Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1982-04-05 i i BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5 , 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS ii j! APPEAL NO. 1422 Tom Newton 1 702-04 North Aurora Street ; APPEAL NO. 1422 Executive Session 15 I� i I�APPEAL NO. 1424 Robert Teitelbaum 16 212 Monroe Street APPEAL NO. 1424 Executive Session 18 l �IAPPEAL NO. 1426 Mary F. Boynton 19 201% Wyckoff Avenue i, ;APPEAL NO. 1426 Executive Session 21 i' i, IIAPPEAL NO. 1427 Robert C. Wood 22 319 Hillview Place ( APPEAL NO. 1427 Executive Session 28 is j APPEAL NO. 1428 Alan H. Cohen 29 310 Utica Street �I� APPEAL NO. 1428 Executive Session 30 !i APPEAL NO. 1429 Eric H. Skalwold 31 222 Floral Avenue APPEAL NO. 1429 Executive Session 33 ' CERTIFICATION OF RECORDING SECRETARY 34 1 I �f �i i' I it i !i I f i II it Ii I BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5 , 1982 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'd like to call the meeting to order. This is a formal public hearing to hear a number of cases that are listed ina .paper here at the desk for those who wish to know how many cases and in what order. First of all I 'd like to intorduce the Board: Donna Ward Bette Bagnardi Bill Wilcox Toni Bush Charles Weaver, Chairman Thomas D. Hoard , Building Commissione $ Secretary to the Board Barbara Ruane , Recording Secretary ABSENT: Margaret Haine This hearing is in compliance with the City Charter and the Board will not be bound by strict rules of evidence in the conduct of lithe hearing but the determinations shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidence to sustain same. We request that all participants ,identify themselves as to name and address and confine their dis- cussi..ons to pertinent facts of the case under consideration. Please ; avoid extraneous material which would delay - have a delaying ef- 'ifect. We' ll hear the cases in numerical order as listed in the i notice of hearing. After hearing all cases , the Board will retire Tinto executive session. Upon conclusion of the executive session the Board will reconvene in public hearing and interested parties may receive verbal information as to the result of any cases. Those � of you who do not wish to wait through to the end of our executive 1 ; session, you will be able to receive information verbal informa- tion from the office of the Building Commissioner during the busi- ness day tomorrow. I believe we are ready for the first case. SECRETARY HOARD: The first appeal is appeal number 1422: The Appeal of Tom Newton for a new hearing for a use variance under Section 30 . 25 , Column 21, to permit the use of the property at 702-04 North Aurora Street for the non-conforming use as, a three-unit multiple dwelling, and an area j variance under Section 30. 25, Columns 6, 101% 11 and 13 for deficiencies in minimum lost size , i maximum permitted lot coverage , minimum front yard setback, and minimum side yard setback. The property is located in an R-2b (residential one or two family) use district where multiple 2 I - - i i �+ dwellings are not a permitted use ; however the appellant claims that the non-conforming use was legally established under the old zoning (pre-1977) which permitted multiple dwellings . f The Building Commissioner has ruled that the no j conforming use had not been legallyestablished �i before the zoning change, and the Board of Zon- ing Appeals affirmed this ruling in a previous hearing (Appeal No. 1354) . The appellant sub- sequently filed an Article 78 proceedings in th State of New York Supreme Court to annul the I Board's decision; however his petition was dis- missed. The appellant is now requesting a new hearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals , 1 contending that the Board was not aware of all the facts concerning the application. MR. HINES: Thank you. My name is Bob Hines . I represent Mr. Newton, the appellant. It was just exactly a year ago this case Lasheard by this Board, not necessarily the same members. The i' , same evening the appeal of Bryne Dairy was being considered. I don' t know if that is a relevant fact in the consideration because l - I think the Chairman was here that evening - that was a rather lengthy appeal and took quite a bit of time but in any event, my point is that I sat through and listened to much of what Mr . New- ton and his attorney that evening had to say and - one gets a jsense of a case from listening to it after having listened to an awful lot of facts over a period of years and I listened to that Viand I thought to myself - there is a situation which is really confused and mixed up and there seemed to be a substantial amount of equity in favor of Mr. Newton. In any event, my interests that .evening were with another client and the matters passed through the court and now I ask this tribunal to reconsider what happened blast year for two reasons, one , having read the record and read II the decisions and talked with Mr. Newton, having gone down to the 1house and walked around it , went through it , I think there were 'at least a couple of salient facts which were overlooked by this Board primarily` because they weren' t developed in the form of ques- tions and answers. I dont think the appellant recognized the si.gnif ,cance of them. I think in the form of questioning taken by lthe Board and the answers given by Mr. Newton, that they were over � 10oked4 And those two salient facts were the existance of the fir , escape which was plainly visible it is there - it is not new it ,I i 3 - evidence in the sense that no one has created it since the date of the original hearing but there is a fire escape on the north side Ijof the building extending and servicing the third floor of the !,structure. And if you look at the building and go through it you jrecognize that what has been done on the second floor - and we ' ll `ego through the facts in a minute - but I just want to introduce i{ 'what I think are novel and different pieces of information. The second floor is itself a separate unit although it wasn' t origin- �jally constructed as a residential unit , it is , in fact, a separate 'entity in that structure . So those are my arguments , essentially, ;for a rehearing. Now these aren' t - not any substantially different ( criteria than used by courts. The basic rule is that you don' t jwant to have a litigant drag continually back before the same tribunal , the same arguments - there has got to be an end to lis- tening to this case. Courts are not prone to any different views and {II'm sure you would. I'm not asking you to sit and listen to exactly ' the same things and say hey maybe different people different time , you' ll change your mind, I am asking you to think through this I thing on the basis of what we say tonight, hopefully looking at some of the things differently and I think looking at a couple of i ifacts which weren't looked into before, This house is a large house I don't know how many of you have seen it = if it ' s at all 1within the Board' s interest, I have no objection to your going 11down and taking a look at this property and going through it. I 'm +i 1sure Mr. Hoard has seen i.t, but I don't know if anybody else has . Ij 1Th ;s used to be Art Adams House - I 'm sure that you knew Art Adams lor knew of him when he was district attorney and lawyer here in !!town. It 's a rather large structure one of the old Ithaca houses purchased by Mr. Newton in 1975 in the summer, when it was a single ifamily residence. I gather from what I can learn that Art Adams I�may have contemplated converting art of it to some other p use but II think at the time of his leaving the house it was still a single (family residence but a large three story building. What Mr. Newto ( proceeded to do at this point in July of 1975 under the old zoning �11aw was to move his family into the first floor, isolate the secon t it i it I 4 i i and third floors from a natural flow of family traffic such that ithe second floor was physically located above , of course, but iso- lated from the first floor and on that second floor unit which he I �was creating was the contemplated Good Times - the name of the new - lpaper Good Times was to be located there in a business activity, ladjunct to his residence. The third floor, which was again separ- ated physically, using a central staircase in the front as a means of ingress and egress, was constructed as a residential unit. So what happened in that time and what I think was overlooked by the iBoard, possibly because of the way it was developed - there was a construction plan to create three units . A residential unit on ! the first floor, a business office unit on the second floor and a i !'residential unit on the third floor. Walls were closed off, stair- �icases were isolated, rooms were constructed, a fire escape was con- istructed, a stairwell in the back was closed off, Mr. Hoard accepted I. ja building permit , I think inartfully drawn, at least considering i !the intentions and actual activity the state that this was a per- mit to construct a residential unit on the third floor of this i ?house. In fact, substantial construction took place on the second I ;!floor of the house which is readily apparent if you look at what ' s been done. What was plumbing put in, electrical work was put in, I ja stairwell in the back was closed off, and as I said, a fire es- cape was put by Ames Welding a fire escape which apparently was i designed or at least a design suggested by Mr. Stickler of this jDepartment, when he was on the second floor and discussing these various things. So the expenditure which was related in the last !hearing was something in the neighborhood of ten to twelve thousand �idollars for the entire project of 1975. During this time when the IIdark xoom was being constructed and the plumbing and the electrical work for that, discussion was made that Mr. Stickler admonished hi i'tha.t he couldn!t have a residence there because the area wasn' t large enough - there wasn' t enough room to put three units on the i, !Clot because it was shy by, I think Mr. Walsh's testimony was 100 ,,square feet. I don' t know r whatever it is it was a shortage . jBut in am event a residential use wasn't contemplated at that it - 5 - time ,, but in any event shortly after the Good Times undertook its I;operation at that location and they had substantial amount of move i ( spent for it , Mr. Newton had an accident - he hurt himself in some Iway and found it necessary to move his operation to another street (level location over in the Commons Area and it was at that time , w are talking still 1975 , it was well let ' s convert this particula I lunit which was constructed for an economic purpose business purpose - into a residential purpose. Now it was this conversion to which Mr. Aman drew great significance because the conversion from the business use to residential use was only two or three hundred dollars that is, painting the kitchen from a dark room color to I ja white color and installing a stove and refrigerator - whatever lit was to make the kitchen to make the dark room into a kitchen. Concededly a very minor expense. ((CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May I interrupt on that point? When was that dona? R. HINES: Late 1975. - early 76. R. NEWTON: Yes it was done the end of July, I believe, or maybe the beginning of August of 75 - about a month afterward . . 4R. HINES: The speaker is Thomas Newton, the appellant . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We need, for recording purposes - if what you ave to say is to be recorded and be a part of the hearing , you 4ave to come forward and be identified and get where we can hear ' hat you have to say, so introduce yourself. R. NEWTON: My name is, Tom Newton, the appellant , and at that time suffered a leg injury - a full length mirror broke and severed y leg in two places and there was talk of amputation and I was he sole owner of this R. HINES: The question is when did this event take place? R. NEWTON: I believe somewhere in July of 1975 . HAIRMAN WEAVER: So you converted the business use to residential use in 1975? R. NEWTON; Yes. MR. HINES: Using as a reference point you bought this property on my 11 of 1975. You went and took some construction, I 'm trying i ( o make sure we get the right answer . . . EI it i 6 _ �I li IMR. NEWTON: It may be August but my belief is that it was the end I sof July of 1975. i� CHAIRMAN WEAVER: How do you separate the activity of constructing I, , the apartment on the third floor from the creation of an apartment Ion the second floor? As I 've listened to the two of you I don't ii see any difference in time. MR. NEWTON: It was all done at the same time. The apartment . . . i iexcuse me . . . i IMR. HINES; Let me - I've been through this and Mr. Newton - if I !misspeak on any fact, I expect he will correct me . The constructs n li � of the second floor business unit and the third floor apartment tock place at the same time. Mr. Stickler was the inspector in charge ; lthe building permit was issued which stated only the residential jiunit - but nonetheless those events took place at or about the same I I !!time , including the construction against the north wall of a fir li ;,escape by Ames Welding . Now, the point T want to develop and which l 1Mr. Chairman has directed his attention to , was shortly thereafter Iii'it became apparent that you couldn' t use the second floor as a bus ' - 'jness unit because of an injury which you sustained and you moved i the business to another operation the Commons , and you undertook jjto do some work. on the second floor to take the business unit and make it into a residential unit. Is that correct? ;MR. NEWTON: Correct . li MR. HTNES: And about how long after you completed the residential I ! work on the third floor and the business work on the second floor land the fire escape , did you do that? A week, a month? Two ii months? or what? �i M.R. NEWTON: Very shortly thereafter I don' t know exactly - my ( guess X,s that it was within the same month- because the accident occurred about the same time. SMR. HTNES: My- point . . . I ! CHAIRMAN WEAVER: To clarify that. Did the business activity ever j� was it ever conducted in that building? l !MR. NEWTON: 'Yes. 'MR. HTNES: Probably for a very short duration. The point of this , I i I I j �7 / - I .i I!Mr. Chairman, this particular discussion is to address Mr . Aman' s 11comments at the last Board meeting that there was no hardship be- ,! cause icause it only cost two or three hundred dollars to produce this 11residential unit a fact which T am not prepared to argue with - i� my point is that it took considerable amount of money to create ;; that economic entity on the second floor - to wit: the business ;;unit which was fully contemplated at the time to be an adjunct to I; ,,the residence on the first floor, not a residence but something , 11which he had some economic use for as an office and dark room for ithe Good Times paper. And therefore the hardship arose , not from I�the small expenditure to paint the kitchen and to install a couple I fof appliances but the hardship arises by virtue of the expenditure Ilof ten to twelve thousand dollars in total to create the residen- tial unit on the third floor and a business unit on the second flo r and he is now - having moved the business unit out - deprived of any economic benefit of that second unit on the second floor. This ,yi,s not a small house it is a rather large house - the apartments 11created as a result of the activity of Mr . Newton, are rather large . There is a family on the first floor - a large old oak stairwell going up the front fairly large and attractive apartment on the second floor structurally very little if any different from what iwa.s there when the business use was contemplated and on the third lfloor a large apartment occupied by some students. So the hardshi )generated by the inability of Mr. Newton to use the second floor a la residence arises because of the tremendous expenditure to create flan economic unit there that is the business unit. And it wasn't done surreptitiously and it wasn't done in some underhanded manner it was done - the construction was done at or about the time Mr. Stickler was there on a basis of inspecting the work that was being , done and curiously enough, one of the facts the Board found to be absent I think- you drew some attention to this 7 there wasn' t I - there was a special finding that there wasn1t a second means of exit from the third floor and there is in fact a second means of lexit there is the fire escape. I don't know how that related to lithe second floor unit but in any event that was a fact that was 3 I it 8 - 1 ii found in the first hearing and I think it' s incorrect and possibly I� I�based on some misunderstanding. But in any event Mr. Newton was I advised that he could not have a residence - three residential liunits in this building because of a shortage of - or insufficient i`area space. And the lady next door -- the following year - 1976 - I;offered her property for sale not to cure some defect but just lbecause she happened to be leaving and Mr. Newton bought it. Now 11 noone buys a single famly residence for income purposes if they ar isane but in any event he bought this hoping that it somehow or I other would accommodate the shortage he had and resurrect this Iiproblem which was apparent to him. This is a very peculiar set of facts which seem to weigh very heavily in favor of Mr . Newton' s equity in this situation. We are dealing with a zoning law which permitted, at the time prior to 1977 ' s change - three units in that dwelling a multiple dwelling. We had him construct under Ithe aegis of the Board - of the Building Commissioner of the City i ! of Ithaca, three economic units , a residence for himself on the first floor, a business office and dark room on the second floor and a residence on the third floor and substantially cut the house into three parts to do it, Within a very short period of time it became apparent that he couldn' t use that as a business purpose an with a very modest change although great expense initially - �with very modest additional expense changed it into a residential lunit and i,f for any reason at all he had had a small amount of iiadditional square footage at the times on the loth he would have complied legally with. the use of the property as permitted under 1the zoning law. I don' t think there is any argument - it is really DeMinimus but nonetheless he did not get a building permit great it strength was placed on that at the time. I think he had a building permit for practically, everything he did, He didn' t have a permit to paint the kitchen and install an appliance I'm not sure that would have been required. You cannot . t . , CHAIRMAN WEAVER: On that point , the clients the changes that you made on the second floor � changing it from a darkroom and the �1busness base, to an apartment what appliances did you have to add? I - 9 - IMR. NEWTON: Just the stove and to paint the room. The sink was ;lin there and the refrigerator was in there for the chemicals - it I 1was just the stove. i (, CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So for business purposes you had some kind of Sink Band refrigerator installed? i SMR. NEWTON: Right, the sink was used in washing negatives and . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I don't care what you do with it. What I am I trying to find out is what you did - in other words you created a kitchen where none had been before? fMR. NEWTON: When the business was there or after the business was i there? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: What you are describing was converting that - other than the business use . MR. NEWTON: I converted the dark room which had a sink put in and was fully wired by Bear Electric from a dark room to a kitchen by plugging in a stove and painting the kitchen white. MR. HINES : T think that' s fair - the use changed. The use change to the kitchen - also changed the character of the room. A couple �lof.years ago Judge Bryant had occasion to review a case in which a town board, not the city, declined to issue a permit to somebody IIfor a use permit for something which had already been done because I 11they didn' t come Before the Board for a building - they didn' t com . for a building permit . His decision was simply that the fact that someone does not comply with an administrative requirement, to wit getting a building permit , perfectly legitimate requirement , a per I Ifectly reasonable one so the city or the town can review these things before they happen. The fact that the particular person in ; that case had not sought a building permit before they did some- thing wasn' t sufficient reason for denying a review of their acti- vity after it took place and if, in fact , it was proper that they Ishould issue a use permit in other words , if what the person did was permissible under the zoning law but they hadn't got a building pe - Imit for it and the Municipality, in this case Trumansburg, had re- fused to issue a use permit so that use could continue. The judge !held that was illegal . It was improper and the person was subject i, it ii fi 10 - i ii l !i to and was actually fined $100 . 00 for failing to get the building I !permit but they were not it was not within the perogative of the lBoard to deny them the continued use of their - if it did comply, Iso here we have a situation where I am not sure that it was requir d Ito get a building permit but it isn' t really fair I think to hold Newton at hostage - or outward the situation he didn' t get one �� if, in fact, what he did is reasonably consistent with what the lizoning law needed at that time and I think it was because at that ,particular time he was short on feet. The irony of the fact is that he when he bought the property next door he had that in '' joint names . He had this particular property in his single name. 1I1m not going to argue the Supreme Court cases they are perfectl I fltrue there wasn't any merger . Although he might have believed there was going to be a merger when the divorce came there wasn' t going to be any merger and it was couple of years before he got th 1 �Iland straightened out and owned the entire tract in his own name . That 's an anomaly, We have what seems here to be a complete serie i of anomalies from the time he bought this property! From 1975 , from his injury, to the conversion, to the buying the property next door in his wife and his name, and the inability to transfer it back and clean up this area thing until today, we have almost one problem after another which seems to be , if this Board is ever going to bring the matter to a head in a fair manner, must look at the actual expenditure to create to buy a large house and create �Ithree units and now be told you can' t use the second one. It was i ! okay to use it a$ a business and I assume if he went back today and resided on the first floor, he could use the second floor for , the Good Times paper and the third floor for another residential eunit but it is not proper for you to use the second floor, which was la rather large area, for a residential unit when it was such a miner `1 change over what he had earlier spent . I think he has a hardship T think it is certainly unique , Ithink there are a lot of equit- ! able reasons why, he should be given some consideration by this Board and be permitted to us,e that property as three units . He i ! has maintained it reasonably well and I do think when I listened �jto this thing last year, I couldn' t figure out what was going on - i - 11 - I limy mind was somewhere else , quite frankly, but nonetheless - until II saw the place, and I don't know how many of you know Art Adams ' j'old house - until you see it and see how large it is , and see what ' s i� going on there is unobtrusive - it may not mean much to you, what ,';I 've said here tonight but I certainly think there are many, many !,compelling reasons why a variance should be granted. Any questions? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any questions from members of the Board? i ( SECRETARY HOARD: I 'm not a member but I have a couple of questions . I jEarlier you said that the business was part of the first floor oc- �1cupancy. iMR. HINES; Well it ' s adjunct to it because you couldn' t have a i1business down there. 1SECRETARY HOARD: But could you walk from the . . . 11MR. HINES : Outside. I don't think . . . ;SECRETARY HOARD: Outside and then in up to the second floor? ( How did you get to the second floor business from the first floor? I! MR. NEWTON: Up the stairs . �R. HINES: Front stairway the back stairway was closed off, j ��wasn' t it? -IR. NEWTON: Yes.. The only way to get from the first to the second ifloos i,s the main staircase. !SECRETARY HOARD; Okay, but that did not go through the first floor �Iunit? iMR. NEWTON; No, it does not. I' IMR. HINES: When you walk into this house from the porch you walk ;linto a large vestibule, So typical of these older houses with oak *ood, etc. You then see a door in front of you, which leads to the !first floor apartment. Then you have a staircase which winds i� ,I around the outer wall with the nice side windows - up to the second 'jfloor landing which at one it was open, from what I can tell jfrom the construction, as any second floor would be where the bed- 4rooms were , and sQ forth. 7 that has now- been closed so that you �jnow then confront yourself with a second door which leads into the ,,second floor unit which was at one time the business and now the !,apartment in question, Then the staircase continues up around the I+ i it li 12 - outside wall to the third unit where there is a stair ending with a door right in front of it - there is no vestibule - you are at the top stair and you are right at the door to the third I floor apartment. And up into that - what apparently was at one I I� time a full attic - rather large attic. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Counselor do you have any specific information other than this generalization of ten to twelve thousand dollars - what it was spent for? It is apparent from your testimony that you bought a fire escape with it . MR. HINES: I would have Mr. Newton testify - I 've seen what he j� did. In general terms he rewired the second floor did some plumbing . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Did he rewire the first floor? MR. HINES: I don' t think so. i �i SECRETARY HOARD: Did he rewire the third floor? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: For ten or twelve thousand dollars , what did you do? MR. NEWTON: Okay. The third floor - one statement of fact was a I I little bit wrong - Judge Adams created the third floor and attic - �{ so there is an attic even above the third floor it is a very large house , What T did for the money was as follows : The - Judge Adams had roughed in the third floor apartment and had stopped. I went in and put in - when I, say I', # mean licensed con- tractors - put in all the wiring and the plumbing and fixtures , �j sheet rocked all the walls , put in a hardwood oak floor , finished I' l the window seats and gable ceilings and appliances and we bought the bathtubs from the Clinton House- the standing, cast iron bathtubs with- the standing legs - naturally sanded and painted all i the rooms, . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Was it necessary to put doors or doorways or i were there interior partitions in this third floor when you bough �j it? �I MR. NEWTON: There were stud wall partitions on the third floor iI when I bought it there was no sheet rock, no closets , no door �i ways were there - no doors . i CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Did you install doors? �f I� I - 13 - 1 IIMR. NEWTON: Yes sir, on all the rooms- on allthe bedrooms and �! bathroom. That' s on the third floor. On the second floor, the i� first thing we had to do was put a wall which is now the entrance I wall to the second floor because otherwise the tenants going up �I from the first floor to their third floor apartment would walk through the office so that wall . . . MR. HINES: He enclosed the landing. MR. NEWTON: Was put in. Wall to wall carpeting was put in, clos is were put in these old houses didn' t have closets . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: That 's on the third floor? MR. NEWTON: Both the third and the second. They were used for storage and the closets storm windows this goes back a ways l� - seven years . . . Bear Electric did the wiring . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER; In that matter, did you have to have a new service? MR. NEWTON; yes The third floor has its own service . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Did you have to have heavier wiring (unintell) into the building? MR. NEWTON; I do not know Bear Electric -- they put in a separ- ate box I believe. I don't know. CHAIRMAN WEAVER; But you handled the first and second floor from I, �i one meter T assume? or was your business separately metered? MR. NEWTON; I don't know that . I 'm sorry. CHAIRMAN WEAVER; Did you have any electrical improvements on the first floor? MR. NEWTON; T don't think so. MR. HINES: Wasn' t the first floor the primary living unit of Mr. Adams with. a kitchen, etc? MR. NEWTON: Yes.. I don' t think so , As a matter of fact , I 'm sure we didn' t 7 I'm sure that we didn't do any wiring work on �C the first floor at all , CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And the fire escape was put on to serve the thi d i! floor? �I li CHAIRMAN WEAVER; Are there any questions from anyone on the Boarc' ? Do you have anything more to add Mr. Hines . i I) ii i - 14 - ; MR. HINES: I don' t, I guess refer to the earlier record to flush out whatever other information - I do have a transcript of it if you want - oh you do also. I don't want to bore you with going I over the same things you've heard before or which are accessible. . . 'i CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We 'd be very pleased if you didn' t. j� MR. HINES: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anyone that wishes to speak in favor o this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak against I II this application? j MR. HINES: Could I ask that the - there were a couple of letters I I before, I don't know whether are they going to be part of this i record? One from Pan Scholl , and one CHAIRMAN WEAVER: As I understand it , we have two questions befor �j the Board. one is whether you have established enough new infor- mation to have this have been another hearing, first of all - whether we shall hear you or not. . . MR. HINES: Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAVER; And second, if we agree that we have heard suf- ficient new reformation - then to speak to the quality of that. i It seems to m that the Board would be directed by the information I j originally applied even to decide the first question. I I� MR. HINES: I understand. i CHAIRMAN WEAVER; Certainly the quality of information - if we are i! going to answer the second part of the question tonight, it would �I seem to me to force us back into the old transcript for a matter j of record. I' MR. HINES: Okay. I really hope that you would exercise your i I� discretion favorably. I don't think we've used the time to simply rehash something that was heard before. I think there were genuine problems in the first hearing that I hope we have clarified. Thank you very much. Ii j CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. SECRETARY HOARD: We have no letters on this Bob - if - were there j letters? MR. HINES: In reading the transcript there is one from Pam - but I may be wrong. it 'i - 15 - �i it SECRETARY HOARD: They were before the Planning Board? j' JMR. HINES: Maybe - I don ' t know. It' s in the record anyway. i MR. NEWTON: There were two letters from some of the area tenants !i in favor of the appeal . As I remember . . . f SECRETARY HOARD: Oh, you mean the previous appeal? i ' MR. NEWTON: Yes . ii i MR. HINES : It ' s in the transcript . MR. NEWTON: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May we have the next case please? �i i �i BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5, 1982 EXECUTIVE SESSION �1APPEAL NO. 1422 : The Board considered the appeal for a new hearing for the use vari - ance to permit the use of the property at 702-04 North Aurora Stre t i ii for the non-conforming use as a three-unit multiple dwelling, and an area variance . The decision of the Board was as follows : IMR. WILCOX: I move that the Board deny a rehearing based on ; 1) the review of the testimony tonight compared with the testimony of the transcript of appeal iinumber 1354 of 4/6/81 , did not reveal any substan- tially new information that would require a re- hearing. jMS. BUSH: I second the motion. VOTE : 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent Rehearing request denie . l� i� r` i; �I I� I' i! I! l� i! 16 - I !; BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5 , 1982 I I, SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1424 : Appeal of Robert Teitelbaum for an area variance under Sections 30. 49 and 30. 25 , Columns 6 , 11 , and 14 , for existing deficiencies in minimum lot size , minimum front yard setback, and minimum rear yard setback, to permit the enlargement of the second floor of the non--conforming single family house at 212 Monroe Street for additional family living space. The property is located in an R-3b ii (residential-multiple dwelling) use district which permits the use as a one-family dwelling; however, �i under Section 30 .49 the appellant must obtain an area variance for the existing deficiencies before a building permit can be considered for expansion of a non-conforming structure. i I�MR. TEITELBAUM: I 'm Bob Teitelbaum, I don' t know what I can add i �Ito the information on the appeal. Essentially the present situa- I Ition is that in order to get to the attic we have to pass through the bathroom and what we had in mind was extending the house over Lhatwas an old pantry , is now a breakfast room, moving the bath- room and turning what is now the bathroom into a hallway. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: That sounded easy Bob but if you would bear with I (me the two drawings that are attached to your application MR. TEITELBAUM: I have the originals here. Okay, you want me to jpoint and . . . 6ArRMAN WEAVER; T think that would be helpful and the Board could i Ifollow you on that . MR. TEITELBAUM: The house faces south. southis on your left, I guess. The present bath is; in the south. end of the house and you can see just behind the front porch marked bath on the present draw- Ings . What would happen there is that the fixtures would be re- i� moved that would be turned into a hallway and having extended lover on the north end of the house was the breakfast room roof, putting in an extension that is 71 x 14 � approximately that would ; create a small bedroom and room enough to put the bath in what is I �Inow marked on the drawing the present drawing as the bedroom. CHAIRMAN WEAVER; So you are not increasing your bedrooms in the 1l second floor? '' MR. TEITELBAUM: No. �I i! i� - 17 - i I CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Does this indicate a use of the attic other than it ,; storage? JMR. TEITELBAUM: Yes. ICHAIRMAN WEAVER: And what will be there? i AR. TEITELBAUM: Well what - it ' s hard to say. What will probably be there is an office I presently maintain an office up there - "Ithough it ' s kind of a shambles I 'm living in the insulation and jwe presently have storage up there. We will have a general purpose ( space - possibly a guest room - it will essentially be an open ; space finished and divided by furniture. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Your application for a building permit includes `that? As I see this - it is an application for a building permit I Iso is the permit limited - I 'm asking both you and the Commissione i! - is it limited to the work on the second floor? 'MR. TEITELBAUM: No, I hope not. I don' t know what paper to look j , at - I 'm sorry. SMR. HOARD: No, I think he included the top floor the attic space . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: In your narrative you say it is our intention to ii Iiturn the attic into family living space and . . . well that ' s betwee I1you and the Commissioner as far as the details for that are con- cerned anyway, Are there any questions from any member of the I I jBoard? Thank you. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in 1favor of this appeal? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in jopposition to this appeal? Do you have some letters on this? SECRETARY HOARD: No, I did not , ( CHAIRMAN WEAVER; We' ll have the next case, !I it I I� l jl {I I� Ij I I i I� II - 18 - I BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5, 1982 I� EXECUTIVE SESSION 1APPEAL NO. 1424 : '' The Board considered the appeal for an area variance to permit the ! enlargement of the second floor of the non-conforming single famil �I ! house at 212 Monroe Street for additional family living space. The decision of the Board was as follows : MR. WILCOX: I move that the Board grant the area variance I requested in appeal number 1424 . i MS. BUSH: 1 second the motion. ( VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No ; 1 Absent Granted. �IFINDINGS OF FACT: i �11) The renovations are all internal. I2) Will not affect the density or traffic in the neighborhood. 113) Does not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. I I l i' I iI I� i ! I i i 19 - i+ it BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT jj CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 52 1982 SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1426: I Appeal of Mary F. Boynton for an area variance un- der Section 30.49 and Section 30. 25 , Columns 6 , 7 , 11 and 12 , for deficiencies in minimum lot size , minimum lot width, minimum front yard depth, and i` minimum depth of one side yard, to permit a second story addition to the existing single family house at 2012 Wyckoff Avenue for additional family living space. The property is located in an R-2a (resi- dential - one and two family dwellings) use district which permits the use as a one-family dwelling; however under Section 30 . 49 the appellant must ob- tain an area variance for the existing deficiencies before a building permit can be considered for ex- pansion of a non-conforming structure. MR. SHARMA: My name is Jagat Sharma and I live at 110 Maplewood Drive. (NOTE: Tape was changed at this point - the first minute of Mr. Sharma' s testimony was not picked up by the other tape - I i tape defective) . The existing house was built in 1913 and it is Estill in very good condition. It has a large living room, dining i room on the lower floor and a garage and a study/den on the front portion and a kitchen and entry in the back. There is also a stair going up and it has a bedroom and a bathroom on the upper jlevel . That is the only sleeping accommodations for the couple i !fright now. What we propose to do is to raise the garage and put a '! bedroom and a bath- on the second floor. If you look at the site plan, we are deficient in the front yard with twenty feet instead sof twenty-five feet, we have a side yard of only three feet on one end - it requires ten feet. The lot area is small and the minimum frontage of the lot is small we are deficient on that but what I we are doing by the addition, we are not increasing any lot cover- !Lage, what we have is an existing condition. Primarily we are in- creasing the height of the building and creating more living space I i for the family so we are not by any way increasing the already deficient areas and encroaching on them. We are restricting the building outline to what the building is on the site. Height-wise jkalso we are only raising - to get the roof to the line of the pre- sent living room. So we are not increasing from the design point I� i li �i I i - 20 - ! of view - create a very tall building in front . We are carrying !! 1,11this line forward to the front of the building and putting the roo within that space . Material-wise we are using - the whole house '! has a stucco finish, rough stucco and fine stucco and that is the present proposed addition on the garage on top. We are going to match the color and the texture of the materials also. Looking at i! lithe neighborhood I think by putting a room here it improves the ; looks of the building in the front . It is a very well maintained I house the area from the front yard, and the side yard - there is . nothing we can do about it . 1CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions? Thank you. MS. BAGNARDI : The garage stays? If I! , MR. SHARMA: The garage stays. We will create an interior stair land will come up to the bedroom and the bath and the single family i lresidence right now and it will remain a single family residence Ilwith only two people living there . The use of the building - it ' s I; ! not going to change'- any more additional occupants in the building . This is just going to provide more living space for the family. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank. you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak Ii '!in favor of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak ;lin opposition? We ' ll have the next case. !I I� ii !I i �I !I I l I' ii I i; I� i i' �I i I� BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT. i CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK �j APRIL 5, 1982 j EXECUTIVE SESSION jjAPPEAL NO. 1426 : l ' The Board considered the appeal of Mary F. Boynton for an area jvariance to permit a second story addition to the existing single !! family house at 2011-, Wyckoff Avenue for additional family living li Espace. The decision of the Board was as follows : ; MS. BUSH: fi move that the Board grant the area variance re- quested in appeal number 1426. i MS . WARD: I second the motion. NOTE: 5 Yes; 0 No ; 1 Absent Granted { FINDINGS OF FACT: i i 1, 1) Would not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. I' X12) Doesn' t increase the traffic or density of the neighborhood. 13) Would not violate its present use as a single family dwelling. i I I i� i i li ii ,j ii I 'I I ii I' I, i I i - 22 - i i BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT i' CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5 , 1982 dSECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1427 : i� Appeal of Robert C. Wood for a use varianc under Section 30. 25 , Column 2 , and an area variance unde Section 30. 25 , Columns 7 and 14 , for deficient lot width and rear yard setback, to permit the oc- cupancy of the two-family dwelling at 319 Hillview Place by four unrelated individuals in one unit an ii two unrelated individuals in the other unit. The property is located in an R- 2a (residential - one and two family) use district in which occupancy of a dwelling unit by more than three unrelated in I dividuals is not a permitted use. The appellant i, must obtain a use variance and an area variance before a Certificate of Compliance can be considerEd i; for the conversion. i i,IMR. WOOD: I 'd like to clarify one thing . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: You need to identify yourself. MR. WOOD: Oh. Bob Wood, 210 Franklin Street, Ithaca, New York. ;Once before when I embarked on this project, I got an area vari- ance for the two units and I understand that it says that I am Tasking for an area variance -- just because I have to , is that (right? I IiSECRETARY HOARD: Well you are going from a one family - I mean yo i; are going from a - under the Ordinance classification - a two I' family dwelling to a multiple dwelling classification. i MR. WOOD: Okay, thanks, iCHAIRMAN WEAVER: So it 's not an area li MR. WOOD: 1 thought it was a use variance. � CHAIRMAN WEAVER: You have the area deficiencies but you also are I lask ,ng for a use variance in the bargain and as I understand your application do you agree? IMR. WOOD: Right, This property is at 319 Hillview Place, it' s one of the oldest farm houses up there - in fact it was , for this iparticular area of south hill , I am told, it was the original farm (house , and the, lots around it were sold off over time and that is �1why the lot looks like this - it has eight sides , Okay, the reaso IIpoint this out, ,t ' s a very large, although it only has somethin like twenty-seven feet of street frontage but as lots go, I would I i l i; ii ! - 23 - Ijventure to say that it is at least twice as big as a lot of them, in square footage. If I were to take the time and knew how to i figure out the area of that shape - at any rate, recent history is i �ithat it was renovated last year at a cost of over $35 ,000. into tw 'units . There is a two-bedroom and a four-bedroom unit that was done with permits and according to the laws and everything. The 1particular building presented a lot of problems as we got into it 11there is three sections of the building - the oldest I am told is i hover one hundred years old and then one section is about forty I jlyears old, I think, judging from the lumber that was used, It l, worked out in this particular house , where it was better to have , ',instead of two similarly sized three--bedroom or three-bedroom unit 11which I obtained a permit for and a variance to have a larger and i jlsmaller unit . That' s a combination of the building and working with I !!the building codes to access the furnace room and things like that. il If you have questions about that I ' ll go into it but it is kind of 'I a long story. So what I 've got now is a very nice building , totally , renovated, with- one very small unit and one larger unit. I 'm aski g � for a situation where I can rent the smaller unit to two people 'land then the other unit to four people whereas I have now a vari- ance where I can rent it to three and three. It works out better for me and more practical for me to rent it to this four and two jcombination so I am not asking for an increase i,n density, I feel , li jI am asking for taking one person out of one unit and put it in th I ; other that ' s the way l look at it . And T think there were two 1people from the neighborhood at the Planning hearing who didn' t come tonight , but they were in favor of that and I would say that it IT think this is pertinent because when you get two threes - three ,,people in each. one you will have two groups of people - like t 'fold saying, two is company, three is a crowd you get two crowds really. I, thnk. the four and two combination gives you really one jcrowd and then two people which is more like a couple , in my ex- � perience or actually individuals have rented small two bedrooms . IlAnd practically speaking , from my point of view, if I don't get this variance I am stuck with a two-three situation which is five people i - which is one less than is allowed under the variance that now ij ii II j - 24 - i Iexists and quite frankly to renovate $35 ,000 renovation during '! these high interest rates , etc. , I need all the income I can get I'; lto carry the building. And, therefore, I would be happy to be fable to rent that one unit to four people and it is quite large ii ' too, it is not like cramming four people in. There are three bed- rooms that are over eight square feet which is required by the New York State building Code and there is one that is over one hundred ( twenty square feet. There is a very large living room, a kitchen !i land a dining area, separate room - dining room I guess you could call it and a porch. I should mention also that during this reno- vation there was no increase in the lot coverage in fact, the lot coverage decreased because Iremoved two pretty bulky porches one I Ion the front and one on the west side . In the planning discussion or hearing or whatever , the only opposition there were two point of opposition and I'd like to address those, The Board split two !land two on it so there isn't a recommendation in any direction but !; the character of the neighborhood was one that this might alter jthe character of the neighborhood. I feel that it won't because am not increasing the density - with six people it won' t have I iIthat much. of an affect or I don' t think it will have any affect I� factually. The other, thing about character of the neighborhood, I !f think it is difficult to access the character of that neighborhood Mand I don' t envy you on the Zoning Board trying to deal with this I but within a thousand feet of this building there are six zones ijranging from heavy industrial , office, banks, mortuary, nursing iIhome, rooming houses, Co-ops, households , etc. I know you are ( familiar with all those , the character of this neighborhood is i ! not single family dwellings - it ' s mixed, at best. And even out I Iside of these - you go past the existing permitted zones in two ( variances - like the home that is across the street from me and , the Hillview apartments but this i,s a neighborhood that is at ' least 50% student occupied or group occupied seems to be i! synonymous!Is mous here in Ithaca. And I feel, again to reiterate this , y I,jwhat I am doing - I am really eliminating one of these group situ- Iations and the trade-off is that by eliminating one , one becomes ,I ii i; i' ii 25 - 'i I Kone person larger in other words a group of three becomes a group i,of four and you get a couple situation. The other point that came up was , and I find this very disturbing - was that, yes this makes sense and yes you did a good job on the building and yes it ' s nice i Viand everything, but really what we have to do is always govern or ,legislate for the worst case and personally I kind of resent that 11and — because I don' t feel that I am a worst case and I think that �lif people look at this reasonably or an average landlord or a (reasonable landlord that the inference that while four becomes five land five becomes six and, you know, you get into this packing situ I elation - even though I know some landlords- do that and they do that every close to this: location -- I don' t think a decision should be i ijmade based on worst case -- I think that it should be based on I ,, reason and normal use and normal , what I would call , average rea- I jsonable actions of a landlord. That ' s all I have to say. Any I' jquestions? i ( CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I am not commenting on what you've said but merely Jf'or your information, this Board rather than Common Council or the .s 'ilPlanners who may be in a position to make recommendations and may ,legislate , we are a quasi-judicial board and we are bound by the jjzoning laws and whether you and I agree that they are wise or not Hand the official map p i,s a part of the - so in a very general sense dour response will be not based upon whether you are a good landlord i� I f but . . . iiMR, WOOD; T'm glad of that, �CHATRMAN WEAVER: But upon whether you . . . but upon what the Zoning �,10rdinance allows. Your use - your question initially on whether ! you are asking for exactly what you are asking for is a use variance !which arian e !which requires a. showing of hardship, among other things . Now that I IT've said that, I 'd like to ask you a question, ffave you made any attempt to rent this to related persons? Is there no market for ! families as they were traditionally known? IIMR, WOOD; Yes. Well T think there is a tremendous market for Ifami.lies. but today in Ithaca it seems a family is a couple with on ii . itIchi;ld and the demand that I get - 'if I put an ad in for two bedroo I' I s i 26 - iunit , the phone rings off the hook. It ' s couples and I feel I� ; couples that normally would go out and buy a small house but now they are not in the purchasing market really. But I think a large family - no - I don't get many calls for large families . 'i �ICHAIRMAN WEAVER: For four bedrooms? SMR. WOOD: No. I think - I venture to say it 's a - fast becoming a thing of the past. Even three bedrooms. The funny thing about this - I 'm in this for the two bedroom I mean, I a two bedroom � I can rent. If I get a vacancy I can rent a two bedroom. A three land a four is difficult - if you don' t have a three and a four rented in September you have a tough time - you hope that in ,January you can fill it but sometimes you can't. Whereas a two 11bedroom if I had my druthers , I' d have three two-bedrooms in thi building. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do you have any information for the Board to I indicate that in renting this legally as you are now restricted, I that you can or cannot make a profit? MR. WOOD: No, in fact it puts me below my break even point if I can 't rent this: at going rates for the two and four combination iiit. puts me in a difficult economic position. I CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do you have any specific information to substan l Itiate that statement? i !MR. WOOD: I didn't bring it with me. I have a $512. 00 a month Imortgage payment. I have insurance that runs about $35 . 00 a month I have $40. 00 maintenance a month, which is low, if I figure $100. 00 - around $120, 00 or $112 , 00 for taxes. I 've got to get $700. 00 a month and the $40. 00 maintenance fee is minimal a new furnace can wipe that out pretty qu ck for the year. Then I 've got ( depreciation I've got to figure into that sometimes I 've got real estate fees for rental i.f I have a realtor rent it and if you are talking about a two bedroom at $325. 00, which is really maximum - �that unit cannot be rented for more than $325 , 00 I know and if the other is rented to three people 7 would be three times $156 . 00 which ''I find is a okay so I've got $468 . $793. so Ilve got about $80. 00 !in there to play with a month which, to slug away at that thing is ,I ii 27 - �t 1for a year the way I have and borrow money at between 14z and 19 l 1percent, a cushion of $80. 00 some odd dollars - and that is a 'i Icushion without a vacancy rate and if I figure 5% vacancy rate i into that - which again is low - and depreciation, this is not a ;' financially feasible operation. ,i MS. WARD: You don' t have any utility costs - your tenants pay ! that? i MR. WOOD: No in the renovation we separated out the utilities . MS. WARD: How long have you rented it the way it is? SMR. WOOD: Well the other unit is now rented to two people and a child - I guess you' d call them a family and the other is a couple ' so I have four adults and two people in there and I am getting i ! $300. 00 a month for the four bedroom and I am getting $325 . 00 for the two-bedroom so I 'm taking in $625 . 00 a month now. jMS. WARD: For how long, though, have you rented it? MR. WOOD: Since well the two bedrooms was rented at $325 . 00 in September and the four bedroom was rented in February pretty much on a sublet basis waiting for next August. SMS. WARD: But I mean, you really have only been renting them for about a year? II MR. WOOD: Yes , other MS. WARD: The building has only been ready to have tenants in it for about a year? IMR. WOOD; Yes . The renovation was essentially completed in September although. th_e four bedroom unit came along a little later MS. BAGNARDT; And you own the house adjacent to this property? MR. WOOD: Yes. This property here. I should also point out that in doing this I provided seven parking spaces , not counting the driveway. IMS . BAGNARDI`: Where do they park? I couldnIt see from the street . t MR. WOOD: These units are really I think, now linked for the rest ,j of time because the driveway is on this property and the parking is on this property and that is the trade off there is seven �Ispots along here. That was to provide parking and also limit t� �I lawn - there is an awful lot of lawn to cut. Which exceeds - I I� - 28 - ilonly need four spaces but I have two extra spaces and I provide ijtwo spaces with the larger unit. 1ICHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any other questions? Thank you. 11MR. WOOD: Thank you. ij !; CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of i iithis application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposi- tion to this application? Were there any letters? iSECRETARY HOARD: No letters. ; CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Next case please. ii BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT ii CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5 , 1982 it EXECUTIVE SESSION I. � APPEAL NO. 1427 : !!The Board considered the appeal of Robert C. Wood for a use vari- i ance to permit the occupancy of the two-family dwelling at 319 � Hillview Place by four unrelated individuals in one unit and two unrelated individuals in the other unit. The decision of the �Board was as follows: MS. WARD: I move that the Board deny the use variance requeste in appeal number 1427 ,MS. BAGNARDI': T second the motion. VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent Granted FINDINGS OF FACT E1) The Board did not hear testimony supporting the evidence of hardship. � 2) The zoning clearly defines the area as R-2 which does not allow a multiple residence. i I I l - 29 - i ii I BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS it CITY COURT j CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK 'I APRIL 5 , 1982 i� ( SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1428 : Appeal of Alan H. Cohen for a special permit under Section 30. 25 , Column 3 , and Section 30 . 26 , to per- mit the home occupation of an accountant' s office at 310 Utica Street. The property is located in an R-2b (residential - one and two family) use district in which a home occupation is permitted, but only if the Board of Zoning Appeals finds that the use meets the requirements of Section 30 . 26 for a Special Per- mit and the definition of a home occupation. MR. COHEN: My name is Alan Cohen and I live at 310 Utica Street. llBasically what I am doing is I've been a resident of Tompkins Coun y !ffor the last 81-, years and I now live in the Fall Creek area. I 'm i" an associate professor of accounting up at Ithaca College - I 'm also a consultant and a Certified Public Accountant and what I 'd ! like to do is - to continue with my home occupation and obtain a i special permit. I believe that I have fulfilled all the require- ,ments of the provision and I respectfully request that my applica- tion be approved. I� ' CHAIRMAN WEAVER While you are still here, do we have a response ; from the neighborhood? SECRETARY HOARD; No . MR. COHEN: There were some comments at the other hearing I went to . i l iCHAIRMAN WEAVER; Well but that doesn't have any affect upon us ! . except they influence 7 the Planning Board makes recommendation. iUnless addressed to us in response to your application. Ij IMR. COHEN; I didn' t get anything. i! MR. WILCOX You would only have one other employee? �lMR. COHEN; I only have one employee. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any questions from anyone on the Board? Thank you very much. Is 'there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of j! this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposi- I ;' tion to this application? 11 1 MR. COHEN; I have a q,-,.eston• You mentioned an oral response at li , Your office tomorrow - is there any written response? i i I� I 30 - SECRETARY HOARD: Yes you will get a letter too but just if you ,'want a quick answer in the morning. ii CHAIRMAN WEAVER: If you don't want to wait for the mail you can it ! call him tomorrow. The next case. i BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5 , 1982 EXECUTIVE SESSION APPEAL NO. 1428 : I�The Board considered the request of Alan H. Cohen for a special 11. �permit to permit the home occupation of an accountants office at 1310 Utica Street The decision f the Board was as follows : Street, h 10 O O �MR. WILCOX: I move that the Board approve the request for a special permit in appeal number 1428 for a home occu- pation in the accounting profession. I! IMS . BUSH: I second the motion. 'I VOTE : 4 Yes ; 0 No ; 1 Absent, 1 Abstention Granted FINDINGS OF FACT: 11) The accounting profession is within the definition of a home occupation. !2) Will not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. I I j13) Does not increase traffic in the neighborhood. �4) Does not increase the density of the neighborhood. iI I' i! I i 1 !I I! I ! I' i !i i� i I� 31 - ii Ii BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT j CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK i•. l APRIL 5, 1982 SECRETARY HOARD: And the final case is appeal number 1429: Appeal of Eric H. Skalwold for an area variance under ii Section 30. 49 and Section 30. 25 ,Columns 6, 12 , and 14 , for existing deficiencies in minimum lot size, one minimum side yard, and minimum rear yard setback, to permit an addition to the rear of the single family house at 222 Floral Avenue. The property is located in an R-3a (residential multiple dwelling) use district where the use is permitted; however under Section 30. 49 which prohibits the enlargement of a non-conforming structure , the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit can be considered for the construe tion. !' MR. SKALWOLD: My name is Eric Skalwold, I reside at 222 Floral i' ' Avenue . Most of what I have to say is outlined in the letter that i� I submitted with this - at least I believe there was a letter sent to you - I was in a rush and sent out letters to all the home owners and I think you had a copy of that . The house is 100 years old, judging by the railroad time schedule I found in the wall . yThe construction of the house leaves much to be desired, It was i not well thought out in construction or in execution. I bought the house in July and began renovations of the house which had bee condemned for ten years byythe Housing Board, or approximately ten years . When I got the 'house the roof was gone , the sills were IIgone and itis requiring extensive repair. The house was divided yup into various living units which do not - did not meet code. My own desires were to enlarge rooms and make them at least to code or larger but I was left with two situations. One where to put IIthe stairs the stairs that had been in the house were not in a �jreasonable location and they were not in they were not safe. I, And the other was, where do I put the furnace, because the house has a crawl space underneath it but no cellar and there is no place in the house that could reasonably be made into a furnace Froom. So the plans which you have there is at least one copy of - are to put in stairs to provide access to the upstairs to two bedrooms which would be put in the upstairs and a second bath to g Ilion the upstairs . It also would be a second means of exit from the i I; l 32 - (I i ;! house - an exit to the rear. Though the lot is small this additio ! to the back of the house is almost invisible from any but one i; neighbor. There is a cliff that forms the back barrier of the lot i ;land that goes up twenty or twenty-five feet. It goes up higher % than the peak of the roof and that blocks the view from, of course i 11the back and it also with. the house up that close to the cliff - i I�Iit is hard to see from the street so - and on one side are two i� '! city lots so there are no houses there . One of them is too small I! i to put any sort of house on. The one immediately next to the hous nand the other neighbors could see it from their back porch they i. I1could see the addition. But other than that it would be invisible IAre there any questions? i ( CHAIRMAN WEAVER: When you get done with your remodeling how many bedrooms will there be in fthe entire house? MR. SKALWOLD: Two or three. if ' CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The two indicated on the second floor . . . (!MR. SKALWOLD: There are two on the second floor ' CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And on the first? MR. SKALWOLD: One and that is howl plan to use it. It may it ( could be used as a study or as a living room, If you look at the ;(downstairs plan - it has a living xoom and kitchen area that are adjoined. Now if one wanted to use the living room as a dining area or a family area and then more private living room than that downstairs bedroom or study or living room, IMS. BAGNARDI': How long ago did you say you purchased this home? MR, SKALWOLD: I made a verbal agreement in July and began work on it. Actual purchase of the house - I paid two months rent - I ! guess at the end of January I signed the agreement. As far as how people in the neighborhood receive it there was little response +,,when I began working on it and soon I found myself interrupted by people walking on the street to their house and saying Oh, my IIGod I can't believe you are doing that - I'm so glad you are work Ing on this house , And as I worked on the roof, putting a new i ;roof down, I began to get people honking their horn and wave to me i ,and things like that so it ' s been rather gratifying, the respons ii i ii i - 33 - ii from the neighborhood. i! [.MR. WILCOX: You can fish right off the front porch if you can i ;caste a line far enough. MR. SKALWOLD: Just about . I' CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions from the Board? Thank you. MR. SKALWOLD: Thank you very much. „ CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in ! favor of this appeal? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in i i 0opposition? Were there any letters? , SECRETARY HOARD: No letters . liCHAIRMAN WEAVER: We now go into executive session which means we ! lthrow out the press. l BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 5, 1982 EXECUTIVE SESSION APPEAL NO. 1429 : CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1429 . IMR. WILCOX: I second the motion. VOTE: 5 Yes; 0 No ; 1 Absent Granted. , FINDINGS OF FACT: i i1) There are practical difficulties in using the house as pre- sently constituted. The very small addition will expedite i� rehabilitation. �I �I it 1 it I ii i 34 - ',f 1, I , BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes of the Board. I; of Zoning Appeals , City of Ithaca, New York, in the matters of ; ,'Appeals numbered 1422 , 1424 , 1426 , 1427 , 1428 and 1429 on April 5 , i ; 1982 at City Court, City of Ithaca, New York; that I have trans- t j� scribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript lof the minutes of the meeting and the executive session of the ; Board of Zoning Appeals , City of Ithaca, on the above date , and i the whole thereof to the best of my ability. i; r e,4�i�r i' i i I Barbara C. Ru*e Recording Secretary �f l Sworn to before me this i� day of , 1982 1 Notary Public JEAN., J. HANKiNSON NOTARY Fl1nL'C, STI'1 OF NEW YORK QJ C COUNTY rrrwl- a i ip'!tCH so.19�I3 �j l i I ii ii