, they are going to be naturally higher, easily 4 or 5 feet higher than
even Old Gorge road, and so probably six or seven feet higher than this house, but again
also 60 foot front yard setback plus 60 foot road right of way plus 60 ... inaudible
Chairperson Sigel—The lots are all of similar size,presumably are going to attract homes
of a similar nature. And personally, I'm comfortable sort of setting this as an
approximate limit for what we would grant for that area. Unless of course, there was a
very unusual circumstance.
Mr. Matthews - Does anyone else have a concern that Mr. Krantz mentioned that
someone building a house on Eldridge circle, which is just west of where this house is
being built, and then Mr. Putnam just came here and Mr. Frantz said that the people
building a house north of him on a lower grade also got a height variance. Is anyone
concerned here with the fact that the builders are driving the code? Up. And should we
be concerned with that?
Chairperson Sigel—Certainly I can't say it is not cause for concern.
Mr. Matthews -Pardon?
Chairperson Sigel—I can't say that it's not cause for concern, but we have to evaluate it
on a...
Mr. Ellsworth - Case by case basis, isn't that right, John? Just because we've approved a
bunch of homes above the height, doesn't mean we're carte blanche approving homes
above 36 foot. Each case is specific, even though George is...
Mr. Matthews - I understand Harry, but it's hard to say no, once you've said yes to four
people.
Mr. Ellsworth - Well, that's why I'm riding the fence here because the next guy in the
door is going to be pointing back, or in the neighborhood. And I'm not just riding along
with this.
Chairperson Sigel—And I'm certainly assuming...
Mr. Ellsworth - We're seven feet above the ordinance.
Chairperson Sigel—I certainly have thought about what you're bringing up and I am
assuming that someone else who comes in with a similar lot in this neighborhood with a
21
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
similar situation, I would vote in favor of that same variance. I would, I mean if it is
similar to this.
Mr. Matthews - It's hard to say no, once you've said yes five times.
Chairperson Sigel—I agree, but an area variance... in the case of a use variance, one of
the criteria is that the need for the variance is not, is unique to the neighborhood, is not,
does not exist throughout the neighborhood, but that is not the case for an area variance.
It is acceptable, I think, John, to give area variances that might occur throughout the
neighborhood.
Mr. Frost- You know, someone just said once you say yes, it's hard to say no. After that
it seems to me that if you're saying yes, it's OK to say yes, and if you're going to make
some decisions that are consistent, you'll probably say yes again, because you just don't
see it as a detriment. In some ways a positive vote is an indication that it's not such a bad
thing.
Mr. Matthews -Next week it's eight feet.
Mr. Ellsworth - Yeah, next week they'll be in for 45 feet.
Mr. Matthews - Then it's a foot.
Mr. Frost - That's where you have to draw the line. As Harry mentioned, each case is an
individual case.
Mr. Ellsworth - Let me explain one we approved several years ago, happened to be a
surgeon, but nevertheless, up on the lake. He went, and you can't do it in this case
because there are no neighbors, he went a mile up and down the road and got everyone's
approval for what he was doing. And he was quite high and viewed very high from the
lake—still does. But he went out and spent the time, he can't do this because there are no
neighbors for a few lots.
Mr. Matthews - The lots have been purchased by someone.
Mr. Frost- My guess is your going to see similar houses because I think the designs up
there are going to dictate similar designs down the road.
Chairperson Sigel—What mitigates it for me is that from the front of the house it is
within the legal height.
Mr. Ellsworth - Well, George has been clever in laying this out.
Chairperson Sigel—Well, they have designed it so that from the street it appears, as
George said to be 34 to 35 feet.
22
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Ellsworth - Well, yeah, I think he specifically worked it that way, but...
Chairperson Sigel—And then, you know from the back, these are wooded lots, they're
pretty good sized lots, and to me I just don't see enough, substantial enough detriment to
the neighborhood in allowing a sunken patio to vote against it.
Mr. Ellsworth - I can think of an environmental reason with a sunken patio, but that's
their business. It's a great pool. A place to collect, especially...
Mr. Barney - Ice.
Mr. Ellsworth -if you slope it right it won't be, but we talked about this on the other one.
Anyway, it's my ornery night. I'm not for it.
Chairperson Sigel—Are you not for all of it, or just the sunken patio?
Mr. Ellsworth - The height.
Chairperson Sigel—The interior height?
Mr. Ellsworth - Yeah, the 43 feet, because where do you stop?
Mr. Barney - What variances have you granted in the past, do you know what the
dimensions were?
Mr. Frost- I would have to say 42 as an average and a guesstimate.
Chairperson Sigel—I mean, we've had... most of them have been in the range just a little
over 41, 42.
Mr. Frost- And the board is usually giving another 6 inches or so to round it off.
Mr. Ellsworth - Which rounds off to what... 42 and a half?
Mr. Frost - This might be on the threshold of biggest.
Mr. Barney - Biggest.
Mr. Ellsworth - This as far as I'm concerned is a fence line, and you can fall off one way
or the other. I've told you which way I'm falling.
Mr. Frost - I advertised this as 43 but it's actually less than that, I usually give my
advertisements another six inches.
Chairperson Sigel - 42 and a half.
23
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Frantz - No, it's 42' 8", I think.
Chairperson Sigel—Oh, 42' 8", I'm sorry.
Mr. Krantz - The question is simply, you've got a six and a half foot height increase,
which is pushing it, but you've got three things which kind of balance it out some.
There's a large amount of distance between houses in a heavily wooded lot. You've got
a higher elevation across the street, and the front of the house is more or less within
limits, it's just the back of the house. Is that enough to justify allowing an increase of 6
and a half or seven feet.
Chairperson Sigel—That's the question.
Mr. Ellsworth - I'll give George credit for trying.
Chairperson Sigel—The back of the house exceeds the exterior height and then the house
itself exceeds the interior.
Mr. Ellsworth - But when Dick walks out behind there to the woods or to hunt behind
there, he'll see it.
Mr. Matthews - I think the points been made that there's an ordinance and some people
want to stick with the ordinance.
Chairperson Sigel—How much lower could you go, George, and still... I'm trying to
infer what might get Harry to get off the fence.
Mr. Frantz - I can see it in his eyes.
Mr. Ellsworth - Eight on twelve, not 9 and a half on twelve.
Mr. Frantz - Well, eight on twelve would save us... let me.
Mr. Ellsworth - I'm only one member of the board.
Mr. Frantz - I'm just trying to respond to...
Mr. Matthews -You're one of two Harry.
Mr. Ellsworth - Maybe it'll be a stalemate.
Chairperson Sigel—Can you get it down to 42?
Mr. Frantz - Well, I'm sure if we went 9/12, it would be down to... You're the engineer,
Harry.
24
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Ellsworth - It's my night off. Every 12 feet you're picking up half a foot...
Mr. Frantz - Half a foot and we're...
Mr. Ellsworth - So multiply by increments of 12.
Chairperson Sigel—the house is more than 12 feet wide, so...
Mr. Ellsworth - Well if it's 36, it's one and a half foot difference. You're picking up half
a foot every twelve feet in width.
Mr. Frantz - OK, the one at 320 is 37 feet, so 36 feet would be a foot...
Mr. Ellsworth - So one and a half feet, a little more, 1.6 feet.
Mr. Frantz - If we went with the 9/12 roof pitch.
Comments inaudible
Mr. Frantz - I cannot see any difference in going to a 9/12 pitch. It would actually be a
nine inch difference, 36 divided by 2 is 18 feet.
Mr. Ellsworth - You're picking up half a foot every twelve feet. If you're 36 feet wide,
you're picking up a foot and a half. If you're 38, you're picking up 1.6 or whatever it is.
A little more than one and a half. So you can drive it down...
Chairperson Sigel—your roof line only goes over half the house.
Mr. Frantz - For every 12 feet, we're dropping half a foot in roof height. So we have 18
feet, 1.5 times one half is 9 inches. So this would bring the height of the house down to
41 feet.
Mr. Frost- The irony is from the front of the road, you're still going to see the same
thing. So, I can understand debating whether you're going to grant a height variance if
the whole house is high. But in this case, the front of the house, and what most people
see, you're still seeing a legally compliant house. Dropping the pitch to achieve another
foot and a half is only going to affect the rear of the house, essentially.
Mr. Ellsworth - I thought it was the front of the house.
Mr. Frost- Maybe in the front a little bit, but the front is already in compliance, so is it
going to make it more compliant?
Mr. Ellsworth - Well, I'm trying to stave off a landslide of people coming in here and
keep driving this up.
25
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Barney - Andy, I think Harry is saying there is a detriment to the neighborhood as a
whole if we continue to go...
Mr. Ellsworth - This direction in this neighborhood.
Mr. Barney -unfettered.
Mr. Frost- And I truly understand if the measuring point is if the whole house, including
the front, is over the height. I think that's the point as me personally as a town resident as
the building inspector, as the zoning officer for many years, I think that really starts to
tread on good reason to allow variances that from the front...
Mr. Barney - But you look at houses from four sides.
Mr. Frost- I don't want to get into it, I'm just suggesting what I think. I don't vote, so it
doesn't even matter.
Mr. Ellsworth - This isn't a problem for good architects, which I think the owner
probably has.
Mr. Barney - I think George is calculating correctly, Harry, though, I don't think it
knocks it down a foot and a half.
Mr. Ellsworth - We're below the 42 average we were talking about.
Chairperson Sigel—It gets you just under 42.
Mr. Barney - It gets you just under 42.
Mr. Frantz - Without visibly changing the appearance of the house.
Mr. Frost - Are these prepackaged?
Mr. Frantz - No, we could make an adjustment like that, because we would be ordering
the roof trusses...
Mr. Frost - Yourself.
Mr. Frantz - So at that point, we could go with the 9/12 roof pitch.
Mr. Ellsworth - Dan can figure out a different roof truss. Dan can figure out a different
roof truss.
Chairperson Sigel—Harry would you vote for it at 42 feet.
Mr. Ellsworth - Yeah.
26
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Krantz - You said yes?
Mr. Ellsworth - I said yes.
Mr. Krantz - At 43 feet?
Mr. Ellsworth - At 42. Because Andy said the lot of what we approved is 42.
Chairperson Sigel—I would say that's a fair characterization that we've gone as much as
42.
Mr. Krantz - I admit to being conflicted, but I guess I'll go along with 42.
Chairperson Sigel—George?
Mr. Frantz - That's something we can certainly handle, you know, going to a 9/12 pitch.
Mr. Barney -Now that you've gone that far, how about 8/12?
Laughter
Mr. Frantz - Then actually I get into real problems with the other peaks, I think.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, give us a brief summary of your road situation then.
Mr. Ellsworth - That's the second part.
Mr. Frost- I sort of threw that in because the road, should he get a building permit, there
is no road there right now, so we want to cover the bases. We had a case also up in
Southwoods that was kind of a corner property and we had a completed road a portion of
the road that was not complete, and I think the board in granting their approval had a
caveat in there that you had to have a completed road. My only concern, and the concern
of my department right at the moment, George, is when you drive in we have some
pictures where there's mounds of dirt. And if a fire truck can get up to the parcel, they
can't get too far into the parcel because of these mounds of dirt, and however you
consider this, I would just want to see there being a fairly level driveway up to the
construction site meaning adjacent to the house, so if you had to get a fire truck in there
we could get it in there. But in the final analysis, you may want to consider withholding
a certificate of occupancy until the road is substantially completed.
Mr. Frantz - That was sort of the notion that we have been operating under, the notion
that we couldn't get a certificate of occupancy until the road was finished. As far as, I'm
not worried about fire truck access because we're going to have to get the truckloads of
materials in there, so...
27
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—So John, do we need to grant that variance then from 280A.
Mr. Barney - Oh, the law says no building permits should be issues unless you're on a
public road, so. I think the title papers are in my office, if we're looking at the title on it.
But it's not physically constructed yet I gather from these pictures.
Mr. Frantz - Again, I believe he has to—he was very close to putting down and doing the
final grading, and then the plan is to yes, have it finished...
Mr. Barney - Well before these houses would be eligible for occupancy.
Mr. Frantz - Yes.
Chairperson Sigel—OK.
Mr. Barney - I don't see a problem, if you choose to do so, with granting a 280A variance
with the condition that no certificate of occupancy be issued until the road is completed
to the satisfaction of the town highway superintendent.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. OK, I will move to make a negative determination of
environmental significance in regard to the appeals of Heritage Park Townhomes for the
reasons stated in the environmental assessment form prepared by Mike Smith, dated
September 8, 2004. Second?
Mr. Ellsworth - I'll second.
Chairperson Sigel—All in favor?
ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 046 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT :
Heritage Park Town Homes, Owner, George Frantz, Appellant, 318 and 320
Old Gorge Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 46-1-15.27 and 46-1-15.28,
Low Density Residential Zone.
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth.
RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental
significance in the appeals of Heritage Park Town Homes, Owner, George
Frantz, Appellant, based upon the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by
Town staff dated September 8, 2004.
The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows:
AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz
NAYS: Matthews
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
28
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—OK. I will move to grant the appeals of Heritage Park Townhomes,
owner, George Frantz, appellant requesting variances from the requirements of Article
VIII, Section 270-59 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to
construct residential buildings with interior and exterior heights not to exceed 42 feet
(where 36 and 38 foot limits are in effect) at 318 and 320 Old Gorge Road, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 46-1-15.27 and 46-1-15.28, Low Density Residential Zone. In
addition this motion grants variances from Article VIII, Sections 270-60 and 270-62, and
Section 280A of New York State Town Law, to allow construction to commence prior to
the completion of Town approved roadways. With the following findings: That the
requirements for an area variance have been satisfied; that the home, while exceeding the
permitted height in the interior height and in the rear, the homes do fall within the
required height from the front of the house. And with the condition that the road must be
accepted by the Town of Ithaca ...
Mr. Barney - I think it ought to be constructed and completed to the satisfaction of the
town highway superintendent, and the town code enforcement officer, and I guess it
probably ought to be accepted and dedicated to the town.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. Prior to the issuing of a certificate?
Mr. Barney -Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy of either house.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, did I miss anything you can think of here? OK. Second?
Mr. Ellsworth - Second.
Chairperson Sigel—All in favor?
ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 047: Heritage Park Town Homes, Owner,
George Frantz, Appellant, 318 and 320 Old Gorge Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcels No. 46-1-15.27 and 46-1-15.28, Low Density Residential Zone.
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth.
RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeals of Heritage Park Town Homes,
Owner, George Frantz, Appellant, requesting variances from the requirements of
Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be
permitted to construct residential buildings with interior and exterior heights not to
exceed 42 feet (36 foot height limit) at 318 and 320 Old Gorge Road, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 46-1-15.27 and 46-1-15.28, Low Density Residential
Zone. In addition this motion grants variances from Article VIII, Sections 270-60
and 270-62, and Section 280A of New York State Town Law, to allow
construction to commence prior to the completion of Town approved roadways.
29
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
FINDINGS:
1. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied.
2. The homes, while exceeding the permitted height in the interior and in
the rear, do fall within the required height when viewed from the front.
CONDITIONS:
1. The road must be constructed and completed to the satisfaction of the
Town of Ithaca Highway Superintendent, Town Code enforcement officer,
and must be accepted and dedicated to the Town prior to the issuance of
certificates of occupancy.
The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows:
AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz
NAYS: Matthews
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, alright.
Mr. Frantz - Thank you.
Chairperson Sigel—Thank you.
APPEAL of Robert Champion,Appellant, requesting a variance from the
requirements of Section 280-A of New York State Town Law, to be able to construct
a residence on a parcel of land that does not front on a Town, County, or State
roadway,located on West Haven Road (near 140), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
28-1-28.1.
Chairperson Sigel—OK.
Mr. Champion - Hi. My name is Robert Champion of 210 Rachel Carson Way. The
address of this property, which is a new address, is 144 West Haven Rd.
Mr. Frost- We're not using that.
Mr. Champion - We're not using that. Excuse me.
Mr. Frost- We'll talk about that later.
Mr. Champion - If possible, I wouldn't mind making a short statement that may be
relevant?
30
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—Go ahead.
Mr. Champion - OK. Some of you might recognize me, I certainly recognize some of
you from work at Eco Village and the construction of Song. And I've been living there
for three years, having built a house there. And a year ago, my wife and I divorced, and
we won't go into that tonight. But I can tell you that as parents with a six year old, we
agreed we wanted to be as close together as possible in terms of housing, so that we could
co-parent, without having to drive across town. So I looked for a property and I found
this property which backs up against Eco Village and I was so thrilled to have found one
property through my assessor search, that I could possibly own and build a house on, and
still be closer to my daughter's mother's house, which is the house that I built in Eco
Village. So I bought the property, after talking to the Henry's across the street from this
house, and I had no idea that I wouldn't be able to build a house on it after the deal closed
and I was getting a permit process started, that I discovered that because it's not on a city,
state, or town road, you have to go for a variance, so that's kind of how I got here and
why this piece of land is particularly important to me as opposed to any other one in
Ithaca, is the location for co-parenting my daughter. And maybe I didn't say this, but I
can walk, she can walk, and will be able to indefinitely through her childhood back and
forth between houses, without having to sort of do the whole car thing.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, thank you.
Mr. Matthews - I read his application, and if his daughter was applying, I would give it to
her right away. My concern, even though I'm a relatively new board member, that he's
depending on access to his home by emergency vehicles, at the good will and grace of
Eco Village. And while Eco Village has a good reputation as far as I understand, things
change over time and people decide they aren't going to do what they've committed to do
on a handshake, because there's no legal bind on Eco Village to plow that road.
Many inaudible comments
Mr. Matthews -No, there's no bind on Eco Village to keep that road open.
Mr. Frost- Actually they have to by part of the Eco Village development, that this was an
emergency access route that is required to be maintained, snowplowed and so forth.
While there is no hard surface there, they are required to, and we have addressed this over
the several winters in the past to keep this road cleared, so if we got to get emergency
vehicles or fire department, they can get up there. So they actually have to keep it
maintained.
Mr. Ellsworth - And they had a fire open during construction.
Mr. Matthews - So they are legally bound to keep that road open.
Mr. Frost- And when it's not, I usually hear about it from the fire department, but in the
last few years, they've kept it pretty well plowed and clear.
31
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—And you do have an easement, in the deed, right, to give you access
across?
Mr. Champion - Right. That's how I assumed that this wasn't going to be an issue, but
yes, there is an easement that is guaranteed and transferred with the deed and so forth.
Mr. Frost- I also want to bring up, in talking with Mike Smith, that the town is now
entertaining a subdivision for some lands to be south and southwest of this, and part of
that subdivision is going to result on the town maintaining, taking some park land, I
think, right adjacent to this roadway, so the town is going to have some ownership as well
near this road.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. That shouldn't have any real impact on the property, should it?
Mr. Frost- Other than it may involve some help for clearing the snow and so forth for
access.
Chairperson Sigel—OK. Well, it seems pretty straightforward to me. You know, he has
a right of way over the adjacent land to access the road. We have approved a number of
these in the past. It comes up from time to time where you get a lot that is not on the
road.
Mr. Matthews - So the variance is that he's not fronting the highway, and we've
established the fact that there is egress.
Chairperson Sigel—Right, right.
Mr. Barney - The only question I guess I would have is if Eco Village failed to live up to
their maintenance, would you be willing to undertake maintenance obligation to maintain
it at least sufficiently for emergency vehicle access to your property from West Haven
road, is it?
Mr. Champion - It's about 400 feet or so.
Mr. Barney - Yeah, it's about 338 feet on the lot in front of you.
Mr. Frost- Are you Mr. Henry by chance, sitting in the audience there? Are you Mr.
Henry?
Mr. Peluso -No, I'm at 140 right across...
Mr. Frost- OK.
Mr. Champion - To get back to your question, are you referring to like the snow removal
situation. I'm assuming that in order for me to get to the house myself, it's going to have
32
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
to be cleared. And the Henry's who live across the street from this lot have lived there
for 17 years I believe. And, I don't know what they did before Eco Village, but they of
course would also need to be able to get to their house, so certainly the answer is yes.
Mr. Barney - Where are the Henry's?
Mr. Champion - Directly South.
Mr. Barney - 28.6?
Chairperson Sigel—28.6, I think.
Mr. Champion - Directly south across the...
Mr. Frost- I'm not sure Eco Village has a choice not to maintain the road. They have to
maintain the road.
Mr. Barney - But my concern is —
Mr. Ellsworth - The last section.
Mr. Barney - Let's put it this way. Eco Village has access from a different location that
normally we require people to use, but if this is an emergency really, if that access got
blocked off, so they're in a way a little bit less concerned, and we are as a town, as long
as it has one access. Here this is the only mode of access to this lot. And I guess for the
Henry's as well. Is that what your saying?
Mr. Champion - Right.
Mr. Barney - I mean it seems to me that we want to make sure that everybody that has a
building constructed that's going to be subject possible to a fire or some catastrophe
needing to get an emergency vehicles there, is going to assume some responsibility to
make sure that road is open. Now, you would have none as long as Eco Village lived up
to their responsibility, but if they didn't, if they went bankrupt or something like that.
Mr. Champion - Sure, sure. I would be happy to agree to any kind of language that was
default if they didn't, if they failed to keep the road up, that I would.
Mr. Barney - I probably would put it more that you would have a condition of the
granting of this variance would be your agreement that this road would be maintained, or
this area be maintained. If Eco Village maintained it, you're not going to do anything, if
it's not, you might have to step up to the plate and do whatever's necessary to maintain it.
Mr. Champion - Yes.
Chairperson Sigel—Do you suggest that as a condition?
33
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Barney - Yes. If you choose to grant the variance, I would suggest that.
Mr. Matthews - There's no guarantee that the roads going to be maintained for each part
for emergency.
Mr. Barney - Well, there is in effect an agreement, actually I think it may be part of the
local law that allowed the rezoning of Eco Village—
Mr. Champion - Yeah.
Mr. Barney - - a condition that, in that local law, that says that Eco Village will maintain
this roadway adequate for emergency vehicle passage. Roadway is too strong a word, but
emergency vehicle access. But, as you say, things happen, certainly things change. And
they may decline to, or refuse to, or go bankrupt or whatever the case may be, and before
the town might be able to enforce that obligation on whatever the owner of Eco Village
might be at that point in time, in the meantime, we want this road kept up because it's
protecting now, this gentlemen's as well as it looks like another gentlemen's on the south,
or a whole family on the south. So, I just, anybody that's relying on this whether it's Eco
Village, Mr. Champion, or the folks, the Henry's on the south, I think ought to all be
prepared a significant portion of that roadway if someone else isn't doing it to the level
acceptable to the town, in order to be able to get fire engines in.
Mr. Matthews - How can we as a board enforce that?
Mr. Barney -Pardon?
Mr. Matthews - How can we as a board of appeals enforce that?
Mr. Ellsworth - Andy does.
Mr. Barney - You don't. It's a condition of granting the variance, then its default is the
basis for the Town of Ithaca to take action to enforce it. And we would against Eco
Village I think, I have no reason to believe that we wouldn't.
Mr. Champion - I'd call them first though. I'll be on the phone first.
Mr. Barney - Oh yeah, I mean, we don't run into court the day something goes wrong. A
lot of notices go out and that sort of stuff, but, ultimately, if people don't respond
positively to a nudge, then you've got to pull out the club and try to use that.
Mr. Frost - I agree with your wisdom, John, and I'm not debating that. That access road
does actually make use of getting to the pond area which is actually part of the hydrant
system, so in the unlikely event that there may be something going on there, they may
actually want to access that because it is easier to get into the hydrant system. It's a little
bit more significant just getting a vehicle up there.
34
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Ellsworth - Let me explain the importance of this. A few years ago, Eco Village had
a fire during construction. Phase 11 construction?
Mr. Frost - A few years?
Mr. Champion -Phase I.
Mr. Ellsworth - The wind was strong that night. And Andy was up there, and it stirred
the fire up good. They're setting up near the top of the hill, and it advanced very quickly.
So that's why all this is important. Luckily, they got it put out before it spread. These
were just framed up I guess.
Mr. Barney - And it was during the course of construction, of course there was nobody
living there at the time.
Mr. Frost- Well we had people living there, not in those particular buildings, though.
Mr. Ellsworth - Adjacent. Phase I people were living there.
Mr. Matthews -Did they use the access road that Mr. Champion has?
Mr. Frost-No.
Mr. Barney - To get in there, I don't think that road had been...
Mr. Frost- I don't think at that point.
Mr. Barney - It was kind of ironic, because we had a long fight with Eco Village when
they wanted to do this initially. Because they have about a half-mile driveway coming in
from Mecklenburg road, and normally the town does not allow a cul-de-sac, which is
really what that was, of more than 1200 feet. That's there policy. And Eco Village
simply couldn't understand why we wouldn't lie over and play dead and let this thing go
for half a mile without any requirements. So finally we negotiated at great length, and
got them to build that to town highway specs pretty much, their main entry way, but also
a condition that they have another mode of getting in there. Unfortunately, when they
had the fire, we were still in the negotiating stage. It was very interesting, because after
the fire came and went, the negotiations became very easy from the Town's perspective,
because I think they realized at that point that we weren't doing this simply to be pains in
the neck, we had a reason for it and it was a reason that they unfortunately learned kind
of the hard way, that this stuff should be put in place.
Mr. Frost- An interesting, one of the assumed causes was is that they were blowing
insulation into some of the new buildings, someone may have been smoking a cigarette,
hot ash got into the insulation. It actually may have been more than a day's time before it
reached the point that it ignited and started the fire. So it was an unusual occurrence.
35
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Matthews - I have personally no problem with an affirmative to Mr. Champion's
request,providing that this access road that he depends on, he will depend on, will be
open if he has emergencies somehow, as you spoke, to ensure me that that will be taken
care of by force of legal form if necessary.
Chairperson Sigel—Well it will be, as much as the town can compel anyone to do
anything.
Mr. Matthews - I understand that. I understand that. They come knocking on my door, I
behave myself.
Chairperson Sigel—Yup. OK, let's open the public hearing. Anyone wish to speak?
Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 8:42 p.m.
Chairperson Sigel—can you just come to a microphone and state your name and address.
Mr. Peluso - Sure, Josh Peluso, 140 West Haven. Actually I came here because we didn't
know what the variance was completely about, and now that I do, we live adjacent to the
access road, we would be completely in support of it. We're actually very excited to see
him buying there, seeing the plan that he has for the property, we couldn't hope for much
more. So as far as granting, as a neighbor to him, we would definitely be in favor. And
history—we've been living there a year, and that road is generally kept very very clean
and people can always get up an down it, so thank you.
Chairperson Sigel—Thank you.
Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 8:44 p.m.
Chairperson Sigel—Oh, John Andy pointed out that this was actually advertised
incorrectly.
Mr. Frost- It's an LDR, not an MDR.
Mr. Barney - I don't think that's critical.
Chairperson Sigel—I didn't think so, it's not even directly related to the request. Alright,
any further discussion, questions or comments? Alright, I will move to make a negative
determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Robert Champion, for the
reasons stated on the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Mike Smith dated
September 8, 2004. Second?
Mr. Krantz - Second.
Chairperson Sigel—All in favor?
36
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 048 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Robert
Champion, West Haven Road (near 140), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-
1-28.1, Low Density Residential Zone.
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz
RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental
significance in the appeal of Robert Champion, based upon the Environmental
Assessment Form prepared by Town staff dated September 8, 2004.
The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows:
AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews
NAYS: None
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Sigel—And, I will move to grant the appeal of Robert Champion, Appellant,
requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Sections 270-60 and 270-62
of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and Section 280-A of New York State Town
Law, to be able to construct a residence on a parcel of land that does not front on a Town,
County, or State roadway, located on West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
28-1-28.1, Low Density Residential Zone, with the finding that the requirements for an
area variance have been satisfied and with the condition that, in the event that the
roadway is not maintained by Eco Village or its successors, I suppose...
Mr. Barney - Or any other...
Chairperson Sigel—or any other entity...
Mr. Barney - To a level that enables the passage of emergency vehicles such as fire
engines and ambulance medical emergency vehicles...
Chairperson Sigel—That Mr. Champion be responsible for such maintenance from West
Haven road as far as his driveway.
Mr. Frost -Now, if in some way this gets modified with the subdivision, do we have to
add language to that?
Mr. Barney - No, because I think the subdivision... the town may take over ownership of
that roadway.
37
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Mr. Frost- Or there's a path that runs perpendicular to that that is parallel to West Haven
road.
Mr. Barney - Yeah, but I think there's some discussion... I think there is some clause that
that may become a town road. If that does then that would supercede all those anyway.
Mr. Champion - May I ask, if it does become a town road...
Chairperson Sigel—That means you have to pave it.
Mr. Barney - It becomes a town road, the maintenance responsibility, you divulge to the
town. It would relieve you of that responsibility.
Mr. Champion - And Eco Village.
Mr. Barney - And Eco Village.
Mr. Frost- You just have to move your house another 25 foot back.
Mr. Barney - You don't meet the frontage requirements.
Mr. Champion - I was actually at that meeting, so I know what they're talking about.
Mr. Barney - Isn't the town talking about a park of some sort.
Mr. Champion - Well, yeah, the trail might be considered a park space, and this would be
like the access to it.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, second?
Mr. Ellsworth - Second.
Chairperson Sigel—All in favor?
Mr. Matthews - I have a question, OK?
Chairperson Sigel—Yup?
Mr. Matthews - You said that, if Eco Village doesn't take care of that road, Mr.
Champion's going to be responsible for maintaining it.
Chairperson Sigel—As far as his driveway, yeah.
Mr. Ellsworth - The West Haven Road, not the road into Eco Village.
38
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
Chairperson Sigel—Right, obviously he's not responsible for anything further, but he's
responsible for the maintenance from West Haven as far as his driveway.
Mr. Krantz - For Emergency vehicles to get to his house.
Mr. Matthews - And not the other people who use that...?
Mr. Barney - That's why we say any other person or entity.
Chairperson Sigel—Well, at this point, we can't make say, the Henry's responsible,
because they're not...
Mr. Ellsworth - They're not involved in this.
Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, they're not here asking for anything.
Mr. Champion - But the assumption is that they may.
Chairperson Sigel—Right, I mean presumably...
Mr. Barney - I assume, if Mr. Champion has a good attorney, he will have that attorney
talk to the Henry's and there should be a joint maintenance agreement, quite frankly,
something between them and Eco Village to work out, because now you have three
entities that are getting the benefit of that road. But we don't have that control or that
ability to get to that level.
Mr. Matthews - He accepts or rejects that approval.
Mr. Barney - I understand he's consenting to that condition.
Mr. Champion - I'm all for it.
Mr. Matthews - He knows that right up front then?
Chairperson Sigel—Yes.
Mr. Matthews -You know that right up front? OK.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, all in favor?
ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 049: Robert Champion, Appellant, West Haven
Road (near 140), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.1, Medium Density
Residential Zone.
39
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 20, 2004
APPROVED MINUTES
MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth.
RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Robert Champion, Appellant,
requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Sections 270-60 and
270-62 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and Section 280-A of New York
State Town Law, to be able to construct a residence on a parcel of land that does
not front on a Town, County, or State roadway, located on West Haven Road
(near 140), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.1, Low Density Residential
Zone.
FINDINGS:
The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied.
CONDITIONS:
In the event that the roadway is not maintained by Eco-Village or any other
entity to a level that enables passage of emergency vehicles, such as fire
engines and medical emergency vehicles, that Mr. Champion be
responsible for such maintenance from West Haven Road as far as his
d riveway.
The vote on the a MOTION resulted as follows:
AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Matthews
NAYS: NONE
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Sigel—OK, all approved. OK. You're all set, thanks.
Mr. Champion - Thank you.
Chairperson Sigel adjourns the meeting at 8:48 p.m.
Kirk Sigel, Chairperson
40