Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2009-11-16 Si TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2009 215 North Tlma Street, Ithaca 7 : 00 P. M. Continuation — Adjourned appeal of Alden/Baer subdivision located at 247 Dubois Rd. Appeal of South Hill Business Campus , Linda Luciano, Agent from Chapter 221 , "Signs" to retain existing sign (s) and install additional freestanding sign (s) at 950 Danby Rd, TP # 39. - 1 - 1 . 1 , Planned Development Zone # 12. Appeal of Manuel Martin , Owner, Dean Shea, Agent, requesting an area variance from Chapter 270 =71 (c) , "Side Yard Regulations" to construct a garage and connection to a house located at 1442 Slaterville Rd , TP # 58 . -2-34, Medium Density Residential , MDR . Assistance will be provided for individuals with special needs, upon request, requests should be made not less than 48 hours prior to the public hearings. Bruce W. Bates Director of Code Enforcement ® 607=273- 1783 Dated: 11 /2/2009 Published: 11 /9/2009 FILE DATE a - �- TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Monday, November 16, 2009 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca 7 : 00 P. M . Present: Kirk Sigel , Chair; Board Members : David Mountin , Harry Ellsworth , Jim Niefer and Ron Krantz Absent: Susan Mann Staff Present: Bruce Bates , Director of Code Enforcement and Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk Board Member David Mountin recused himself from this appeal. CONTINUATION -- APPEAL of Barbara Alden and Ellen Baer, requesting Variances from Chapter 270, Section 62, (A, B, & C) to be allowed to subdivide property resulting in insufficient setbacks on two of the proposed parcels located at 247 Dubois Rd, Tax Parcel # 22.-2-1 . 31 , Low Density Residential , (LDR). Barbara Alden , Owner/Applicant was available to answer the Board 's questions . Chairman Sigel summarized the plan and noted that a revised plan was submitted showing Lott having 30 , 000 sq ft. Lot A is in compliance and Lot C is 4 . 75 acres which even though the street lines are set below what they should be , is acceptable . He went on to state that the only remaining issue was that Lot B needed a 30' variance on the minimum width setback. Chairman Sigel thought that these requests were modest and fit within the character of the low density zone . The Board agreed . Chairman Sigel made a change to the Part II Environmental Assessment Form ; removing from Item C : the phrase , "that one lot is smaller than the other. " ZBA Resolution No. 2009 — 47 Environmental Assessment Alden/Baer Subdivision 247 Dubois Rd TP# 22.-2-1 . 31 November 16 , 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Jim Niefer RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance for the reasons stated in Part 2 of the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town Staff that was included in the November packet with the phrase "With one slightly smaller than the minimum required size , " removed from the form . A vote on the motion was as follows : ZB A 11 - 16-2009 Page 2 of 8 ® Ayes : Sigel , Krantz , Ellsworth and Niefer Nays : None Absent: Mann Abstained : Mountin Motion passed Chairman. Sigel then opened the Public Hearing . Resident # 1 I ' m Anna Smith , 242 Dubois Road . With respect to 247 Dubois Road , as it is proposed , this is unacceptable , because it will spoil our low density neighborhood . I have the criteria that the Board uses to evaluate such appeals such as this , and I would like to address those . When the proposed subdivision project is evaluated against the criteria , the project fails on five out six criteria . The balancing test to weigh the benefit to the applicant against the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community: 1 . Health : How does this Board measure stress? The stress of having our neighborhood spoiled forever is an outstanding detriment. The stress of losing the environment that I have worked so hard and sacrificed much to live in , is overwhelming . The applicants are the newest residents in our neighborhood . ® Your vote to approve their subdivision project will invalidate the rights of other the other neighbors , who specifically chose to live in a low-density neighborhood . 2 . Welfare : The project as proposed is seriously out of balance with the welfare of the neighborhood . Do the previous objections from seven immediately neighboring households mean nothing? The neighborhood would be spoiled by sacrificing our low-density; spoiled by building two houses right next to the road ; spoiled by destroying our views across the hills and valley; spoiled by the increasing traffic with its noise and exhaust fumes and threat to animals . Forcing this project on the neighborhood , despite sustained opposition , is unfair and is not a balanced approach . The benefit of to applicant can be achieved by other means . The proposed project is achievable by simply relocating the proposed houses to the rear of the property, which would allow the new households to enjoy the proximity to the pond . Our views across the landscape would then not be obstructed , because the land slopes downward beyond the pond , so the houses would have a much lower profile in our line of sight. Yes , the benefit to the applicant can be achieved by other means . ® 3 . Undesirable change in both the neighborhood character and to nearby properties . will; . result from the proposed project. The appearance of the ZBA 11 - 16-2009 Page 3 of 8 ® neighborhood will be altered . Low-density is a significant factor in the appeal of the neighborhood . Future homebuyers seeking a low-density location may no longer be interested in buying my house or nearby houses . The applicants refer to the arrangement of cluster houses on Wolf Lane , saying that their subdivision proposal is therefore in keeping with the flavor of the neighborhood ; that is misleading , if you are unfamiliar with our area . The two neighborhoods are adjacent , but are not visible to each other. They are distinctly separated by land and by individual houses . There is no justification to override our low-density zoning to permit cluster housing . Spot zoning is unfair to other residents of the neighborhood . The Rout 96 quarter development project will replace low-density areas of West hill with high - density housing . If we must sacrifice low-density areas , it should be confined to those development ? ? Yes , there will be an undesirable change in both the neighborhood character and to nearby properties . 4 . The request is substantial . Changing from low-density to cluster housing is undeniably substantial . Forever altering a neighborhood is substantial . Our views across hills and valleys will be lost forever; mine has already been partially obstructed by the ongoing expansion of the existing house on Lot C . Setbacks are from the road are minimal . If approved , this disruptive subdivision sets a disturbing precedent for our neighborhood . Yes , the impact of the request is substantial . 5 . The alleged difficulty . is self-created . The desire for a substantial exception to the zoning code created the difficulty. The desire to forever alter our neighborhood , instead of fitting into it, created the difficulty . The desire to locate the houses by the road , instead of at the rear of the rear of the property, created most of the difficulty . The applicants could have purchased property elsewhere , more amenable to a communal development . So yes , the alleged difficulty is self-created . If approved , this proposed subdivision will be to the detriment of many for the benefit of just one . It will subvert the concerns and objections of many neighbors for the benefit of one household . Where is the benefit in that? Resident #2 : 253 Dubois Road Is in agreement with Resident # 1 . Added potential water and sewer problems that may arise ( Lower water pressure ) . Park was promised and hasn 't happened yet. Resident #3 : 250 Dubois Road Concurs with Residents 1 & 2 . Feelings of majority have to matter. Mentions noise factor and elderly. Resident #4 : Melissa , 219 Dubois Road . Concurs with Residents, 1 , 2 & 3 . Space and distance between homes is important to her. Project opens doors for future homes . ZBA 11 - 16-2009 Page 4 of 8 ® Resident #5 : Lynne Rich , 253 Dubois Road . Agrees that the project upsets the ® integrity of neighborhood . Previous homes were started and never finished and foundations were just left there . Residents were upset and thought that the Board had already made up their minds before the meeting and may have discussed the project before and reached an agreement. Chairman Sigel and Board Member Krantz addressed the audience and assured them that discussions have only taken place in open meeting . They added that there have been multiple meetings on this appeal and they were very familiar with it. Chairman Sigel added that the only reason the appellants were here at this point was for a minor reason and that is the only reason the neighbors were even involved . It would be very hard to turn down the appeal for such a minor variance . He also went on to say that the term "cluster housing" is being misused . ' The lots are pretty much the same size with two houses up front. Mr. Bates added that as of right , houses in this zone could be one or two-family dwelling , nursery or farm , public-owned park, or any municipal or public utility to maintain service ( i . e . substations) , can be built under the code , including any accessory buildings as well , as long as they meet the setback regulations . ® Motion made and seconded . ZBA Resolution No. 2009 — 48 Area Variance Alden/Baer Subdivision 247 Dubois Rd TP# 22 .-2-1 . 31 November 16, 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Barbara Alden and Ellen Baer requesting variances from Chapter 270 , Section 62 ( B and C) , to be allowed to subdivide property, resulting in insufficient setbacks on two of the proposed parcels located at 247 Dubois Road , Tax Parcel #22-2- 1 . 31 , low-density residential zone . Conditions : 1 . Lot C , the minimum width at the street line be no less than 28ft. , and the minimum width at the required 60ft. setback be no less than 28ft. , and 2 . Lot B , the minimum width at 60ft. be no less than 125ft . , and 3 . Further, that there be a legal agreement submitted to the Town for the shared driveway that is acceptable to the attorney for the Town , and ZBA 11 - 16-2009 Page 5 of 8 4 . That the applicant receive approval from the Planning Board for the modification to the subdivision plan , and 5 . There will be no further subdivision of Lot C . Findings The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , specifically : 1 . Applicant could achieve their goal by other means by locating the homes further back in the lot, but what the applicant has proposed is perfectly reasonable to achieve the means they want to , and in fact results in homes that fit in with the neighborhood better than placing homes further from the road , since many of the homes in this area are close to the road , and 2 . There will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties , given that the proposed homes are similar distances from the road and each other as other nearby homes , and 3 . The request is not substantial , it is a case of reducing the lot width from 150ft. to approx . 130ft , on one lot and reducing the width substantially on another lot, but that lot being much larger than required , and 4 . The request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects , and 5 . That while the alleged difficulty is self-created , given that the applicant recently purchased the property, nevertheless , the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety , and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz , Ellsworth and Niefer Nays : None Absent: Mann Abstained : Mountin Motion passed . A resident who spoke earlier approached the Board and was very upset with the ruling . She thought that the Board had already decided the case and it was a waste of time for them to come . Chairman Sigel noted that they did the best that they could and the land is buildable and the residents' assertions that they did ZBA 11 - 16-2009 Page 6 of 8 not want any more buildings is a risk they take moving near buildable property . The criteria were met and the Board voted . Appeal of Manuel Martin , Owner, Dean Shea, Agent ; requesting an area variance from Chapter 270 -71 (c) , " Side Yard Regulations" to construct a garage and connection to a house located at 1442 Slaterville Rd , TP # 58.-2- 34 , Medium Density Residential , MDR. Mr. Martin and Mr. Shea were available to answer the Board 's questions . Mr. Shea gave an overview of the project . There were two letters from neighbors in support of the project . The garage and connector will encroach on the side lot line but are in keeping with the neighborhood and the shape of the lot does not give a lot of options . Another important factor is that the slope of the lot makes it not that noticeable from the road . Chairman Sigel was concerned about the siding of the connector and the builder explained that it will be matched eventually , but not as part of this project due to budgetary concerns . It will be stained to a similar color. Board Member Mountin asked about the proposed fence and the height and ® appearance were discussed . Board Member Krantz asked for more details on the garage . The builder explained that the garage will not have doors or a concrete floor at this time , although again , the plan is to add these elements when resources are available . Although the Board was concerned about some of the elements of the project, they did not feel it was in their jurisdiction to address them and , given the surrounding neighborhood , it was in keeping with the character. There was some discussion regarding the exact measurements of the lot . There was no - SEQR needed . Chairman Sigel opened the public hearing and as there was no one present , he closed the public hearing . Motion made and seconded . ZBA Resolution No. 2009 — 49 Area Variance Manuel Martin 1442 Slaterville Rd TP# 58 .-2-34 November 16 . 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Manuel Martin requesting an area variance from Chapter 270 -71 (c) , "Side Yard Regulations" to construct a garage and connection to a house located at 1442 Slaterville Rd , TP # 58 . -2-34 , Medium Density Residential , with the following 71B 11 - 16-2009 Page 7 of 8 CONDITIONS : 1 . That no part of the garage be closer to the side lot line than 6' , and 2 . That the garage be built as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant , and 3 . that the exterior of the garage be stained to match , as best as possible , the color of the main house . FINDINGS That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community, specifically : 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve would be difficult to achieve by any other means and what the applicant has proposed is reasonable , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the house with the proposed garage will still be setback at least as far from the road as the neighboring homes , and 3 . That while the request is substantial , nevertheless the benefit to the applicant does outweigh the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical or environmental effects , and 5 . Again , while the alleged difficulty is self-created since the applicant just recently purchased the home , that the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz , Ellsworth , Mountin and Niefer Nays : None Absent: Mann Motion passed . APPEAL of South Hill Business Campus, Linda Luciano, Agent from Chapter 221 , " Signs" to retain existing sign (s) and install additional free= standing sign (s) at 950 Danby Rd , TP # 39.=1 -1 . 1 , Planned Development Zone #12. The applicant was not available to answer the Board's questions and the Board felt it was important that a representative be there . ZB A 11 - 16-2009 Page 8 of 8 ZBA Resolution No. 2009 = 50 Sign Variance South Hill Business Campus 950 Danby Rd Tax Parcel #39.=1 =1 . 1 November 16 , 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz . RESOLVED that this Board adjourns the appeal of South Hill Business Campus to a subsequent meeting when the applicant is able to attend . A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz , Ellsworth and Niefer Nays : None Absent : Mann Abstained : Mountin Motion passed . Meeting was adjourned at 8 : 08 p . m . Kirk Sigel , Chair 1 FILE DATE ® ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZBA RESOLUTION No. 2009 — 47 Environmental Assessment Alden/Baer Subdivision 247 Dubois Rd TP# 22.-2-1 .31 November 16, 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Jim Niefer RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance for the reasons stated in Part 2 of the Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Town Staff that was included in the November packet with the phrase "With one slightly smaller than the minimum required size" removed from the form . A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz, Ellsworth and Niefer Nays : None Absent: Mann Abstained : Mountin Motion passed STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA. I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting the 16th day of November 2009 . Deputy own Clerk, Town of Ithaca FILE DATE _ - o ADOPTED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION No. 2009 — 48 Area Variance Alden/Baer Subdivision 247 Dubois Rd TP# 22 .-2-1 .31 November 16, 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Barbara Alden and Ellen Baer requesting variances from Chapter 270 , Section 62 ( B and C) , to be allowed to subdivide property , resulting in insufficient setbacks on two of the proposed parcels located at 247 Dubois Road , Tax Parcel #22-2- 1 . 31 , low-density residential zone . Conditions : 1 . Lot C , the minimum width at the street line be no less than 28ft . , and the minimum width at the required 60ft. setback be no less than 28ft. , and Alk 2 . Lot B , the minimum width at 60ft. be no less than 125ft. , and 3 . Further, that there be a legal agreement submitted to the Town for the shared driveway that is acceptable to the attorney for the Town , and 4 . That the applicant receive approval from the Planning Board for the modification to the subdivision plan , and 5 . There will be no further subdivision of Lot C . Findings The benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , specifically : 1 . Applicant could achieve their goal by other means by locating the homes further back in the lot, but what the applicant has proposed is perfectly reasonable to achieve the means they want to , and in fact results in homes that fit in with the neighborhood better than placing homes further from the road , since many of the homes in this area are close to the road , and ZB A 2009 — 48 Page 2 of 2 2 . There will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties , given that the proposed homes are similar distances from the road and each other as other nearby homes , and 3 . The request is not substantial , it is a case of reducing the lot width from 150ft . to approx. 130ft. on one lot and reducing the width substantially on another lot, but that lot being much larger than required , and 4 . The request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects , and 5 . That while the alleged difficulty is self-created , given that the applicant recently purchased the property , nevertheless , the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety , and welfare of the community . A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz, Ellsworth and Niefer Nays : None Absent : Mann Abstained : Mountin Motion passed . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA. I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting n the 16th day of November 2009 . Deputy Town Clerk, town of Ithaca FI LE DATE SO ADOPTED RESOLUTION L N ZBA RESOLUTION No. 2009 — 49 O Area Variance Manuel Martin 1442 Slaterville Rd TP# 58.-2-34 November 16 , 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED that this Board grants the appeal of Manuel Martin requesting an area variance from Chapter 270 -71 (c) , "Side Yard Regulations" to construct a garage and connection to a house located at 1442 Slaterville Rd , TP # 58 . -2-347 Medium Density Residential , with the following CONDITIONS : 1 . That no part of the garage be closer to the side lot line than 6' , and 2 . That the garage be built as indicated on the plans submitted by the applicant , and 3 : that the exterior of the garage be stained to match , as best as possible , the color of the main house . FINDINGS That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , specifically: 1 . That the benefit the applicant wishes to achieve would be difficult to achieve by any other means and what the applicant has proposed is reasonable , and 2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties given that the house with the proposed garage will still be setback at least as far from the road as the neighboring homes, and 3 . That while the request is substantial , nevertheless the benefit to the applicant does outweigh the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community , and 4 . That the request will not have any adverse physical or environmental effects , and ZBA 2009 — 49 Page 2 of 2 5 . Again , while the alleged difficulty is self-created since the applicant just recently purchased the home , that the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community. A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz , Ellsworth , Mountin and Niefer Nays : None Absent: Mann Motion passed . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA. I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting Qn the 16th day of November 2009 . Deputy Town Clerk, Town of Ithaca FILE DATE - � ADOPTED RESOLUTION ZBA Resolution No. 2009 = 050 Sign Variance = Adjournment South Hill Business Campus 950 Danby Rd Tax Parcel #39.=1 - 1 . 1 November 16, 2009 Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz . RESOLVED that this Board adjourns the appeal of South Hill Business Campus to a subsequent meeting when the applicant is able to attend . A vote on the motion was as follows : Ayes : Sigel , Krantz , Ellsworth and Niefer Nays : None Absent: Mann Abstained : Mountin Motion passed . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA. I , Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York, do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting the 16th day of November 2009 . Deputy Town Clerk, Town o Ithaca