Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2004-11-22 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2004 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Kirk Sigel, Chairperson; Harry Ellsworth, Board Member; Ronald Krantz, Board Member; Jim Niefer, Board Member; Dick Matthews, Board Member; Andy Frost, Director of Building/Zoning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town (7:05); Michael Smith, Environmental Planner; Creig Hebdon, Assistant Town Engineer. ABSENT: None EXCUSED: None OTHERS: John M. Keefe, Cornell University; Colleen Shuler, 1319 Mecklenburg Rd, The Inn at City Lights; David Mountin, 274 Gray Road; Tomasz Pracel, 386 Stone Quarry Rd. Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—Welcome to the November meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have five appeals, and we will take them in the following order: the appeal of the Town of Ithaca, the appeal of Helen DeGraff, the appeal of Cornell University, the appeal of Colleen Shuler, and the appeal of Tomasz Pracel. APPEAL of Town of Ithaca,Appellant, Creig Hebdon,Agent, requesting a variance from the Code of the Town of Ithaca Chapter 225, Sprinkler Systems to be permitted to construct a Town park comfort station and pavilion without said system, at 151 Bostwick Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-4-6.1, Low Density Residential Zone. Chairperson Sigel—Welcome. Mr. Hebdon - Thank you. Chairperson Sigel—Do we even have a copy of that part of the regulation? Mr. Frost—Well, you would in the town code. Chairperson Sigel—If I had one. All I have is this. Maybe Creig could just give us an overview and also cite what the code would normally require and why and why it's not necessary here. Mr. Hebdon - OK. In the past the Town has built neighborhood parks, and this is our first Community Park, it's down at Tutelo on Bostwick Rd. And the differentiation between a community park and a neighborhood park is a community park does have TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES parking, and we're trying to put in comfort stations and more facilities, ball fields and pavilions and stuff. This is going to be the first of, I believe four that were designated in 1997 open space that that was done. What we are looking for the variance on is a comfort station that is going to be basically a concrete building. We are going to put a pad in and they are going to bring in a concrete building, tilt it up, we are going to put a block wall in between the two sides, and put another block wall in for storage in the back for things like lining and dragging things for this baseball field. We are also going to put in a pavilion in the back, it's going to be an open air pavilion with just a roof on it. There is water going to be lined back there. The comfort station in particular is going to be an occupied space during the summer time, at this point there is no plans to leave it open during the winter. It is the same building that we have been using for almost all of our pump stations, it's almost exact same dimensions and everything, but because it is going to be occupied space it falls underneath the sprinkler law. Basically we feel there is really nothing in there except maybe toilet paper that could burn, because it's all concrete. The pavilion in the back is going to be open air, it is going to be a wood pavilion, but there are going to be no sides to it, so there is going to be no way to obstruct anybody leaving that area. Chairperson Sigel—is the comfort station going to be open 24 hours a day in the summer? Mr. Hebdon -No, I believe they're going to open it up in the morning, of if there's an event, they will have keys available for people to open it up that way. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so a town staff person will open it and close it everyday. Mr. Hebdon - We believe so. Like I said, this is the first one we have with a comfort station and this is going to be a process in figuring out when we should have it open and when we shouldn't have it open, who's going to open it and who's not going to open it, and that type of stuff. Mr. Krantz—Will it be available in the winter? Mr. Hebdon -Not at this point. We don't plan on it being available in the wintertime. It's going to be built in such a way that if the park starts getting usage and people start asking for it to be available during the winter, we could put some heating units in it and we already have, our normal pump station already has the concrete with the foam in between, so we could heat them. Mr. Krantz —There's actually a water tank just a block and a half or so from the... Mr. Hebdon - Yes, right up the road is the water tank. Mr. Smith—Kirk, right now all the town parks and trails close a half hour after dusk and half hour before they open, so technically they're open at night. 2 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—OK, thank you. Mr. Hebdon - And there is no lighting planned for any of the baseball fields or anything, so... Mr. Matthews —what ordinance is being invaded here? I don't understand, I'm not opposed to comfort stations. Mr. Niefer—Sprinkler variance. Chairperson Sigel—Just the sprinklers... Mr. Hebdon - We would like to be relieved from putting sprinklers in a concrete building. Mr. Matthews —No sprinkler? It's a concrete building? Mr. Hebdon - Yeah. Chairperson Sigel—Yes, the sprinkler ordinance would otherwise require it to be sprinklered. Mr. Matthews —Even if it's a concrete building? Mr. Hebdon - Yes, because it's an occupied space. Someone's going to be occupying it. Mr. Ellsworth—The sprinkler law is more for people residing there and sleeping there, you know. Mr. Matthews —No one is sleeping in this building. Mr. Frost—Not necessarily, it covers all kinds of buildings beyond residential. Mr. Barney—Schools, daycare centers, that kind of thing. We have sprinklers there too. Chairperson Sigel—Well, I don't have any objections. Maybe we would want to... do we want to condition this on there not being heat in the building? They're not putting in heat right now. Mr. Hebdon - I don't believe so. We may put in the same heating units we have in the pump stations just to keep the pipes and stuff warm at this point. Chairperson Sigel—OK. I don't know that that would be a big issue. Mr. Hebdon - We've had our pump stations going with these buildings now for fifteen years and we've never had one of the heating elements even fail. 3 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—You put electric heat in? Mr. Hebdon - Yeah. They just sit up in the corner and keep it up to about fifty degrees. Mr. Frost—Creig, what's the square footage of the building, so you know, off the top of your head? Mr. Hebdon -No, I know I gave dimensions, it's like 27 by 18 or something like that. Mr. Frost—you may want to make note of the very small size of the structure. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah. Mr. Barney—It has three exits? Mr. Hebdon -No. Mr. Barney—No? Mr. Hebdon -No. Mr. Barney—Two windows and an exit? No? Mr. Hebdon - It has a window and an exit. Chairperson Sigel—OK. I will... does this require an environmental assessment? Mr. Smith—There's one there. Chairperson Sigel—for sprinklers, what do you think, John? Mr. Barney—Probably not, because I think there's an exemption for a 4,000 square foot non-commercial, non-residential building. But, now that we have it, we might as well take advantage of it. Chairperson Sigel—OK. I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance. Forgot the public hearing. We'll open the public hearing, if anyone would wish to speak about this case. Chairperson Sigel opened the Public Hearing at 7:11 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—If not, we will close the public hearing. Thank you sir. Chairperson Sigel closes the Public Hearing at 7:12 p.m. 4 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Now I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of the Town of Ithaca to build a town park comfort station for the reasons stated in the environmental assessment form prepared by town staff, dated October 281' of this year. Second? Mr. Niefer—Second. Chairperson Sigel—all in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 055 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Town of Ithaca, Creig Hebdon, Agent, 151 Bostwick Rd, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-4-6.1, Low Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Jim Niefer RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Town of Ithaca, Appellant, Creig Hebdon, Agent, requesting a variance from the Code of the Town of Ithaca Chapter 225, Sprinkler Systems to be permitted to construct a Town park comfort station and pavilion without said system, based upon the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff dated October 28, 2004. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK, and I will move to grant the appeal of the Town of Ithaca requesting a variance from the requirements of the Code of the Town of Ithaca Chapter 225, Sprinkler Systems to be permitted to construct a Town park comfort station and pavilion without said system, at 151 Bostwick Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31- 4-6.1, Low Density Residential Zone. With the findings that the requirements for an area variance, I assume? It must be an area variance, Creig do you know? Where the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied with an additional finding that the building is made entirely of, or substantially of concrete, and is a small size. What are the dimensions again? Mr. Ellsworth— 17 by 27. Chairperson Sigel— 17 by 27. 5 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Niefer—And there's no heat. Chairperson Sigel—well, it may have minimal heating, so we may just want to leave that out. Mr. Frost—I don't know if you want to just note that it's going to be used as essentially Mr. Barney—Can I just go back a second... Mr. Smith—There's two buildings, there's the pavilion as well. Mr. Frost—But that's an open building. Chairperson Sigel—Does that require a sprinkler, a sprinkler system? We could exempt that too, yeah. Mr. Frost—There's no electricity in the pavilion or anything is there? Mr. Ellsworth—No, there's no sides. Mr. Hebdon - There'll be water and electric back there, yeah. Mr. Ellsworth—Thought you said it only has two sides? Mr. Hebdon -No, it has no sides. It's just basically the top and the wood beams that go up. It's like a pole barn with no sides. Mr. Barney—There's no walls, is what you're saying. Mr. Hebdon -No, no walls. Chairperson Sigel—What were you going to say, John? Mr. Barney—That's a lot of exits it seems to me. Chairperson Sigel—No, that's the pavilion, not the comfort station. Mr. Hebdon - Yeah, the pavilion will have lots of room to remove yourself from. Mr. Barney—It isn't really an area or a use variance test. It's really specifically spelled out in the statute itself, it's 225-8, and it says you make a determination of practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship. And the tests are would create a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship, and the omission of a [inaudible] would not significantly jeopardize human life. 6 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Barney—So it's not really a true area variance or use variance test. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so we'll change area variance requirements being met to, what's the section? Mr. Barney—It's now 225-8 of the new Town of Ithaca code. Chairperson Sigel—We'll just say having met... Mr. Barney—I'd say it is a practical difficulty and an unnecessary hardship based upon the cost versus the benefit to be obtained here. Requiring the sprinkler system. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so second? Mr. Krantz—You might add that water is available in the form of a large water tank within... Chairperson Sigel—it's hard to get water out of a tank though, on demand. Mr. Krantz—Well, the fire department can. Chairperson Sigel—Well, there's water on site. Mr. Hebdon - There is a hydrant within fifty feet of the... Mr. Frost—I think the essence though, is that it is basically a bathroom in one structure and a totally open pavilion in the other. So from a life safety perspective, the risks are ... Mr. Barney—and the occupancy is presumably not going to be continuous, it will tend to be sporadic. Mr. Matthews —Kirk, am I missing something, tell me if I am. Chairperson Sigel—I don't know. Mr. Matthews —What's to burn? Chairperson Sigel—Well, that's what we're deciding. Mr. Barney—That's another good point, it's a concrete block building, the likelihood of a fire is really. Mr. Matthews —So I'm not missing anything. 7 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Frost—Extremely low fire load, would be the proper term. Mr. Barney—what's the ceiling or the roof made of there? It is a wood frame roof? Mr. Hebdon -No, actually it's a concrete roof, they're just going to have a wood frame over the top just to make it blend in a little more, but the wood frame roof built has got to go through nine inches of concrete before it gets to the actual building. Mr. Barney—I think you can safely make the point that there isn't much jeopardy to human life by omitting the sprinklers. Chairperson Sigel—I mentioned the concrete. Mr. Krantz—We have a motion, seconded. Chairperson Sigel—Second, OK. All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 056: Town of Ithaca, Appellant, Creig Hebdon, Agent, 151 Bostwick Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-4-6.1, Low Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Town of Ithaca, Appellant, Creig Hebdon, Agent, requesting a variance from the Code of the Town of Ithaca Chapter 225, Sprinkler Systems to be permitted to construct a Town park comfort station and pavilion without said system, at 151 Bostwick Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-4-6.1, Low Density Residential Zone. FINDINGS: 1. The requirements for obtaining a sprinkler variance have been met. 2. The building is made substantially of concrete and is 17 feet x 27 feet. 3. It is a practical difficulty and an unnecessary hardship based upon the cost versus the benefit to be obtained in requiring sprinklers. CONDITIONS: None The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. 8 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES APPEAL of Helen DeGraff, Owner, David Mountin,Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 to create,by subdivision, building lots with lot widths being less than the required 100 foot width, on lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone. Mr. Frost—This has gone before the planning board. I believe it was a handout, the findings from the planning board giving preliminary and final subdivision approval. That actually occurred on the 171'. And that approval is conditioned upon any variances necessary from the zoning board. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so we have their resolution here. OK, would you like to give us a brief overview? Mr. Mountin - Dave Mountin, 274 Gray Road, Ithaca. Do I need the mic up by the...? OK. I will give you an overview of the subdivision here and then the variances that we are requesting for this and the elm street extension part. The original subdivision is for a 33 acre parcel, bounded by West Haven road, Elm Street extension. The original owner is Helen DeGraff, who lives here. She is selling this one 33 acre parcel as is, she's not breaking it up. So we purchased 33 acres, and we divided it up. Four private owners here will be building houses, that's A, B, C, and D. Parcel E here is going to be conveyed to Eco Village, and this will be a buffer, buffer property, added to Eco Village's buffer land as is. Parcel F is being conveyed to the Town of Ithaca for municipal services, as we are donating Parcel F to the Town of Ithaca for a park, parkland. And then parcel G down at the bottom here is 50 feet by 900 feet will be conveyed to Mr. Terwilliger, and it will continue to act as easement and right of way access out to Elm street, it's a fifty foot parcel, gravel road. The original property was thought to be developed four years ago, there is actually an existing gravel road bed that travels through here. So, I need to donate this whole section here to the town as parkland to the existing trail through here and all the neighbors that are using it to continue that as a donation, if we donated this land, would this continue to be used as a trail, for passive recreation, for biking and for hiking. And for right now, there are trails all up and through here, but there is a solid road bed here, and talking to John Barney and others, we would like to have this part used to Elm street, excuse me, West Haven for access for vehicles for maintenance or whatever for tree trimming whatever would happen in this parcel here. The variances we are asking for tonight are, you may not be able to see on the small maps in front of you, these four parcels here are, one of them is 100 feet, meeting the code of 100 feet of road frontage. The one parcel A, is 100 feet, these other 3 parcels are fall short of 100 feet, they're approximately 88 to 92 feet, and the variances on parcel F here, I believe that variance came on from the town having the 50 foot access to the parkland. Maybe John can explain that a little bit more easily than I can, but the variance request for the town to convert this for parkland. 9 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—Well, it's actually a variance from the lot size, but I'm not sure you're going to need a variance for that strip because it's going to be conveyed as a road. Mr. Mountin - OK, it was on the original application, ABC and D were looking for a variance and then F was put on there as well. Mr. Frost—we advertise it just to cover the bases. Mr. Mountin - OK. Mr. Smith—I think F won't have the adequate road frontage the width of the setback, once that strip becomes road, then the parkland won't have... Mr. Barney—I'm sorry, you're right. It won't have any road frontage, well, very little road frontage. Chairperson Sigel—Will F have any road frontage? Mr. Barney—Well G, or whatever the parcel from the top, is going to be a road. Mr. Frost—Does it really matter if there's no structures on there? There's no structures proposed is there? Mr. Barney—Well, except that you can have houses up 100 feet, or whatever 150 feet width. Chairperson Sigel—F doesn't make it out to that road. Mr. Barney—It does as a turn around. The road is going to be an L-shaped road, you'll have a little green strip there at the edge of the road. Chairperson Sigel—OK, OK. Mr. Barney—I'm looking, I guess, Mr. Mountin, we're back to the problem we had at the last planning board meeting, I'm looking at a different map than... Mr. Mountin - Oh yes, by now, I'm sure you have a signed survey from the surveyor. This was done just before, this was not signed, but the town has the signed stamped latest. I'm showing you a draft. It's the same thing in terms of parcels, lot E, lot F, lot F, lot G, lot H. The only difference is that one didn't get signed and stamped. Mr. Barney—Yeah, the D and C lot line is modified. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so what's the requirement there for maximum setbacks for medium density? Is that 100, or is it wider at the maximum setbacks? [further questions inaudible]. 10 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—OK, so A, B, D, and D is 100 feet at the setback. Mr. Smith—Same as F. Chairperson Sigel—OK, F is the same thing. Does F meet the requirement at the road? Mr. Smith—I think so. Chairperson Sigel—Is that 60? Mr. Smith—I think it's 61. Chairperson Sigel—61.77 maybe? OK. No we can see it here well enough thanks. Mr. Ellsworth—What are the yellow blocks there? Mr. Mountin - In front of the planning board, I used a yellow line to indicate where these photos are taken of the original subdivision. Mr. Ellsworth—Oh, OK. Chairperson Sigel—OK, any questions? It seems pretty straightforward. It's actually pretty close to the requirement for these flag lots, closer than a lot, to the required width. Mr. Krantz—I'd just like to make one point. In the past it's always bothered me, periodically, when people want to subdivide land up, they are put under pressure to have a community park, which has always sort of rubbed me. That is not the case clearly here. This is the people in the long houses and the people in Eco Village were anxious to keep this land as a community park, and have acted accordingly. No pressures were brought to bear. Mr. Barney—That is absolutely correct. Mr. Mountin - And the Eco Village Longhouse contributed about 50% of the money to purchase the parcel F and the other came from residents on West Haven and Eco Village, and Coy Glen, so the entire community up there donated a total of$65,000 to buy parcel G and in the sense donated it to be preserved as parkland, for the whole community up there or for West Hill for that matter. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Any other questions or comments? We'll open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opens the Public Hearing at 7:27 p.m. 11 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Anyone wish to speak regarding this appeal? If not we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the Public Hearing at 7:28 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—This one we should not have to do the environmental assessment? Mr. Barney—I think that's true except that... Chairperson Sigel—Except that it's on Elm St. Extension? Mr. Barney—residential building... Mr. Ellsworth— 100 feet to 88 feet road frontage. Chairperson Sigel—well, it looks like we are prepared just in case. Mr. Smith—Yeah, there is a SEQR here. Chairperson Sigel—I mean, we can do it. Mr. Barney—no I think you do need it. I think its area variances for residential properties. [other comments inaudible] Chairperson Sigel—OK. I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Helen DeGraff requesting variances from Article IX, Section 270-73 to create building lots by subdivision on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone, for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff and dated October 15, 2004. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—Second. Chairperson Sigel—all in favor? Board Members —Aye. Mr. Smith—I was just going to mention there is a revised version that you should have dated November 10th. Chairperson Sigel—Ah, you're right. Change that to the revised version dated November 1 ot'. Should we vote on that too? Mr. Barney—I think everybody understands that that is what you voted on. 12 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—OK. Second on the revision? Move to modify the motion to say November 10th. Mr. Ellsworth—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 057 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Helen DeGraff, Owner, David Mountin, Agent, lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium 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 appeal of Helen DeGraff, Owner, David Mountin, Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 to create building lots by subdivision with lot widths being less than the required 100 foot width, on lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone, for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff and revised on November 10, 2004. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Mr. Barney—Just as a point of information, one is a granting of individual setback and lot line variances, it's a type II action. This is a multiple setback and lot line variances, so I don't think it would qualify under that exemption. And then the other one is granting an area variance for a single family, two family, or three family residence. And technically, in a way, lots, I don't know if they have houses on them, they don't have houses on them yet anyway. Mr. Mountin -No. Mr. Barney—I think the SEQR is probably a good idea on all of the lots. Chairperson Sigel—OK. And I will move to grant the appeal of Helen DeGraff requesting variances from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 to create, by 13 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES subdivision, building lots some of which have lot widths being less than the required 100 foot at the maximum setback, on lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone. Specifically, on the drawings submitted to the Town, stamped having been received November 9, 2004, this motion grants variances for lots A, B, C, and D to be... Do you know the widths of each one individually? Mr. Mountin - Yes. Mr. Ellsworth—88 to 92 he said. Chairperson Sigel—You said A was actually 100? Mr. Mountin - Yes. Mr. Barney—I don't know if the dimensions are on here. Mr. Mountin - They're not on here. I remember them being 88, 92, 96, and 100 in that range. I mean it's 420 feet on the curb, and that's on here. Chairperson Sigel—Can we just grant them to be no less than 85, but as drawn on this map? Mr. Barney—I mean, they really aren't showing... is it 50 feet back they have to be? Chairperson Sigel—I think it's 100. Mr. Frost—It's 50 foot back... Chairperson Sigel—Oh, it's 50 foot back, is that where you measure? Mr. Frost—50 foot is the maximum front yard setback, and then it's got to be 100 foot. Chairperson Sigel—I'm not sure, actually. Would it be a line perpendicular to the road? Mr. Mountin -Perpendicular to the property line. That's what I was told. Chairperson Sigel—OK. I'm not sure we'd get much more precise with a ruler. I don't have a ruler. Mr. Barney—I think what I would suggest, since no one is going to be building, I don't believe, there anyway, they're talking about building well back into the lots, that maybe the variance could simply be stated, the variance allowing the division of the lots, as shown on subdivision map such and such. Chairperson Sigel—You could just mention with no width being less than 85. 14 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—85 feet or something like that. Probably with the understanding... you might want to make it a condition that any construction of a house occur at a point where the lot is at least, what do we require? 150 feet, 100 feet wide, and that would basically force the construction to be back beyond these four little. Chairperson Sigel—Well, the one lot A actually is 100 feet along that strip. [comments inaudible] Mr. Barney—Well, I'm not entirely clear, it's the width of the lot, it's not necessarily perpendicular. It's really the shortest line between at 50 feet back. Well, I think as long as you say that their houses are built where there is at least 100 feet width of the lot, that will suffice, because if they have it they are in compliance, if they don't have it, they've got to go further back. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so that covers A through D, and then F, motion grants a variance for lot F to be, does that narrow as it goes back? Mr. Barney—It looks like it. Chairperson Sigel—to have a maximum width at the 50 foot setback of no less than 50 feet, I would say, is that all? That's all that has been advertised. With the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied in all cases, and with the condition that no structures be built on lots A, B, C, D or F where the lot is not at least 100 feet wide. Second? Mr. Niefer—Do you want to make reference to the Planning Board resolution? Chairperson Sigel—I suppose I could. This motion is conditioned upon all requirements set by the planning board being met except for condition 2b, the requirement that they receive this board's approval. Mr. Barney—Can we go back to the condition about no structures? I think I would suggest that no residences be built, because I could see some structures, some shed or something like that, which would not be a problem. Chairperson Sigel—OK, we change that to no residences. Yeah? Mr. Matthews —I want to make sure I understand that those narrow pieces of property are all going to be turned into the site of a road going up through the center of them. Chairperson Sigel—No, they are going to have one common, one shared driveway. Mr. Matthews —That's what I mean. So the road is going to go up through the middle point of those four pieces of property? 15 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, approximately. Mr. Mountin - It's in the guidelines. There is an existing road... Mr. Matthews —I understand that. And the property owners are going to take care of it themselves? And that's going to be a permanent easement in case those folks leave town and somebody else buys the place, right? Mr. Mountin - We've drafted a maintenance agreement between the four of us and the town to review. Mr. Matthews —That's going into the? Mr. Barney—It's part of the planning board resolution already... Mr. Matthews —OK, I understand now. I'm a little slow on the pick-up. Mr. Barney—No, no. It's perfectly alright. Chairperson Sigel—OK, second? Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 058: Helen DeGraff, Owner, David Mountin, Agent, lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal Helen DeGraff, Owner, David Mountin, Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-73 to create, by subdivision, building lots some of which have lot widths being less than the required 100 foot at the maximum setback, on lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1- 28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone. Specifically, this motion grants variances for lots A, B, C, and D as shown on the drawings submitted to the Town, stamped having been received November 9, 2004, with no width being less than 85 feet at the maximum setback. This motion also grants a variance for lot F to have a width at the 50 foot setback of no less than 50 feet. FINDINGS: 1. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied in all cases. 16 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES CONDITIONS: 1. No residences shall be built on lots A, B, C, D, or F where the lot is not at least 100 feet wide. 2. Said variances are subject to the following conditions contained in the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Resolution number 2004-116 adopted by the Planning Board on November 16, 2004- a. prior to signing of the plat by the Chairman of the Planning Board, the Town Board grants approval for the Town to accept the donation of lands shown as "Lot F" for a Town park, and "Lot G" for general municipal purposes, all as shown on the above-referenced subdivision map, and b. submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an original or mylar copy of the final subdivision plat, and three dark-lined prints, including the name and seal of the registered land surveyor, prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, and c. submission of an easement and maintenance agreement, for review and approval by the Attorney for the Town, allowing the shared use and maintenance of the access driveway off Elm Street Ext. between Parcels A, B, C, and D, said approval to be issued prior to the signing of the plat by the Chairman of the Planning Board, and d. submission of a maintenance agreement, for review and approval by the Attorney for the Town, to insure continued shared maintenance responsibility of the access drive off Elm Street Extension (Lot H) between parcels owned by Cowie & White, Terwilliger, and Luft prior to the signing of the plat by the Chairman of the Planning Board, and e. completion of an easement agreement (to be incorporated into the deed when Lot F is conveyed to the Town), for review and approval by the Attorney for the Town, granting a temporary 20 foot wide easement from Lot H for trail construction, and granting a permanent 10 foot wide easement from Lot H for purposes of providing public access and Town maintenance of a pedestrian trail, and f. within six months of this approval, consolidation of Parcel E with the adjacent EcoVillage at Ithaca Inc. property (Tax Parcel No. 28.-1- 26.22) to the north, and consolidation of Parcel H with the Terwilliger property (Tax Parcel No. 29.4-12) and submission to the Town Planning Department of a copy of the request to the Tompkins County Assessment Department for the consolidation, and 17 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES g. submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county or state agencies, including but not limited to the Notice of Intent for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities for NYSDEC, and h. conveyance of Lot F to the Town of Ithaca for park purposes and Lot G to the Town of Ithaca for general municipal purposes prior to the issuance of Certificates of Occupancies for Lots A— D. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—Thank you. APPEAL of Cornell University,Appellant, John Keefe,Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct an academic building with a height of 76+ feet(36 foot limit) on the University's campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 63-1- 2.2 and 67-1-10.3, Low Density Residential Zone. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah? Mr. Matthews —I noticed in their proposal here they identified members of the planning board and their association with Cornell. For I suppose conflict of interest matters. For the record, because they had me unknown, and I don't want someone to come back and say I was a secret agent. I am a graduate of Cornell if that has to go into the record. Mr. Barney—They won't hold that against you. Mr. Matthews —I hope not. I try not to hold it against myself sir. Chairperson Sigel—And they're missing Ron, Ron do you have any affiliation with Cornell? Mr. Krantz—No. Chairperson Sigel—None? Mr. Krantz—No. Chairperson Sigel—You used to go to their hockey games, right? 18 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Krantz—Yes. Chairperson Sigel—I thought so. Mr. Matthews —Hockey fan, that counts. Mr. Krantz—and they have a player named Krantz. Chairperson Sigel—Eric pointed that out to me. He was very proud of that. OK. I think we're ready. State your name and address please. Mr. Keefe- John Keefe, Humphrey service building, Cornell University. Chairperson Sigel—OK, and give us a quick overview. Mr. Keefe- I am the project manager for the campus research facility. There is a proposed 80,000 gross square foot research and animal holding facility proposed on the northeast corner of Tower and Campus roads, it is going to be a four story structure and approximately 76 feet in height. To give you an idea, the west elevation is here from a road looking at it, the juxtapositioning and the height of the surrounding buildings. That's the veterinary research tower to the North there. This building will have connectivity to that tower. Chairperson Sigel—Now, are these renderings including Phase 11 or not including Phase II? Mr. Keefe- These renderings are not including Phase IL Phase II is simply a 400 square foot floor plate addition as I said. We met with the Planning Board, they did not give us preliminary approval for Phase II, so we will discuss it later on, although the SEQR did ... categories I and II. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Mr. Keefe- This rendition is just another artists rendering of the facility looking at it from an angle on Tower road, again showing it up against the veterinary research tower. And finally, this is a South elevation, but it gives you a good idea as to how it's going to sit against the tower, as well as it's relationship to the veterinary medical center which is over on this side here. Mr. Ellsworth—How high is that vet tower? Mr. Keefe- I believe the tower is 130 feet, I don't know the exact. It goes up and includes stacks on top. It's a nine story building. Our building gets to be 76 feet because we have large interstitial spaces between the floors and the mechanical room has got about a 20 foot ceiling on it. 19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Well, it seems to have been quite well reviewed up to this point, the planning board was lead agency, was that true? Mr. Smith—Yes, it's a type I action, the planning board was lead agency, so the SEQR has been taken care of. Chairperson Sigel—So the planning board has already made a negative determination of environmental significance for all involved agencies' behalf, so all we are voting on is the height variance. It seems obviously being considerably shorter than the surrounding buildings. Mr. Matthews —There are no homes near this. I mean I've driven around, so the viewshed, if there's a viewshed problem it's with pedestrians they have at Cornell. Chairperson Sigel—Mostly, yeah. It's quite a bit shorter than the neighboring buildings. Mr. Ellsworth—What's the height variance? 76 feet, is that little tower there to the right? Mr. Keefe- That's correct, the conveying structure which is the elevators and stair tower at the back there is what's the highest point. Mr. Krantz—For a tall building, it's relatively unobtrusive, it fits in nicely. Mr. Matthews —It's surrounded by tall buildings. It's a midget. Chairperson Sigel—well, we don't want encourage them to go higher. OK, well, if there are no further questions or comments, we'll open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—And if no one wishes to speak, we will close the public hearing... Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—What's that? Mr. Matthews —There will be occupants in this building? Mr. Keefe- That's correct. Mr. Matthews —And the traffic has been taken into consideration? The added traffic of these people coming to work and so forth? Mr. Keefe- Yes it has, and that's in the environmental assessment. There's really only a projected, on the Phase I, increasing of 30 people total, because most of the facilities in 20 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES there are a consolidation, so there's people that are already working there and in around that area on campus. Mr. Matthews —It may not be a consideration of this board, but 30 here and 30 there adds up to 100. Chairperson Sigel—It does, but given the parking facilities they have in the area, it's a relatively small further impact. And 366 is a major, fairly major artery for this area, and it's close to that, so... I had a question or two from reading the environmental assessment, Mike, I was just wondering if these things had been addressed by the Planning board. You had mentioned some light fixtures not having light cut-offs that were in those plans. Did that get modified? Mr. Smith—Yeah, the planning board conditioned it upon having lights that have the cutoff, but since I had written the environmental assessment, I did some more research on the type of lights, and it appears that the type that they were proposing does have a type of cutoff on it, it just wasn't clear with the detail that was provided. We will work to ensure that the lights, if the ones that were proposed don't have the cutoff that different ones will, or cutoffs will be installed. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Anything else? If not, I will move to grant the appeal of Cornell University, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct an academic building with a height not to exceed 78 feet on the University's campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 63-1-2.2 and 67-1-10.3, Low Density Residential Zone. With the Findings that the requirements for an area variance have been met, and an addition finding that neighboring buildings are substantially taller than the proposed building, and that the proposed building will not have much if any impact on the views from around town as substantiated in the long EAF submitted by the applicant. Second? Mr. Niefer—You want to incorporate the Planning resolution too? It deals with light fixtures, and light fixture heights and so on and so forth. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, that's probably a good idea. We'll also include all the conditions expressed in the planning board resolution, except for any conditions requiring variances from this board. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second it. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 059: Cornell University, Appellant, John Keefe, Agent, Cornell University campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 63-1-2.2 and 67-1-10.3, Low Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. 21 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Cornell University, Appellant, John Keefe, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-59 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct an academic building with a height not to exceed 78 feet on the University's campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 63-1-2.2 and 67-1-10.3, Low Density Residential Zone. FINDINGS: 1. The requirements for an area variance have been met. 2. Neighboring buildings are substantially taller than the proposed building. 3. The proposed building would not have much, if any, impact on the views from around town as substantiated in the Long EAF submitted by the applicant. CONDITIONS: 1. Such variances are subject to the following conditions contained in the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Resolution number 2004-120 adopted by the Planning Board on November 16, 2004- a. submission of an original of the final site plan on mylar, vellum or paper, to be retained by the Town of Ithaca, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and b. submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and/or federal agencies, including but not limited to the Notice of Intent and Pollution Prevention Plan for NYSDEC, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and c. revision of "Topographic Map" plan ("Topographic Survey", TS100), to include the name and seal of the registered land surveyor or engineer who prepared the topographic survey, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and d. submission of a truck routing plan including the landfill destinations for the demolition material from the Laboratory Animal Services building for review and approval by the Director of Engineering, prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, such plan to be designed to minimize to the extent feasible heavy truck traffic in residential neighborhoods, and e. revision of the Lighting Plan (LP01) to include cut-off fixtures on the eight pole lights (Labeled M1 on Sheet LP01) to minimize glare and 22 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES light spillage on surrounding areas, prior to the issuance of a building permit. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Mr. Keefe- Thank you for your time. Mr. Niefer—You want these extra? Can you use them? All those trees that were cut down, we try to recycle them if we can. APPEAL of Colleen Shuler,Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-55 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to operate a bed and breakfast facility with 5 total bedrooms, at 1319 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-26.6, Low Density Residential Zone. Said Ordinance defines a bed and breakfast as providing accommodations of no more than 4 bedrooms (Article III, Section 270-5). Chairperson Sigel—Hello. Ms. Shuler- Hi. Chairperson Sigel—Could you please start with your name and address? Ms. Shuler- Yup, Colleen Shuler, 1319 Mecklenburg Rd, the Inn at City Lights. Chairperson Sigel—OK. And just give us a brief overview of what you're asking for here. Ms. Shuler- We're asking for our fifth and final room. We need a variance to do that. I guess that's not common, or that you know, it's not a normal thing. We feel that we have plenty of parking and we've met all the requirements for the four rooms and I believe we've met all the requirements for the fifth room, we just need a variance from the town to go ahead and use that room in our operations. Mr. Frost—What she's referring to, and you'll see it in your packet, is there were some building code issues, which she has addressed through the variance process, of New York State building code. Really, the only issue she's got to deal with at this point is having a fifth room, as zoning goes. 23 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—Right. Now I see that this is checked as a use variance, yet I would have thought that this was an area variance, since the underlying use is allowed. Mr. Barney—That's an interesting question, and I think you're correct, it is basically an area variance. Chairperson Sigel—I mean I saw it more as analogous to encroaching on a setback... Mr. Barney—The cases are a little all over the lot on this. We've done some research. Generally where it's an increase in density of what is otherwise a permitted use, it is considered an area variance rather than a use variance and that's what I would suggest. Chairperson Sigel—I mean I guess you could make the argument that five bedrooms is not a bed and breakfast by our definition, and then that would be a use, that's not allowed. Mr. Frost—We're not making that argument. Chairperson Sigel—But that's how you could get a use variance. Mr. Barney—I'm thinking of a case that I think went to the top court in the State of New York, where they dealt with a floor area ration, and the zoning ordinance permitted so many, I forget whether is was so many occupants of the building per x number of square feet. And the people came in and requested a variance that would have allowed a greater number of occupants for the same number of square feet, and the Supreme Court held that that was an area variance and not a use variance. And we found one other that I think had somewhat of a similar approach to it. So I think I'm comfortable applying the area variance criteria as opposed to the use variance criteria. Chairperson Sigel—OK. Just so you're aware, the use variance criteria would have been very unfavorable to you. Ms. Shuler- OK. Chairperson Sigel—You would have to demonstrate real, a financial hardship, that this one extra room, say, made a difference towards, whereas the area variance is just a balancing of your benefit versus the community's detriment, which is an easier test to meet. Ms. Shuler- OK. Mr. Matthews —Here we go again. You can always depend on me. What's the basis for limiting a bed and breakfast to four bedrooms? Chairperson Sigel—I think the town board just wanted to try to keep a handle on the scope, you know, of what a bed and breakfast would be. 24 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—They also allow bed and breakfasts in what are otherwise typically residential neighborhoods, so I don't think they were comfortable having a LaTourelle, which is characterized as a bed and breakfast, in a residential neighborhood, so they put a limit on it at four units. But four, there's nothing magical I think about four particularly, because I think the code allows five before you get bumped up into... Mr. Frost—Well there's health regulations when you have 24 occupants, that's a separate issue. Mr. Matthews —OK, thank you, Counselor. Now, let's assume that this is approved for the fifth bedroom. What happens in the future if the area is developed and there are homes around there, do we concern ourselves with the future occupants of the adjoining lands at all? Mr. Barney—You can, if you chose to. You can put a time-limited variance in place. Mr. Krantz—The area across the street has already been developed as much as it can be developed. That's where all those mid-cost houses are. Mr. Niefer—That's down the road a ways. Chairperson Sigel—That's not right across the street, I don't think. Mr. Krantz—It is... Mr. Frost—There are several other proposals for development, as well as rezonings, even, too. Mr. Matthews —And adjacent to it, too? Mr. Krantz—No,just across the street. Mr. Matthews —OK, but adjacent to the home on the same side of the road... Mr. Frost—well, you have Eco Village, which I don't see that being developed any further. And there are actually rezoning proposals to higher density across the street. So I'm not so sure that I see that part of the town being a Low Density Residential zone, if anything it's going to be a much higher density as I see it. Mr. Matthews —The ordinance doesn't speak to high density or low density concerns. Mr. Barney—No, correct. 25 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —So, again, I go back to my question, should we concern ourselves with the future in permitting the fifth bedroom in something that the future residents would find objectionable. Chairperson Sigel—I mean, that's certainly I think a legitimate basis... Mr. Niefer—In this situation, they're not asking to build an additional wing on the house, it's an existing house, and whether we grant it or don't grant it. The size of the house stays the same, so if there's an extra bedroom, it doesn't structurally change the structure at all. Chairperson Sigel—I agree, and I would argue that it's a fairly large lot with a lot of buildings, and it's already of a commercial nature. I mean, someone, say, considering purchasing land next door or developing land next door is already dealing with a, really a commercial... Mr. Krantz—And parking is no problem, it's set back. Mr. Matthews —Yeah, I don't think they're concerned about the size of the home, in fact it's a lovely home as I recall, I think they're concerned about traffic and noise and whatever else people bring. Mr. Barney—I think the criteria, though, what you're looking at for an area variance is the character of the neighborhood, today, not the character of the neighborhood as it may be in 20 or 30 years, but what it is today, and what impact the granting of the variance would have on that character, so... Mr. Matthews —So we're not concerned with the future? Mr. Barney—Well, I don't want to say you're not concerned with it, but I think that your criteria as articulated in the statute is the character of the neighborhood, and I think it speaks to what is that character today, not what it may become or may be ten or fifteen or twenty years from now. Mr. Krantz—Unless we forget,just down the road a piece on the other side is a gravel pit. Which brings back a lot of bad memories... Mr. Frost—Another point, too, Dick, is if someone came in and wanted to develop or build, they know what they are buying into, as opposed to someone who is already there and is now building, and all of a sudden something is changing on them. I think it's a little bit different for someone who is buying land and developing because they already know what is there and it's not going to change when she gets her variance. Chairperson Sigel—The test is a balance between the benefit to the applicant, versus the detriment to the community. 26 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —Right, I understand that. Chairperson Sigel—And if there's... it's really hard to foresee the detriment, future detriment, and the immediate benefit to the applicant is clear. So I think in that, I'm not saying I think you would discount the future detriment, but I think it's reasonable to discount it some. I mean, it's hard to quantify, it's hard to know what's going to happen, and there doesn't, to me at least, there doesn't appear to be or very little detriment to the community, now, and so... I don't, because the house is near the middle of the lot, and it's a big lot with plenty of parking. Mr. Smith—State road. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, it's a busy state road, even if there were people to build houses nearby, I don't think it would be a detriment in fact, I think in some ways it's a benefit if this nice old house can survive as a bed and breakfast, so. Any other questions? Mr. Frost—I'll just point out one more thing, this used to be a three-family house and now it's a single family house, so the actual density, I don't think there's much of a difference. Mr. Matthews —I'm trying to become clear in my understanding of the board's obligations to clarify a little bit about our obligations to the future. I wouldn't like to have somebody say over our grave who committed that, thirty years from now, because I won't be able to answer them. Chairperson Sigel—I think in a case where there was potentially more detriment, and you could more clearly see what was happening in the near future, then that could definitely be a stronger factor. Mr. Matthews —OK. Thank you very much for your patience. Chairperson Sigel—OK, any other further questions or comments? If not, we'll open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opens the Public Hearing at 7:58 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—If no one wishes to speak, we'll close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the Public Hearing at 7:59 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—Should I just do the environmental assessment, John, and not even ask whether it's needed? Mr. Barney—I would say in answer, I think it would be needed because again we're not talking about one two or three family residence. 27 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—OK, it's only when I assume it's needed that... OK, I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Colleen Shuler, Appellant, requesting a variance to operate a 5 bedroom bed and breakfast at 1319 Mecklenburg Road, based upon the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff dated October 15, 2004. Second? Mr. Krantz—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 060 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Colleen Shuler, Appellant, 1319 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-26.6, 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 Colleen Shuler, Appellant, requesting a variance to operate a 5 bedroom bed and breakfast at 1319 Mecklenburg Road, based upon the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff dated October 15, 2004. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—And I will further move to grant the appeal of Colleen Shuler, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-55 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to operate a bed and breakfast facility with a total of 5 bedrooms, at 1319 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-26.6, Low Density Residential Zone. With the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been met, and with a condition that, I believe there's already a condition that you can't have more than 10 guests at one time? Ms. Shuler- Correct. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so I'll just repeat that condition in our motion. Any other conditions that might be needed, John? And there are other, I mean your other exemptions required you to remove all cooking facilities and other things, so it's really already recorded. 28 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Shuler- Correct. Mr. Barney—It probably wouldn't hurt to state that by granting this variance, you're not altering any prior variances. Chairperson Sigel—Alright, and with the requirement that all requirements to meet New York State code continue to be met. OK, second? Mr. Ellsworth—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 061: Colleen Shuler, Appellant, 1319 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-26.6, Low Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Colleen Shuler, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VIII, Section 270-55 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to operate a bed and breakfast facility with a total of 5 bedrooms, at 1319 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-26.6, Low Density Residential Zone. FINDINGS: 1. The requirements for an area variance have been met. CONDITIONS: 1. Said facility shall not accommodate more than 10 guests at any one time. 2. All requirements to meet New York State code continue to be met. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK, thank you. Ms. Shuler- Thank you. 29 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES APPEAL of Tomasz Pracel,Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXV, Section 270-205 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to add a roofed porch entryway onto a non- conforming house resulting in a new front yard building setback of 10 +feet(25 foot setback required),located at 386 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 38-3-12, Low Density Residential Zone. The existing house is 15 +feet from the road right-of-way. Chairperson Sigel—Could you begin by stating your name and address for the record? Mr. Pracel - Tomasz Pracel, 386 Stone Quarry Road. Chairperson Sigel—OK, and could you just give us a brief overview of what your doing and why? Mr. Pracel - Yes, I need to prevent snow and ice buildup on the existing steps and the landing. Mr. Frost—I think it was best explained with the one pager. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, that was nice. Mr. Frost- Did you do that on the computer, Tomasz? Mr. Pracel - Yes. Mr. Frost—So essentially he wants to get a roof over the front entryway to make it safer passage into and out of the house. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, it seems a pretty minimal intrusion to me. Ordinarily, I would not be so inclined to get any closer to the road like that on something that's already close, but... Mr. Frost—the stairs are already there and you would still have the same people going in and out of the door, it's just now you're offering some protection overhead. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, it seems so minor. I mean, I would assume a railing is permitted. Mr. Frost—Yes, it could actually be required. 30 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Chairperson Sigel—So it's really just that little bit of roof that's triggering the variance. He could put up a railing without a variance on his steps. Mr. Matthews —the roof of this addition is going over the steps? Mr. Frost—Yes, to offer protection of the passage. Mr. Matthews —You've seen it or are you taking it from this drawing? Mr. Frost—Well, I'm assuming it's going to be like his drawing. Mr. Matthews —OK, so it's going to go over the steps and cover the steps from the rain and the snow? Mr. Niefer—There's a picture. Mr. Matthews —We don't know if there's any... may I ask a question. Chairperson Sigel indicates "yes". Mr. Matthews —We don't know if there are any future plans for road widening through that area? It's a pretty busy area. Chairperson Sigel—I'm not aware of any. Mr. Frost—I think it would be difficult,particularly in some areas where the slope drops off fairly dramatically. This is lower down the hill. Mr. Matthews —I know that, Stone Quarry is pretty... Mr. Ellsworth—We just spend a fortune redoing that road and redoing all the drainage. Mr. Frost—But even the road widening, I mean they couldn't take his steps away, the steps are there. Mr. Matthews —Could the road come up to the edge of the steps perhaps? Mr. Krantz—Well, the steps are already there. Mr. Frost—I mean the steps are there, all he's trying to do is provide a cover... Mr. Krantz—He's just putting a top on it. Mr. Matthews —I stand corrected, you're right. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, the steps are existing. 31 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Matthews —I pass by the house everyday. Mr. Krantz—It would be far less dangerous because if he slips because there's no roof, he's going to then slide right onto the road, and we don't want that. Mr. Matthews —because then the town will get sued. By the way, you did a nice job on fixing that house up. Mr. Barney—Does somebody have the picture, could I possibly...? Chairperson Sigel—So is this just strictly a variance from this section? Mr. Frost—Well, it's a variance to allow a non-conforming use to be ... Unidentified—Continue. Mr. Frost—I mean it's debatable how much more non-conforming... Chairperson Sigel—Doesn't it also require a new setback variance? Mr. Barney—A new setback? Chairperson Sigel—From the road? Mr. Barney—that's what we're asking for, isn't it? Or are we enlarging a non- conforming use? Chairperson Sigel—Well, the section cited is non-conforming structures. Mr. Frost—Well, it's already too close to the property as it is. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, but it's getting closer. Mr. Frost—If you want to count the steps. Chairperson Sigel—Are the steps without the roof over them considered the front-most part of the house? Mr. Barney—You have a good point. It is decreasing the setback. Steps don't qualify as a setback issue unless they're more than three feet up, do they? Are these three feet high, these steps? Chairperson Sigel—They look less than three from the rendering. Well, and the giveaway is that the advertisement even mentions the 10, the 15 feet going down to 10 setback. 32 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Ellsworth—That's eight inches and we got two steps, so... Chairperson Sigel—Right. Mr. Matthews —Are you saying that those steps could go right out to the road without any concern? Mr. Frost—The steps terminate on his front yard. Mr. Barney—But the answer is yes, as long as you keep them under three feet, they are not counted for setback requirements. Mr. Matthews —They could go right out the edge of the road? Mr. Frost—As long as it's less than 36 inches. Mr. Barney—Doesn't exceed 36 inches above grade. Mr. Frost—There's a section in the ordinance that actually says patio, unroofed porch, similar structures and no more than 36 inches off the ground's surface, it's exempt from the ordinance. Chairperson Sigel—So you could boardwalk your entire property? Mr. Frost—Yes. Chairperson Sigel—I'll have to do that. OK, so is it the case that if we simply grant a variance for the new setback, would that be all he needs? Mr. Frost—No matter what, if he does something in the future, he has to come back to the board, because it's non-conforming. Chairperson Sigel—Right, right. Mr. Barney—What section did it get advertised under? Mr. Frost—205, non-conforming uses. Mr. Matthews —So if he went to the vertical edge of the steps, he wouldn't have to be here. Mr. Frost—Say that again? Mr. Matthews —If he went to the vertical edge of the steps in a vertical line— 33 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—No, once he goes above the 36 inches... Chairperson Sigel—The roof makes it a structure. Mr. Frost—But he still needs a variance from that section, because it says he can't extend something that's non-conforming without. Mr. Barney—You know, given the tremendous amount of public interest in the particular application, as witnessed by all of these people here in opposition to it. Mr. Frost—screaming. Mr. Barney—screaming. I probably would suggest that we bend our usual rule and I would cover both sections in your variance, if you choose to grant the variance, even though we may not have advertised both. [inaudible comments between Mr. Barney and Mr. Frost] Chairperson Sigel—like if this house, if they just wanted to... Mr. Barney—I think your wrong... Mr. Frost—No, I don't have a problem, it's just I'm trying to understand because in the old days if you had something non-conforming, you did a change to a non-conforming use as a special approval. Now our non-conforming uses requires a variance. Mr. Barney—Well, it really requires two variances, doesn't it though, really? The variance from this section prohibiting the creating of a greater non-conformity, and also because you're already impeding on the limited ... you're further out. Chairperson Sigel—If he was expanding out the back, he would still need the variance from 205. Mr. Barney—No, I think we [inaudible] that. If it's a non-conforming use but the actual change to it does not enlarge the non-conformity, you don't have to go to the board. So there's a basis for Andy's suggestion. Maybe this is the only one. I don't think it's the right basis, but it is a basis... Mr. Frost—I don't want to advertise... Chairperson Sigel—The entire code. Mr. Barney—Article 270, section 270. Chairperson Sigel—OK, so this is low density, that would be height yard regulations, so 270-60 as well. 34 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—Yes. Mr. Frost—So that being the case then, if he wants to extend the front of the house an extra three foot for the entire perimeter, or the entire line of the front of the house, he could do it once he gets this variance. Mr. Barney—No, you can limit the variance to just this particular structure. Chairperson Sigel—But then if he came back to expand out three feet, he might only need from 205 because he's already gotten a variance. OK, and a SEQR on this one? We'll open the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel opens the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—with no one in the room except the applicant, we will close the public hearing. Chairperson Sigel closes the public hearing at 8:13 p.m. Chairperson Sigel—I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in the appeal of Tomasz Pracel, Appellant, requesting a variance to put a roof over his entryway, at 386 Stone Quarry Road, for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff dated November 10, 2004. Second? Mr. Krantz—I'll second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 062 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Tomasz Pracel, Appellant, 386 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 38-3-12, 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 Tomasz Pracel, Appellant, requesting a variance to put a roof over his entryway, at 386 Stone Quarry Road, for the reasons stated in the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town staff dated November 10, 2004. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews 35 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES NAYS: None The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—I will move to grant the appeal of Tomasz Pracel, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXV, Section 270-205 and 270- 60 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to add a roofed porch entryway onto a non-conforming house resulting in a new front yard building setback of... is it going to be less than, is the setback going to be any less than 10 feet? Mr. Pracel - No. Well, I measured it as 2+/- foot to the yellow line in the middle of the road and it was 25 feet, so it should be 14 or 15 feet. Chairperson Sigel—It's 14 or 15 feet now to the edge of the steps? Mr. Pracel -No, now it's about 18, so it will be 14, 15 or something. Chairperson Sigel—OK, the new roof. Mr. Pracel - Yes. Chairperson Sigel—So I'll say allowing a front yard setback of not less than 13 feet where 25 feet is required, located at 386 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 38-3-12, Low Density Residential Zone. With the finding that the requirements for an area variance have been satisfied, with the requirement that only the structure as described on the applicant's plans be built within this new, smaller, front yard setback and that the rest of the house remain as it is with respect to encroaching into the front yard setback. Second? Mr. Krantz—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 063: Tomasz Pracel, Appellant, 386 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 38-3-12, Low Density Residential Zone. MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Ronald Krantz. RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Tomasz Pracel, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXV, Section 270-205 and 270-60 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to add a roofed porch entryway onto a non-conforming house resulting in a new front yard building setback of not less than 13 feet where 25 feet is required, located at 386 36 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 38-3-12, Low Density Residential Zone. FINDINGS: 1. The requirements for an area variance have been satisfied. CONDITIONS: 1. Only the structure as described on the applicant's plans be built within this new, smaller, front yard setback and that the rest of the house remain as it is with respect to encroaching into the front yard setback. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK, thank you. Mr. Pracel - Thank you. Chairperson Sigel—Any other official business? Mr. Barney—What's the meeting schedule? Mr. Frost—Well, I guess just a couple things to mention, you should have a schedule for 2005 and is anyone not going to be here December meeting? Mr. Krantz—Yes, I will not. Mr. Frost—OK, Ron. Mr. Barney—There will be a meeting December 19 '? Mr. Frost—Yes, I've got three cases already. Chairperson Sigel—Yeah, so Ron expressed interest in being renewed because his term expires. And I don't know if it was discussed at the last meeting,probably not, but ordinarily I think the board nominates a chairman, or suggests a chairman for the town board to approve... 37 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—That's correct. Chairperson Sigel—And I was asked by Carrie if I wanted to do it, and I said I would be happy to if no one else was interested, I thought I should just check to see... Mr. Krantz—I move that we nominate Kirk to continue his fine work. Mr. Ellsworth—I'll second. Chairperson Sigel—OK, all in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 064: Nomination of a Chairperson MOTION made by Ronald Krantz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board nominates Kirk Sigel to continue his fine work as chair of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals for the year 2005. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE ABSTAIN: Sigel The MOTION was declared to be carried. Mr. Barney—You realize it's unofficial, Kirk, because you've already adjourned, so you can't do any official business. Chairperson Sigel—Oh shoot, yeah. Mr. Coakley, Deputy Clerk- The tape's still running. Chairperson Sigel—I don't think it matters anyhow. I don't think they need your recommendation. Mr. Barney—Reverse that adjournment motion, John, on the minutes. Chairperson Sigel—We'll extend a couple minutes. Mr. Barney—Actually, you didn't vote on adjournment anyway. Chairperson Sigel—That's true. We never do. 38 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Barney—So technically you're probably alright. Chairperson Sigel - We've been open since I became chairman... Mr. Barney—So do you want to vote on this meeting schedule? Technically you really should vote on this at your first meeting after the first of the year, the problem is that I think the Town Clerk likes to publish all of these meeting dates right at the first of the year. She does it in conjunction with the Town Board and the Planning board and everything else, so I would suggest, unless anyone has a problem, that you might want to go ahead and vote on this. Chairperson Sigel—OK, well I will move this schedule of meeting dates as our schedule for next year. Second? Mr. Ellsworth—Second. Chairperson Sigel—All in favor? ZB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 065: 2005 Zoning Board Meeting Schedule MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED that this Board approves the attached schedule of meeting dates as the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals meetings for 2005. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS: NONE The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel—OK. I think now we're adjourned. Chairperson Sigel adjourns the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Kirk Sigel, Chairperson 39 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2004 APPROVED MINUTES ZB Attachment A: 2005 Meeting Schedule TO: Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Members FROM: Kirk Sigel, Chairman RE: Schedule of Meetings --2005 Zoning Board of Appeals DATE: November 19, 2004 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals will meet on the following dates in 2005. All meetings will commence at 7:00 P.M. and will be adjourned at 10:00 P.M. All meetings will be on Monday. Please mark your calendars accordingly. January 24, 2005 February 28, 2005 March 21, 2005 April 18, 2005 May 16, 2005 June 20, 2005 July 18, 2005 August 15, 2005 September 19, 2005 October 17, 2005 November 21, 2005 December 19, 2005 40