Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1983-07-06 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK JULY 6, 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page APPEAL NO. 1495: Orson Ledger POSTPONED 207 Williams Street APPEAL NO. 1501 : Norman D. Freeman POSTPONED 109 Elston Place APPEAL NO. 1503 Evaporated Metal Films Corp. 2 701 Spencer Road APPEAL NO. 1503 Executive Session 5 APPEAL NO. 1504 Harold A. Fish (South Side Fuel Co) 6 815 South Aurora Street APPEAL NO. 1504 Executive Session 10 APPEAL NO. 1505 William J. Gerber 15 142 South Aurora Street APPEAL NO. 1505 Executive Session 19 APPEAL NO. 1506 G. Lee Multari 21 309 Cascadilla Street APPEAL NO. 1506 Executive Session 26 APPEAL NO. 1507 Arthur A. Muka & Steve Muka POSTPONED APPEAL NO. 1508 Environmental Strategies 31 APPEAL NO. 1508 Executive Session 40 APPEAL NO. 1509 Anthony Ceracche TABLED 42 522 West State Street APPEAL NO. 1510 American Community Cablevision 60 519 W. State Street APPEAL NO. 1510 Executive Session 73 JULY 6, 1983 BZA MEETING (continued) APPEAL N0. 1511 John Novarr 74 505 East Seneca Street APPEAL N0. 1511 Executive Session 85 Minutes were transcribed by Manpower, Inc. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY COURT CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK JULY 6, 1983 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I would like to call this hearing to order. This is a formal public hearing of the duly appointed board of zoning appeals in the City of Ithaca. First I 'd like to introduce the Board: Bette Bagnardi Michael Tomlan Bea Brownell Charles Weaver, Chairman Thomas D. Hoard, Building Comm. & Secy to the Board Barbara Ruane, Recording Secy Absent: Peggy Haine The procedures of the board are that the applicant come forward and because we tape and record the proceedings, you 'll be required to identify yourself and your address and we will proceed with hearing your case. Upon the completion of hearing the testimony, the board will decide each case. The sequence by which we will hear these cases is as they are listed and numbered in the official notice of this meeting. I 'd like to point out tonite that we're operating, we expect, with only four members present, which will require unanimous decision of the board to decide any case. So anyone who is listed for a hearing and wishes to withdraw, may do so now before the hearing commences. ORSON LEDGER: I wish to withdraw. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: You 'd like to withdraw until . . .That's case number 1495. Case number 1495 will be heard not earlier than the next meeting of the board. Question, back there?. . . NORMAN FREEMAN: I would also like to withdraw my appeal . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And that's 1501. . .So anyone here interested in the cases of, I can describe them. One is of the. . . 1495 is the appeal of Orson Ledger for special permit relative to property at 207 Williams Street. That will not be heard tonite. -2- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The second one is appeal of Norman Freeman relative to conversion of property at 109 Elston Place. Yes? (Question regarding date of next hearing) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It hasn't been decided yet, but I believe it will be the first of August, being the first Monday of the month. Let's check the calendars now and we'll do the best that we can. We believe that barring disaster, August first at 7:30, and in that event, it would normally be in City Hall . Our odd date this month has put us into the courtroom. STEVE MUKA: I also would like to withdraw. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And your number? MUKA: 1507. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: 1507. 1507 is appeal of Arthur Muka relative to conversion of a home at 329 Center Street. So anyone who is here interested in that case, that will also be postponed until the August first meeting. Is there anyone else? I 'm not trying to go home early. Oh, I 'm willing! But it'll be pretty tough in August. No one else interested in a postponement then? All right. I 'm not sure that I 've given all the necessary preliminary instructions, but we'll call the first case. SECY HOARD: The first case, Mr. Chairman, is appeal number 1503, appeal of Evaporated Metal Films Corporation for an area variance under Section 30.25, Columns 11 and 14 for deficient front :and rear yards and for a variance under Section 30.49, for the extension of a non-conforming use and non-conforming building, to permit an addition to the existing building at 701 Spencer Road (Evaporated Metal Films) to house new equip- ment to replace equipment damaged by fire. The property is located in a B-5 (commercial ) use district, where the existing light industrial use -3- (cont. ) SECY HOARD: is under a use variance granted in 1962. Under Section 30.49 the appellant must obtain the listed variances before a building permit can be issued for the addition to the non-conforming building and use. Mr. Shay? MICHAEL SHAY: I am Michael Shay, an employee of Evaporated Metal Films. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: That's very sensitive, so you don 't have to worry about it. SHAY: Are you going to ask me questions or do you want me to. . .? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: If you would give a general explanation of your need, I think that will . . . SHAY: 701 Spencer Road is located at the end of Spencer Road. There's a. . . This section of the road is dead end and is used for two purposes. One is for delivery to Evaporated Metal Films and as an entrance to the state park equipment building. So, we have an unusually shaped lot and to begin with, to establish the building, we needed a variance to fit on the lot that's on the end of Spencer Road. And as a result anything that we do to the building requires a variance because the original use was non-conforming. . We had a fire on February 15th in this section of the building and lost some equipment. The equipment that was lost is made in a different mode. The mode that the equipment that was in there operated in the vertical direction. There's a hole in the floor and the equipment then operated up and down. The replacement equipment is now, opens in the front and has considerable amount of the accessory or portion of it that makes it work, is to the back side of it. This equipment was located along this wall, and the replacement equipment then requires that as you were, sort of a dog-house on the back of the -4- (cont. ) SHAY: building to house the workings of the equipment. So here's a side view. The wall would be out in this position, and this is what's left over. We need a place to put it. So we would request a variance to build a 12 by 18 equipment shed to house the back end of this equipment. It would be a non-working space. It would be just to cover and protect the equipment. MR. TOMLAN: The equipment shed is a closed shed? I noticed there's some concrete blocks on the (model ) , that the walls are . . . SHAY: Yes. MR. TOMLAN: So it's going to be enclosed all the way around, it's not simply a roof of any kind, but it's (undecipherable) SHAY: Right, it would be a concrete block about eight feet high and eighteen feet long and twelve feet wide. This equipment extends out about eight feet, and that would give us four feet of service area in back of the equipment. MR. TOMLAN: You show the plan there, the external form. Could you just give me a little bit of an idea of what the plan arrangement on the inside is? Insofar as showing us that there may or may not be any room to negotiate on the inside? SHAY: The inside of the plant? MR. TOMLAN: Yes. SHAY: The area where we're doing our manufacture, actual coding of optical elements, takes place in this area and this area. The fire heavily destroyed this area and this area of the building. And the equipment that we. . . and there is equipment now inside lined up along this area. And the equipment that we had before the fire was located in this room. It was operated in the vertical direction. The replace- ment equipment that is now made for that operates horizontally. So -5- (cont. ) SHAY: if we bring that. . . this room is 13 feet. If we put that equip- ment all inside this particular room, that leaves us only a four foot space in front of the equipment in which to operate it. And that doesn't allow us enough space. So what we would like to do is to move the equipment back this way, so we can have approximately the same working space and just cover the back side of the building to protect the equipment. MRS. BAGNARDI: The stairs going down here . . . will this be a two story/ addition . . . SHAY: single story. . . . these stairs go to the cellar. The basement is under this area. No, it won't be under the addition. MRS. BAGNARDI: I noticed that there were some (blocks) that were covered in area, where blocks had been removed. . . (undecipherable) I 'm not oriented to the building, that's this area right there? SHAY: Yes, that's this area right here. Right. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any other questions? SHAY: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anyone else who wishes to be heard on this matter? Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? Thank you. BROWNELL: Certainly not changing the overall size of the building very much . considering the size of addition and the size of the building. . . (male): Any more questions. (female): No more questions. (Hoard?) : I move that appeal number 1503 by Evaporated Metal Films for an area variance, for Evaporated Metal Films Corporation be granted. The findings of fact being, first: that there are practical (disabilities) in that it is an odd shaped lot and compliance with the regulations seems impossible. That secondly, the deficiency to the efficiency -6- (cont. (Hoard?) : is a practical difficulty which makes the compliance im- possible. It's a rather small deficiency, by comparison to what's going on. And thirdly, the use is consistent and within the charac- ter of the neighborhood_as it has been. (female) : Also, it's a negligible change which is not visible from the street. (Hoard?) : That's a good point. Number four. . . (female) : What was four? (female): negligible change not visible, small change CHAIRMAN: OK, Barbara? We have a motion of second. We have a four affirmative vote. Your appeal has been granted. That's on number 1503. SECY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1504: Appeal by Harold A. Fish for a use variance under Section 30.25, Column 2 (permitted uses) and Section 30.47 (extension or enlargement of a non-conforming use) to permit the construction of an addition to the existing building at 815 South. Aurora Street (Southside Fuel Company) for garaging and washing of company vehicles. The property is located in an R-3b (residential ) use district in which the existing use of fuel storage and sales is not a permitted use; however the business was in opera- tion on this site prior to the annexation of the area by the City and is therefore a legal non-conforming use. A variance is required under Section 30.49 before the non-conforming use can be enlarged. Mr. Fish? FISH: I am Harold A. Fish, Jr. , owner of Southside Fuel Company, 815 South Aurora Street. Why I decided to put a wash bay is when we had a fire three years ago, we had to put our building and our offices into one. The job that was done at that point. . .the floor was not really -7- (cont. ) FISH: satisfactory for washing our trucks down. Then last fall , we had some vandalism at Southside Fuel . We have a bottled gas trailer that sets outside. This particular trailer carries our bottled gas tanks which are 100 pound cylinders, to and from Newfield Hill . Our empty ones going down the hill , our full ones coming back to the office to make our daily deliveries. This particular trailer was, or I should say, was tried to be pushed over the hill . We have concrete curbs and every- thing else there, but it seemed like somebody wanted to move the trailer more than what we wanted to leave it at. From the truck. . .if it ever did get loose coming down Aurora Street hill , it's a 1300 pound trailer and I think there could have been some severe damage. At that time, when I made my decision of building a building for this trailer and to wash our equipment, get salt and everything else off it. This is really what I have to say. Our working tools in our other shop, with electrical tools, air tools and everything else. . .we have a high pressure washer and if anybody has used one, it throws out a. . .it atomizes the water under, I believe, it's under 3000 pounds per square inch. It atomizes the water so it's like a mist, and after awhile, your tools start getting a little rusty and everything else. So, this par- ticular building is actually adjoining our rectangular building that we have right now. It's just coming out 23 feet with a 35 foot length. Our previous building is 50 feet by 40 feet, so it actually, if you were looking at it from any direction, it's making it more rectangular, I believe is the correct word. That's all I have. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Will this allow you to expand the business in any way Mr. Fish? FISH: No, I am not expanding the business at all . Energy is a very sore subject with anybody. We're not expanding or taking on new equipment -8- (cont. ) FISH: or anything like this. We're just trying to keep our present equipment clean and neat. MRS. BAGNARDI : When did you construct the building? Apparently the concrete pad that was put in previously. . .when was that built? FISH: In 1980. That was April of 1980. This was when we had the fire. April 17th, so I believe it was one week after that. MRS. BROWNELL: This map is dated 1976. . . (undecipherable)a long time ago. . . FISH: No, let me correct it on this. Our original plan, and this was done by a surveyor, by Mr. McDowell , he did the actual layout of the whole. . .went back to the abstract and got the right angles and everything else and reset the pins and at that time, we had. . . That was the original blueprint, and from the original blueprint in 1976, in 1980 we had put in our building site for the right angles and everything else on Aurora Street .hill . And then we just xeroxed our new addition onto that particular . . . So there's probably been three.. . There was a blueprint and then a blue print on a xerox and then a xerox on top of that. So, it's probably been three times for that particular picture that you see in your phamplet today. MS. BAGNARDI : So how many company vehicles will you be storing in there in addition to the flatbed? FISH: OK, it would be a bottled gas truck, a fuel oil truck, a pick- up truck and trailer will be in the new building. And across in the old building, if you're looking at your blueprint, or xerox copy, in the long rectangular building, that has two oil trucks in it right now. That's always been housed. . . -9- MR. TOMLAN: The pad was poured in April of 1980 and the walls were constructed when? FISH: In 1980. (female) : I have no other questions. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Let's ventilate that question. I think that construc- tion was repair of (undecipherable) it didn't involve zoning and variance. FISH: That's correct. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So, this is strictly based upon a building permit that was issued within the constraints of the zoning ordinance, the right to repair damaged buildings, and didn't in 1980, didn't require a variance. MR. TOMLAN: I see. MS. BROWNELL: But the building that he's asking for a variance for is already up, is that right, now? FISH: No. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I assume he's asking for a variance in order to get a building permit. Is that correct? FISH: Correct. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any other questions? Before you leave us, it seems to me that you might be able to operate the business in the present circumstances as far as washing is concerned, by washing off premises. Is that a reasonable possibility? To have them washed some- where else? and park them on your property? FISH: We've never done`it. We've always washed in our own building. Before the fire and after the fire. All we're trying to do, actually is enclose, I should say, one particular garage for washing, instead of our whole garage, where our offices are and everything else. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any other questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on, in support of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? -10- MS. BROWNELL: The reason I asked the question I asked was it says here that it's unfortunate the project was started before our building permit was issued. (male) : That's precisely what I asked. MS. BROWNELL: I asked if the building had been started. And he said no. SECY HOARD: He poured a foundation. MS. BROWNELL: Just the slab, that's all?. . . .But the walls? Aren't the walls up? He only needs a roof. The walls are up? He only needs a roof? That's why I asked the question. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: My original answer was I don't know. MS. BROWNELL: Oh, I thought you said no, I 'm sorry. Then the walls are up and the cement floor is down, it just needs a roof. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: See, the question. . . MS. BROWNELL: See, he was asked if he was aware. . . .building permit. . . MR. TOMLAN: I think the bigger question is, it was asked (undecipher- able) usually want to hear from the building (?) regarding why it happens. Basically, how did he go about constructing the walls on top of the pad without getting a permit or anything at this point? Seems like it's always after the fact. SECY HOARD: He had applied for a permit. . . .I don't know when the walls went up, to tell you the truth. I was up there before any walls were up, if there are any walls. . . MS. BAGNARDI: After the fire? SECY HOARD: No, back before. . . MS. BROWNELL: He put the walls up after he knew he had to come here? Is that what you're telling us? -11- (male) : Well , I'm not sure. . . SECY HOARD: Well , he applied for a permit back in the beginning of July MS. BROWNELL: Of last year? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Of this year. . . MS. BROWNELL: Just recently, . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: But that was denied on the basis of the zoning. . . MS. BROWNELL: I 'm not with you at all here. . .it says, Mr. (?) asked Mr. Fish if he was aware a building permit was needed before con- structing his addition and Mr. Fish answered that he was aware, and yet the project had been started, the walls. . . (Mr. Tomlan) : I think he's aware now. MS. BROWNELL: Oh, yeah, well , but he was aware when you went there, before the walls were up? Is that what you just said? (male) : He came in for a building permit MS. BROWNELL: Must have been in June. . . (male) : Yes, it was too late. . . MS. BROWNELL: You said July, you mean June. . . (male): Yes, it was too late for the last meetings MS. BROWNELL: OK, all right. . . (male) But if he had the pad down and he knew he had to come for a building permit, then why did he have the walls before he had the permit? MS. BROWNELL: That's a good question. SECY. HOARD: A situation like that is always at the risk of the builder. If he doesn't get the variance, then he has to take a (?) I think that's what we'd be in the building department. MS. BROWNELL: So, it was done with the full knowledge that he did not have the permit, and he needed one. -12- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well there is a situation of enforcement relative to having a permit to put up a building. Now, the variance on the basis of the merit of his appeal should, as I understand it, it's a use variance in that it's an expansion of a non-conforming use. (undecipherable) R-3b would not allow the business were an applica- tion to be started from the beginning. MR. TOMLAN: Well , one of the problems is, as I read it, to grant this, one would have to demonstrate undue hardship, and have we any undue hardship. . .? (male): Well , I agree with you as I understand it the proof would be, required proof would be hardship. MR. TOMLAN: Exactly. MS. BROWNELL: What's the difference between a fence and a building to keep people out? I mean, why not a fence? Why a building? MR. TOMLAN: Well , that's a good question. MS. BROWNELL: The way I get it, the hardship is that vandals have entered his property and almost taken this trailer and shoved it down the hill to the detri�ent of all people in the neighborhood, and so forth. . . MR. TOMLAN: Is the hardship created unique and unshared by all properties alike in the vicinity? MS. BROWNELL: Sure, but, could it not be fixed with a fence rather than a building? SECY HOARD: Well , I think going back to the last time, we've had a situation with this property, when there was a lot of controversy over the tower, one of the things that the neighbors expressed was a concern that a lot of these vehicles are exposed and that people can get in.. So, I think it's (?) safety, moving in the right direction. -13- MS. BAGNARDI: Keeping them all under cover. . . MS. BROWNELL: Sorry to agree with you, but I think you're right. MR. TOMLAN: I 'm still looking for undue hardship. MS. BROWNELL: I think maybe he's probably got a point there in his undue hardship. . . the vandals, except that, I think that it could be taken care of in other ways. MR. TOMLAN: Well , the hardship question on the extension of an existing use, we have to look. . .what's the choice? (?)the business. MS.BAGNARDI: or do you fence it? SECY HOARD: Well , I don't think that's. . . MR. TOMLAN: I mean, is the building getting more secure? SECY HOARD: If it's just fencing it, then it's not an extension of a non-conforming use. MR. TOMLAN: Well then there 's no variance, that's my point. Is a building justification, or is security justification for building, which means it needs a variance. . . MS. BROWNELL: I think it also replaces what was lost by fire, right? SECY HOARD: I think this ends up a larger building. . . MS. BROWNELL: There aren't a lot of neighbors around close 5y _ to be annoyed or bothered, I think by the building. And certainly this building is in the rear of his existing building. You can barely see it from the road. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , in terms of impact on the existing site, it's a small addition, but the site could take many more buildings if that were your only argument. MS. BROWNELL: No, I 'm thinking of impact on the neighborhood, actually, I think there's very little impact. You can barely see the addition from the road. -14- MS. BAGNARDI: Is that a motion? MS. BROWNELL: I don't know, I guess, I suppose it ought to be. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It needs to be. . .before. . . MS. BROWNELL: It needs to be, yes, I think I 'll make a motion for approval . I think he certainly demonstrated that he has a problem with vandals. I 'm not trying to condone the fact that the building's already built. . . (undecipherable) It was known that a building permit had to be requested before the building was built, but I think a building is a lot safer than a fence. I certainly think that it does not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. (female): Is that a finding? MS. BROWNELL: Yes. And another finding is that it will certainly reduce his costs of production, whatever, because he doesn't have to go and wash them anyplace else. Would you call that a hardship? I mean, he'd have to go a long way to get to a place to wash his trucks. You know. I mean he's a "fur piece" out of town as it were. . . (Male): I 'm not trying to propose, I was trying to investigate whether there were reasonable alternatives, or not. So, do I understand that the motion included that this would provide safety for the property. . . MS. BROWNELL: I think so, for the property. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .for the adjoining. . . MS. BROWNELL: For the trucks, and for the trailer, certainly and that kind of viable solution. . . and trucks, I think should be put under cover. Also the visual quality is very little change. You 're not going to see the equipment outside all over in the yard. You're going to see it inside in a building. The visual quality I think will be enhanced. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May I suggest a friendly limitation on the granting of this variance. It seems to me that a reasonable case has been made -15- (CHAIRMAN WEAVER, cont. ) for the need for this, however, it suggests that as a result the tankers and other equipment will not be parked outside overnight and that if we issue the permit, under the condition that overnight parking of company vehicles will be limited to inside parking, that it will meet our requirements in providing a safer environment. The applicant has said that is his reason for the building. I am trying to protect us against filling it full and then adding a few more vehicles and coming through the same application over and over again. Now, would that be acceptable to the motion? MS. BROWNELL: Yes, absolutely. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any other discussion? (male): In case number 1504, three yes votes and one no vote. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The appeal fails on the lack of four affirmative votes. May we have the next case please. SECY HOARD: The next case is number 1505, the appeal of William J. Gerber for an area variance under Section 30.25, Columns 4 and 6, for deficiencies in off-street parking and minimum lot size, to permit the conversion of the beauty shop in the apartment house at 142 South Aurora Street to an eighth apartment. The property is located in a B-la (business) use district in which the proposed use is permitted; however a variance must be obtained for the listed defi- ciencies before a building permit can be issued for the conversion. R. AMOROSO: My name is Rosemary Amoroso and I am representing William J. Gerber, 841 Taughannock Blvd. . I have some materials I would like to (undecipherable) and I have a statement from Mr. Gerber. . . (male): Do you have a copy for each? AMOROSO: Yes. -16- AMOROSO: The subject: area variance, 142 South Aurora Street, Ithaca, New York. Dear Sir: Purchase of the property at 142 South Aurora Street as a viable income property was contingent on the rental of seven apartments and a commercial unit. The previous owner was himself a cosmetologist and had a successful beauty shop business at that location. However, a succession of commercial tenants have found it impossible to establish a successful business, and therefore, I have been unable to find and maintain a commercial tenant. Because of this, I find it necessary to convert the commercial unit into a residential unit as it once was, in order to continue the operation of the property as a viable income property. Without the rental of approximately two thirds of the ground floor, plus the ensuing loss of the commercial variance as a result of the extended vacancy, and the continuing increase in taxes, utilities and overhead, places me in a situation of extreme hardship. The planning board objection to the conversion was the lack of three additional parking spaces. Their recommendation was to locate the necessary parking within 500 feet of the property. This has been accomplished and a lease for the parking area will be signed with R.H.P. , Inc. upon the approval of the variance and completion of the renovation. Communications with the City Building Commissioner's office on numerous occasions have indicated their preference for a total residential unit, rather than a part commercial , part residential unit because of the definite in- crease of the fire hazard with the commercial unit. Based on the above, I feel I have fulfilled the concern, requirements and recom- mendations of the Planning Board and therefore request that you grant my required variance. Thank you, William J. Gerber. And I have attached a copy of the letter from R.H.P. and a rough -17- (cont. ) AMOROSO: sketch because a question was brought up with the Planning Board. They said they didn't have the sketch and they should have had it in their folder of the layout and inside of the proposed apartment. (female) : This is Aurora Street, . . .? AMOROSO: Yes, right. MS. BROWNELL- What is th.is. . .wall . . .? AMOROSO: Well , the bath, yes, there's a wall right there and that's going to have to be increased to put the bathtub, because right now, there's just the seat and the sink. MS. BROWNELL: Oh, the wall 's coming out? AMOROSO: Yes, there's a wall here right now and it will come out a little so, this will be the bedroom, excuse me, and this will be the entryway—There'll have to be a wall constructed with the doorway and then the hall going down so they can have their separate entrance to the bedroom. Now, Mr. Gerber isn't going to be increasing the square footage of what's already there. MS. BAGNARDI: How long ago was it used as a business? Is that in the materials? AMOROSO: Well , he's had tenants on and off since he's owned the property which is approximately five years. And it's been vacant now, I 'd say, approximately six or seven months. MS. BAGNARDI: And prior to that there was a (undecipherable). . .? AMOROSO: Yes, there has been on and off for about thirty years. (female) : I remember. . .but the last one was also a beauty shop. . . AMOROSO: Right. . . MR. TOMLAN: Has there been any attempt to rent to any other kind of business? -18- AMOROSO: Well , no one particularly cares for the parking reasons. MR. TOMLAN: But there hasn't been any particular attempt. . . AMOROSO: Oh, Mr. Gerber has attempted, but with no luck. . . MS. BAGNARDI: With real estate brokers, on his own, how did he. . . attempt to get. . .? AMOROSO: Mostly on his own. . .contacts with me. . .and I do sell real estate . . . --TAPE CHANGE TO SIDE #2-- AMOROSO: . . .The former owner bought this property, which was a number of years ago, it was an apartment and he, I guess, at one time, en- closed what was the porch and incorporated that into the apartment and made it all one unit which was the beauty shop. MS. BROWNELL: So how many spaces are. . . is he able to get?. . . AMOROSO: There's five available; he can get three which was recommend- ed. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'm concerned about the letter from R.H.P. that suggests that they give you a one year lease. Any discussion of the lease for a longer period of time? AMOROSO: Oh sure, anything is possible. R.H.P. is completely open. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The space that they're proposing to rent is the one on the corner of Prospect and Aurora? AMOROSO: Yes, which they can't use, I guess as a commercial ; they can only use it as rental for parking. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'll clarify that; I know that there was a dispute over that; that can only be used for residential parking. So the prospects of it being converted to another use are limited to residen- tial use only. Other than the parking. -19- AMOROSO: Oh yes, as I said. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any other questions from the board? (female) : I don't have any. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: This had been tenanted space all the time, presently, or Mr. Gerber's own apartment, had it available for rent. . . AMOROSO: Oh yes, as I said it, (undecipherable) property has been vacant for six or seven months now. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any other questions? Well , we thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in behalf of this application? Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? The minimum lot size (undecipherable) . . . MS. BAGNARDI . You know, six months isn't very long . . . (undecipherable) MS. BROWNELL: I can't visualize getting all these dwellings in that one little place. . .did you see this place, it's so small . How do you get all those people in there? MR. TOMLAN: Nine by twelve. . . MS. BROWNELL: Look at the square footage of the lot itself, only 403 feet. MR. TOMLAN: How much is that left over? MS. BROWNELL: Not much. MS. BAGNARDI: With the lot deficiency and the off street parking, if they have satisfied CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . . (undecipherable). . .the lease has to be longer than that. . .one year. . . MS. BROWNELL: Especially in that area. Being new to this business, can we state how long we want the lease for the parking to be? MR. TOMLAN: I think that's a start. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We can condition any variance. We may end up with -20- (cont. ) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: a gray-haired, nervous enforcement officer, but the rights of the . . . SECY HOARD: . . .half of that now. . . the rights of the board. . . MS. BROWNELL: What happens if he only gets a one year lease? And then doesn't renew it? SECY HOARD: (undecipherable) . . .certificate of compliance into that period of time. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: But the renewal of that is on a three year cycle currently. MS. BROWNELL: We could ask for a three year lease. . . SECY HOARD: Or a certificate that's renewable every year. . . AMOROSO: May I state something? Mr. Gerber, I-think would rather tie it up these three years himself (to protect himself) rather than year to year so that someone else (undecipherable) . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Assuming a successful decision here, our conditional variance would mean that if you can't meet that, that you don't have a variance, do you understand? MS. BROWNELL: I 'd just as soon make a motion for approval . MS. BAGNARDI: With what conditions? MS. BROWNELL: That he get a three year lease on those three spaces, and I think one of the reasons is the willingness to find three spaces and proof that in fact, he can get them. (male) : I don't think you want to say just a three year lease MS. BROWNELL: How do we want to word it? Three year. . . (male): renewable MS. BROWNELL: three year renewable (male) : spaces leased along with the period of the certificate. . . .renewed each time. . . -21- MS. BROWNELL: . . .to be continuously renewed. . .that's much better (female) : (undecipherable) . . .house filled with people. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The variance goes to the building and not to the tenants or the operator, and so once granted, the building can change hands any number of times and whatever variance you grant goes with that lot and that building. MS. BROWNELL: Of course, then the guy that buys it claims ignorance and doesn't renew. . . O.K. , let's have a few more. . .throw one on the table. . . (female) : What else do we need on that? MS. BROWNELL: We need some more (undecipherable) . . . (male) : The use would not affect the character of the neighborhood. MS. BROWNELL: We're not changing the outside of the structure in any way. . .that's a good one. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , it does not expand the area of the building. . . MS. BROWNELL: . . .does not change or expand the overall area. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So, we're. . .our motion is to approve. . .are conditioned upon the providing three parking spaces. . . MS. BROWNELL.: . . .a continuous three year lease, is that how we said it? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . . a lease for three parking spaces that will be renewed as a condition of the issuance of a certificate of compliance on a three year interval . SECY HOARD: The vote on case number 1505 is four yes votes. The next appeal is appeal number 1506. Appeal of G. Lee Multari for an area variance under Section 30.25, Columns 4, 6, 11 and 13, for deficiencies in off-street parking, minimum lot size, and minimum setbacks for the frontyard and one sideyard, to permit the conversion of the garage at 309 Cascadilla Street town art studio workshop for the tenants. The -22- (cont. ) SECY HOARD: property is located in an R-3b (residential ) use district where an accessory non-commercial art studio is permitted; however, the conversion would eliminate one of the two required parking spaces, so a variance for the parking and the other listed deficiencies is requir- ed before a building permit can be issued for the conversion. L. MULTARI : My name is Lee Multari and I am the owner of 309 Casca- dilla Street. I guess it was all stated rather clearly by the building commissioner. My desire is to take an attached one car garage and convert it into an art studio for the usage of the downstairs tenants. And right now, according to regulations, my concrete driveway that is directly in front of the garage is, I believe, 50 square feet less than necessary to make it legitimate for the use of parking two cars. My point to the planning board was that single line parking is rather one of those things that's just not practical when you have a two apartment house, but I guess that doesn't quite matter. The garage still counts as one parking space. Now I have in the past rented the driveway to one of my tenants and the garage has always been used for storage. And the other tenant had parked in the area directly in front of the house. Now, in talking with the Planning Board, they told me that if I was able to talk to my neighbors, whom I know fairly well , on either side of the building I have a single family house, and there's a fellow and his wife and young child in one place and an older gentleman in the other place. They've been there for quite a few years. Now, right adjacent to their properties are driveways that run back to the end of their lots. And at the end of the lots, when I was a child, my great-aunt owned this house, there were garages at the tail end of the property, but since that time, both garages for these properties have been taken away, you might say, because they sort of became dilapidated -23- (cont. ) MULTARI: So what in essence we have is quite adequate parking, more than adequate parking, for those two places. So I went and talked to my neighbors just the other day about the problem that I had, and they basically told me that if ever the situation arose where I didn't need the extra parking, which I can't really foresee, because of the. . . I 'm not going to be increasing usage as far as additional tenants in the building. But they told me and they signed a little form letter that I put together here, two of them, that they would be willing to (lease) me an additional parking space. . .You're welcome to look at these if you like. I also want to mention that these are the only two people that I 've talked to because they are my close neighbors, but having walked down the street, Cascadilla Street is, has very deep lots, and there are approximately three other single family dwellings that have the same type of situation, where they have deep lots and it looked like, at one time, rather large garages. I don't see a problem in the future about ever being able to get the additional parking if it is needed. But that's basically the whole story. MS. BROWNELL: How do you plan to design this studio in your attached garage? Well , is it going to be just one big room or is it going to be divided. . .? MULTARI: Well , that's basically it. . .right now there is an overhead door; the door will be removed and I was planning on doing some like pine panel ing on the exterior, with the door window (undecipherable) and a large window in the back to get lighting and put a drop ceiling with as many fluorescent fixtures as necessary to give the proper lighting in the place. MS. BROWNELL: On this side you have no windows? -24- MULTARI : No, there will be no windows on that side, because that would be looking out at the house right next door. For the back, I figured one nice big window in the back would be looking out into the back yard. MS. BROWNELL: You know, this is really close to (undecipherable) MULTARI: This house actually . . . MS. BROWNELL: About five or six feet. . . MULTARI: The garage is right on the boundary of the property and the house is I 'd say, probably six feet would be fairest. MS. BAGNARDI: The attached garage opens up into the living room? This is a door here? MULTARI: Well , I was required by the City to putup fire resistant sheetrock on the inside of the garage facing the house, which I have done. Now there is a door there, but that door has been sort of covered over by the sheetrock and what I would be doing, this was brought up at the last meeting, . . .said, well what prevents someone later on from using this as an extra bedroom? or something like that? And what I was, what I brought up to the board was that my intention is to—right now what you have is you have sheetrock over the whole exterior of the house, because the garage is just added right on. Now I think that would look rather like a (?)job to do any—to leave that. . .so what I 'm going to do is I 'm going to be putting new studs the length of that wall and sheet- rock it right down to the floor so that it will be totally a separate unit and the tenants will be able to gain access from the back door of the garage which is located in the back corner, right off the back porch. MS. BAGNARDI : So there would be two entrances to the garage. . .a door here and a door back here? MULTARI: Right -25- MS. BAGNARDI: What kind of an artist is this? And will there be sales on the premises? Or. . . MULTARI: No, it's. . .you see, for the last few years the downstairs apartment is rented as a large one bedroom with a study, because I have a small room off one corner that's actually. . . I 've used it when I lived in the place, I used it as a bedroom, but it's just that the bedroom and what I consider the living room, adjoin each other and there's no way you could make it into a two bedroom unless you put in a hallway. So I decided that I like renting to individuals or couples myself, and two bedrooms produces a little (difficulty) so far as prospective tenants are concerned. So. . . where was I? MS. BAGNARDI: I asked what kind of a studio this was going to be. . . Will it be used for sales?. . .in any way. . . that's all right. . . MULTARI: As I was saying, the people that I show, the place to, they responded to my ads because of the study and they wanted, they were wondering about it being used ansa darkroom, as a drafting room, as an art room, etc. And here I started thinking to myself, I have this garage; it's a nice garage built in 1952 that seems to collect miscel- laneous things like couches and lumber. . . I said why not make it into something where I could attract this kind of tenant in the future. And I figured that people that were either into engineering, architec- ture, art or photography; it wouldn't necessarily be an art studio, but something along those lines. . . And I just thought that it would be something rather unique, that a lot of people have a hard time locating something like that. One couple said that, you should see what people are calling art studios in Collegetown. . . they're little tiny places that the landlords wanted over $100 a month for. MS. BROWNELL: They're apartments. . . -26- MS BAGNARDI : So you're not doing this particularly for a tenant that you have right now. Are you proposing this for a tenant that's pre- sently in the house? MULTARI: No, I 'm not. I do have an artist in there right now and his wife, which is quite interesting, but that's not the reason that I am doing it. In the future I wish to advertise it and rent it as a one-bedroom apartment (?)attached studio. MS. BAGNARDI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any other questions? I thank you. MULTARI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? --EX. SESS.-- (male) : Commissioner, can you direct me to a listing of the accept- able accessory uses in residential areas? I read this, and that's my problem. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: No, in column 2 in R-2 district for permitted accessory uses. . . MS. BROWNELL: Is that an accessory use? (male): The way that I interpret it is that the. .if it's. . .the tenant is using it, it's a non-commercial use. For instance the tenant. . . was doing some work there, and is not working out of his apartment. . . MS. BROWNELL: for sale you mean. . .? (male) : Then it's just a residential use, (undecipherable) . . .if someone else were using it and it was not intended, or if it were used where you came in the house and I drew plans for you or some- thing. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , that's the reason for my question that -27- (cont. ) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .that home occupation is a special permit procedure, not by itself, just a variance. MS. BAGNARDI: What control is there on that? I mean if somebody comes in, let' s say a draftsman, moonlighting. . .do you have to control it everytime you get a new tenant in there? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , the chair finds a fundamental difficulty in identifying practical difficulty, where we have an existi.ng garage meeting requirements for parking automobiles and the usual use for an attached garage. And the need for changing that use, and in the process, eliminating the required parking. . . .If it were in fact, a requirement of having a tenant, that you have an attached studio and were we not creating it out of an existing garage, there might be some practical difficulty that I don't recognize, but I 'm not per- suaded in this case that there's any difficulty if you leave the situation as it is. The owner of the property has a (undecipherable) rental with adequate parking in a residential zone which is exactly what the house and garage were designed for. I see no difficulty with leaving it alone. TOMLANt . . .but if he provides the parking, then he' s off the hook. . MS. BROWNELL: Can I see those. . . MS. BAGNARDI : What prevents him from making that garage into another bedroom? He says that this whole living area is living room and bed- room, and if he decided to open up this door that's currently covered up with sheetrock and make that another bedroom? So it would be a more comfortable living space. CHAIR: That's another point; the sheetrock is required to separate a garage from a dwelling, and if it were not a garage, the fire separa- tion would not be a requirement, and so, once this becomes a studio, that, I can imagine no reason for disallowing a door through there,and -28- (cont. ) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: trying to identify that this is just a work studio and not just another room, for whatever reason, so whether it be used for living space, den, studio or whatever, it seems to me to be a (tortured?) argument. Who cares? MS. BAGNARDI : That' s my point. I don't know that there's any way to police anything like that. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , it also becomes an expansion of a residential use into the existing garage. MS. BROWNELL: I think I would like to see more garages and less living space. This has a one family unit on each side? The way I understand? MR. TOMLAN: Yes. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: On each floor. . . as I understand. . . MS. BROWNELL: Single family residence on each side of him?. . . "HAIRMAN WEAVER: Oh, on either side. . .oh, yes, yes. MBAGNARD1. three entrances to. . . MS. BROWNELL: must be your turn. . . CHAIR: Do you want to (?) a motion . . . (undecipherable) MS. BROWNELL: No, I want you to make a negative motion. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do I have?. . . The chair recognizes anybody that wants to make a motion. MS. BROWNELL: . . .either way. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any at all . MS. BROWNELL: . . .trying to find his little motion. . .wing it, wing it. I forgot mine, I 'm going to (male) : No, that's not it. . . MS. BROWNELL: . . .probably under your clipboard. . . (male) : All right, then, I 'll move that appeal number 1506 of—for a use variance. . . -29- (male) : . . .area. . . (male) : No, use variance. . . (male) : . . .area. . . (male) : . . .area? MS. BROWNELL: . . . .Why is use variance circled? (male) : I can't help that. . . MS. BROWNELL: You mean, somebody made a boo boo? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I can't imagine that, but on page two, I call to your attention, under 3 . . . (male) : Oops. . .who circled what? (male) : Area variance (undecipherable) MS. BROWNELL: Which one's right? The check or the circle? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , look at the worksheet. . . the deficiency, off- street parking, lot area, frontyard, other yard. . . (male): The parking is the only one affected. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The only one that is going to be changed is that and I don't want to get into a complicated argument about whether this (undecipherable) residential use. . .obviously, who cares? It's not for M that this will not be exactly that. . . (females) : (undecipherable) . . .supposed to ask any questions. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We're in session, I don 't want to interrupt, we could end up. . . I don't want to get involved in a debate. . . No our rules, say once we have gone through that, there are times when we have a large number of people and you can imagine what level of chaos we'd entertain if we had rebuttal upon rebuttal . . .we'd have a debate society. . .I 'm sorry. . . (Everyone talking. . . ) -30- (female): What do we have? . . . (male) : That we do appeal number 1506 for an area variance be denied, that findings of fact, number one: practical difficulty has not been demonstrated. Two: that expansion of residential use in already deficient property exacerbates, intensifies the problems with lot, sideyard deficiency. . . (undecipherable) O.K.? (undecipherable) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there a second? (female) : I 'll second. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Ready for session? Number 1506? SECY HOARD: Yes denies, no approves. MS. BROWNELL: I just write denied or approved, and then I . . . SECY HOARD: Yeah. . .the vote in case 1506 is three yes votes and one no vote. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So the issue is denied. . . may I have the next case please? Do you want a break. . . (male) : Wait a minute, the motion failed. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The motion failed, but the motion also would also would fail in the positive as well , it wouldn't work either way. It makes no difference if it was a positive motion or a negative motion; it would have failed onthe lack of four votes. The chair would recom- mend that the board take a five minute break. We've got a pile. . . We' ll be back within five or six minutes. . . (Everyone talking) ; -31- SECY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1508, appeal of, request of Environmental Strategies of 309 the Parkway, Cayuga Heights, for an interpretation of Section 30.25, Column 2 of the Zoning Ordinance to determine whether a service laboratory and office would be a permitted use in the B-2A and B-2b (business) use districts of the City of Ithaca. Could you identify yourselves? D. McCUNE : I'm Delbert McCune L. WEINSTEIN: . . .Leonard Weinstein. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And your corporate name is ? McCUNE: Environmental Strategies; we're two of the five owners. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The written support of your appeal is in the hands of each of the members. Do you want to read us through that or expand upon it, or. . . McCUNE: I'm not sure. I think everything essentially is said there. A summary of what we do and the nature of our operation. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It seems to me that if I 'm trying to identify or properly label your activity, might suggest that you could be .succeeded by another laboratory somewhat different type. So, to some degree the uniqueness of your operation might be helpful in that either your chances to expand or alter the nature of the business and our problem of trying to decide whether this will impact the immediate neighborhood is the crux of the problem as I see it. How that would relate to the other businesses that would be allowed in the neighborhood. FIs there a way to limit noise, fumes, vibrations, etc. that would allow you a reasonable privilege. to carry out your proposed enterprise? Give us some reasonable parameters for. . . WEINSTEIN: There's no noise involved in this operation. What we do is to analyze vegetation essentially, plant tissue for fluoride, the -32- (cont. ) WEINSTEIN: element flouride and sulfur, mostly flouride. And the whole business is built around the fact that we are well known for a parti- cular kind of analysis of flouride and industrial companies send exam- ples to us for analysis, which we do on a contract basis. We have a number of technicians who work for us, who work for us at night and also work for us in the daytime in another town. And they perform these analyses. Now what the analysis consists of specifically; we receive samples; we grind them in a mill , all right, so there's no (undecipherable). The samples are weighed out in metal crucibles; they're put into a (undecipherable) and they're (ashed?) . That's the only time when there's any possibility of any release coming from (undecipherable), would be the burning and high temperatures of these tissues in that furnace. You know what a (?)furnace is, it's just a high temperature box. . .that is hooded so that any fumes coming from it are vented outside. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Vertically? WEINSTEIN: Pardon me? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Vertically? WEINSTEIN: Vertically, yes. And we're talking about small amounts of tissue at any given time. We're using one gram samples and the most we can fit into an oven at one time is forty. Now we're talking about forty grams of samples to be ashed at one time, and that process goes on for about three hours. Generally, not more than one batch of samples is prepared in one day, so we're really talking about a small amount. After the sample was ashed, it is dissolved in a dilute acid, very dilute, and then put into a tube and it's made to (?) up to a line with water. From that point on, the whole method is automated; the liquid which is now a clear liquid, is put into a cup and an automatic sampler removes the sample. It distills it all in an enclosed system, as it's -33- (cont. ) WEINSTEIN: moving, the flouride is liberated; it's trapped. It's still in the system, it's condensed, it's pumped out. The color, an agent is added to get a color and we get a peak on a chart. This is a completely contained system and no material ever leaves the system after, at that point. At the end, all of this goes into a waste bottle and the waste bottle is disposed of by appropriate means. We don't, wouldn't be dumped in the yard or something. . . We would dispose of it in the same way as it's disposed of in any chemical laboratory. But's that's basically all we do. Sulfer analysis, which we do actually very little of, is even a smaller amount of; we're dealing with 50 milligrams of tissue and these are burned one at a time as part of the process. The sulfur is distilled over, is trapped, and then we just measure the con- ductivity on an instrument. So there's no waste, no acids or anything to dispose of. We just throw these little porcelain crucibles away That's the whole process. So. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are you required to have a permit from any other agency of government? WEINSTEIN: No, not to do that. We also, we don't anticipate doing anything else but fluoride analyses. It's possible that we'll do more sulfur analyses in the future. MS. BROWNELL: What are you analyzing for? WEINSTEIN: We're analyzing for the element fluoride . . .which is a. . . BROWNELL: Fluoride and sulfur, . . . in vegetation. . . WEINSTEIN: Fluoride and sulfur in vegetation, which is present as a contaminant from air pollution, and these samples that are sent to us by industries. . . MS. BROWNELL: There's nothing dangerous in it, then. . . WEINSTEIN: Oh, no. . . -34- MS BAGNARDI : How many people do you have employed? McCUNE: About nine, I would say. They're all part-time. . . MR. TOMLAN: The sum total of equivalent -full-time positions would be what then? McCUNE: Probably one, I 'd say one full -time position. MR. TOMLAN: You all work two hours a day. . .? WEINSTEIN: No, it isn't, that isn't. See, we have a number. . .we all have another job and these technicians work for us normally and we started this business, it was really just a way of having a small business going and letting our technicians who are experts on these analyses, do the work on the side, and paid as independent contractors. And that's essentially what's happened. So, it's kind of hard to say how much they work, because they work on their own time and they work when it's necessary. They work in teams of three, three teams of three people a piece, so it's nine people. So when a team is assigned a batch of samples, they come up and do it, and the other two teams don 't work, until the next job gets there. MR. TOMLAN: One of the questions that was raised, obviously in the Planning Board, is obvious to us, I 'm sure, is that perhaps this kind of operation is more appropriately placed elsewhere in some other zone. I 'd like you to address that if you might, I mean, why in Cayuga Heights, on this particular road, in this particular location? McCUNE: Oh, . . . (male): No, No, it's not in Cayuga Heights. . . TOMLAN: Well , you 're dealing with a B-2 area, why not in an industrial zone, why not a commercial zone? What are you dealing with insofar as. . . McCUNE: I think essentially, we've been wanting to relocate the lab- oratory and if in buildings that can be renovated in some way, in B-2 -35- (cont. ) McCUNE: sections, that if we did renovate them or if (undecipherable) with somebody that was renovating to get space there, they always seem to be in a B-2 section and so we would like to take perhaps part of the building, half of the building that would be renovated and use it as part of our laboratory and then either rent out the rest of it as an office or something like that. MR. TOMLAN: Following that line of operation, you could just legally take an initial building that was abandoned. . .so that doesn't necessarily mean that it would be B-2, it could be. . . McCUNE: No, it's just that there was a question in our minds when we see a building in a B-2 area that may be appropriate, whether this use would conform with it. We want to find out ahead of time. MR. TOMLAN: I see. . . MS. BAGNARDI: Where is 901 Dryden Road? McCUNE: The trailer park. . .it's in Varna. . . MS. BAGNARDI: So, it operates in a trailer now? McCUNE: A concrete block building. . . MS. BAGNARDI : On the site of the trailer park? McCUNE: Right. . . MS. BAGNARDI: Are you the owner of the trailer park? McCUNE: No. . . MS. BROWNELL: It says here that some of your chemicals and waste are potentially dangerous. Certainly hydrochloric acid, you know, the others are. . .How do you handle these so that there can't be any danger from them? WEINSTEIN: Everything is contained within the system and the only time the liquids are really exposed to. . .at the end, everything goes into a waste bottle, it's all automatic, and then the waste bottle, the liquid in the waste bottle is disposed of according to standard chemical waste -36- (cont. ) WEINSTEIN: procedures. MS. BROWNELL: But how are they stored? These dangerous chemicals. . .are they bottled vats, or. . . WEINSTEIN: No, no, they're kept in glass bottles which are coated with plastic, call safe-coats and those are the bottles that we use to (presentil?) the acid into the system. MS. BROWNELL: O.K. , so there's no one actually taking it out of a bottle, it's done all automatically. WEINSTEIN: It's done, the only time, the only thing we do, have been doing recently, is making a dilution of the acid with water, because the company we buy the acid from is 50% acid. That has some problems in its quality control , so we've had to buy the concentrated acid and mix it 50-50 with water, so, otherwise we buy the acid ready to use, we just open up the bottle and use it. And hydrochloric acid is only used for cleaning, it's not used at all in the test procedure. --TAPE CHANGE TO SIDE # 3-- WEINSTEIN: There may be some odor, would be contained within the system. SECY HOARD: Do you have any chemicals that would not be found in a high school chemistry lab? WEINSTEIN: The only chemical that we would use that might not be found is a very sophisticated coloring agent, that would not be there because it's used for such a special use. It's called a (librium --- and we buy it in little five gram bottles which last for years. Just tiny amounts are necessary. But it' s not a dangerous chemical SECY HOARD: Your acids and so on are no stronger than. . . WEINSTEIN: The same acids that you'd find in any chemical lab, any lab. It's a very, really, it's a very simple. . .the whole method is essentially a very simple one and a very, a foolproof, in the sense -37- (cont. ) WEINSTEIN: that everything is automatic. The only way that anything could be released is if it was spilled, and that's of course a problem anytime, if you tipped over a bottle. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: But your total volume per. . . WEINSTEIN: If we in a day's time, with that system operating all day, it would pump something in the order of two or three gallons of liquid waste. . .would be collected in a whole days operation. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: But your normal storage then would be (carboids?) . . . WEINSTEIN: Our normal storage would be in safe-coat bottles, these plastic coated glass bottles. Everything is stored in those. They're shipped in those too. So there would be no problem in terms of breaking a bottle of the concentrated acid. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: As described, looking at the uses allowed in a B-2 zone, we might well agree that you might be as good or a better neighbor as some of the permitted users, however there's no specific expectation apparently, by the drafters that you will arrive here toniqht. It seemed to me that an interpretation of, might very well get us into the area of trying to design the ordinance rather than to interpret it. The planners suggest that legal counsel advise on the suitability of possible incor- poration of new language specific to allowing or denying that use. I 'm not trying to preempt the right of this board to make a decision, I 'm just discussing with you some of the alternatives to a precise yes or no. McCUNE: This is one reason I think we're here, because it really wasn't clear. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'm a little confused that it's not strictly a legal problem, but rather a problem of judgement and the very people that have that kind of judgment are back at planning and development and they seem not to have attacked this with a great deal of (victory?) . I 'm not sure that we should substitute necessarily for that reluctance. -38- MR. TOMLAN: I-m not sure they're going to come to any kind of con- clusion, though, (fast) are they? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The one thing that seems to me possible, an inter- pretation to the very narrow point of the precise business that you're in that would include a description of the amount of hazardous material stored and the method of storing it, and that sort of thing. If it came back to us as a request for a variance, that's what we're for, al- though we do have the obligation for interpretation, and your application tonite is for the interpretation. If we failed on agreeing that this is generally acceptable in a B-2 zone would not in my mind preclude the possibility that we'd grant a variance for this specific business in the B-2 zone. Now that would not be interpreting the ordinance as saying yes, you are approved anywhere in a B-2 zone, but rather, on a specific application, the granting of a variance could be made with specific limitations to the type of activity and the amount of material stored and that sort of thing. So, this isn't a determination, I 'm discussing with you that there are governmental remedies for your predicament and your question is not inappropriate, but that a denial or an interpretation that it generally, working laboratories are not permitted in B-2 zones, would not preclude the possibility that a variance might be granted for a specific one. SECY HOARD: Mr. Chairman, if I might elaborate on some of my thinking. The appellants came to me originally and I couldn't put my finger on what we're dealing with here, you know there's always the thought of Wilcox Press ' problems with air emissions, not knowing the scope of this thing, and I suggested the possibility of either going for a variance for specific properties or trying for, to see what the inter- pretation of the board would be so that if the board said yes, it -39- (cont. ) SECY HOARD: could be in a B-2 zone, then they could look at properties in a B-2 zone and not coming to this board everytime they found a possibility. But I 've also been looking at some of the things that are permitted in residential zones that seem much more offensive than what they've described. In a residential zone, neighborhood commercial facilities, we have a self-service laundramat which would have fumes, drying of clothes, dry-cleaning establishments and you get into the chemistry a little bit of furnaces permitted in residential areas. Hydrochloric acids and some of the other acids mentioned. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well as far as being a good or bad neighbor, whatever that may mean, that's part of the problem. Certainly what you described would be far more attractive, in my experience, than bowling alleys, however, . . .other questions from the board? That would either illuminate or confuse the question? MS. BAGNARDI: I think my concern would be removal of waste materials (undecipherable) WEINSTEIN: Well , you can dispose of acid in the normal , waste, in a sink? normal (undecipherable) , as long as it's disposed of with an adequate amount of water, enough to dilute it to the point where it's insigni- ficant in terms of going into the waste disposal system. MS. BAGNARDI: So you can use city sewers. . . WEINSTEIN: Yes, for certain substances you cannot. We don 't use any radioactive materials. MS. BROWNELL: You have solid wastes too? WEINSTEIN: No. . McCUNE: Well , we would have old glassware. . .bottles and that sort of things, sample of leaves that were not analyzed, that were thrown away, paper products, and. . . MS. BROWNELL: Nothing the garbage man couldn 't handle. . .? -40- WEINSTEIN: Probably a little less than a normal household. Vegetation wastes, we do, we have these little crucibles that we throw out, porce- lain that are used only one time. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? Well , thank you. Anyone else who, well , no, this is an interpretation, we don't need any debate on this. . .Discussion among the board however. . . (male) : Is a motion in order? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Yes it is, the request is for an interpretation. MR. TOMLAN: Then I would move that while it's generally true that laboratories are not approved, or not mentioned at least as the zoning has been written, it' s the interpretation of the board that this oper- ation as defined. . . I 've got it written down. . . (females talking) : interpretation of the board, . . .written down. . . MR. TOMLAN: While it's generally true that laboratories are not approved in this zone, in fact are not mentioned in the zoning code at all , it's the interpretation of the board that this operation is generally compatible with the activities found in a B-2 zone. O.K. , and therefore, should be approved. (male): I second. . . (male): findings, . . . . MR. TOMLAN: Well , one of the questions I had, are we really dealing closer with area or use variance? (EVERYONE) : use. . . well , we're . . . .interpretation. . .permitted use. . . MR. TOMLAN: Well , if you're finding facts, though, in this instance you're not tying it specifically. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We don't have the proofs that are required for a variance but we need to base our conclusion upon a reasonablb reference to the code. . . -41- MS. BROWNELL: You mean like what it does to the environment, and so on SECY HOARD: What you want to do is limit, use those findings to put limits on the interpretation, so we're not talking about a whole world of laboratories. . . MR. TOMLAN: Right, O.K. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It would seem to me, if you'll check, that as described in this application, that the proposed use would not involve substantial traffic, noise, odor, fumes, vibrations, . . . MS. BROWNELL: Waste, etc. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .that would impact a business district in any parti- cular way more seriously than the uses permitted in column 2. MR. TOMLAN: That should about nail it, don't you say? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: That's how I got there. . .It would seem to me that, in support of the motion, it would seem to me that an interpretation of that finding would allow a future board to decide that this use was peculiarly different from Monsanto moving into town, with a new team of plastic manufacturers, whatever. .. MS. BROWNELL: So, a yes vote then is to allow the variance. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: To approve, no, to approve the interpretation that this use is permitted. SECY HOARD: The vote in case 1508 is four yes votes. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Tom, would it be appropriate if that interpretation have the written application attached for future reference? The Parti- cular write-up in there seems to be quite definitive. SECY HOARD: Yes. . . MS. BROWNELL: Do they have to come back each month? (male) : Yes. . . MS. BROWNELL: . . .Next month. . . -42- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: No, we won't see it. . . (male): I hope we don't have to deal with it. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: No, we won't see it. . .if it's in a B-2 zone. . . (male): Watch, they'll come back. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , but the use, the use as they've described it is what we have interpreted. . . (all talking): old brick building. . .that's where it is. . . one they're looking at. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , I think we're better off, I 'm not sure the commissioner is, can we have the next case. . . MS. BROWNELL: Boy are we going to be in trouble when they start burning up animals. . . SECY HOARD: The next appeal is number 1509, appeal of Anthony Cerrache for an area variance under Section 30.25, Columns 13 and 14, for deficiencies in one sideyard and rear yard set- back, and Section 30.49, for extension or enlargement of non- conforming buildings, to permit construction of additions to the front and rear of the existing non-conforming building at 522 West State Street (Anthony Cerrache Enterprises) . The property is located in a B-2b (business) use district in which the existing is permitted, however, the Appellant must obtain an area variance. . .a variance to list the deficiencies before a building permit can be issued for the addition. MR. DIRK GALBRAITH: I 'm an attorney. I have professional offices at 308 North Tioga Street in Ithaca and I 'm here on behalf of the appellant, Mr. Cerrache. Mr. Cerrache is not with us this evening. The present use of this property is as a reservation office for -43- (cont. ) MR. GALBRAITH: several hotels and motels. There is virtually no walk-in business. All the business at this location is conducted over the telephone. The appellant seeks permission to construct two additions to the building. The first would be along the front of the building consisting of approximately a 27' x 42' addition which would contain additional office space for the existing personnel . It is not the applicant's intention to expand the business in any way, merely to provide more room for the people who are working there now. I 'd like to discuss the two additions to the building separately, if I can. I think what we've got would be more intelligible to the board. This building had a fire in 1979 that destroyed substantially all of the front of the building. When it was reconstructed it was reconstructed somewhat on a smaller scale of the existing building. . .had existed. In fact, the building, as it existed prior to 1979, encompassed the area in which the addition on the front is proposed at this point. The addition on the front would be constructed in an area that is presently used as a parking lot. I don't know how many members of the board are personally familiar with this property. There's a diagram that is attached to our application that depicts it. There is presently approximately 42 parking spaces in the parking lot next door. The only appreciable impact the construction of the addition on the front would have would be to diminish the parking lot by a total of five spaces. We have taken a sampling of surrounding business owners and business tenants and submitted to the board a petition signed by eight of them-I believe five of which are property owners, three of which are tenants-indicating that there is presently no parking problem in -44- (contd. ) MR. GALBRAITH: this area; that the (grant?) proposed variance would not cause a parking problem and that they have no objection to the variance sought by the applicant. The planning board recommended approval of this. I think the reason that the practical difficulty with respect to the addition on the front is simply that the configuration of the lot that the existing building is on makes the existing building nonconforming. The addition of the. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I was listening to you. . .what did you say again? MR. GALBRAITH: I didn't say it very well . The existing building as it's constructed is nonconforming because it's too close to the lot line on the east side. This proposed addition is proposed on the west side of the building and it would not, in fact, create a deficiency in itself, inasmuch as Mr. Cerrache owns the property further to the west. But the existing building is already deficient by virtue of its location and the configuration of the building. The practical difficulty here is that we have to come back and ask for a variance understanding the fact that the addition to the front would not create or exacerbate any deficiency. Now, the proposed addition to the back is somewhat more complicated to explain. As the building presently exists there is a shed attached to the rear of the property which is used for storage. The shed is physically connected to the building at 522 West State Street, but is actually located on property presently owned by the Balisario Estate, the address of which is 515 West Seneca Street. That property faces on Seneca Street. Mr. Cerrache is in the process of purchasing the property at 515 West Seneca Street. In fact, at the time we -45- (contd. ) MR. GALBRAITH: made this application I thought he would have closed the purchase by then and, therefore, we made it in his name rather than the Balisario's name. I have a consent form executed by the executor of the Balisario Estate giving his permission to make this variance application so far as it affects the property that they presently own. What Mr. Cerrache would like to do to the rear of the building is to extend the trusses on the roof of the building back over the area that is presently comprised of the shed, square off the back of the building. . .make it aestheti- cally, somewhat better looking than it is. It's kind of unfinished looking and raggedy at the moment. And then after he has acquired the property which is owned by the Balisario Estate kind of rework the back lot line of the property at 522 West State Street to bring it even with the back of the building. In effect cut that off from what is now the Balisario property. The planning board had a legitimate concern about this, I believe, which was that the building at 515 West Seneca Street not simply be demolished to provide additional parking. I think in discussing this, I believe they've recommended to this board that any variance be conditioned upon the applicant obtaining subdivision approval for the Balisario lot to create this division by cutting off the rear end of it to allow this construction. The applicant would consent and in fact concur with that because it is not his intention to demolish this building. Further, he would agree to insert in any deed to the remaining Balisario property when he conveys it off a restriction prohibiting building within 20 feet of the rear lot line of that property so that, in fact, there would be a rear area there and your buildings wouldn't be built up next to each other. So as to -46- (contd. ) MR. GALBRAITH: create the condition I think that the zoning ordinance is aimed at preventing. Again, the practical difficulty with the situation at the rear of this property is merely the configuration of the lot. Although Mr. Cerrache owns all of the land or will shortly own the land to the rear. If he were to convey off the property then he could be left without a rear lot line. I think the proposal really eliminates that possibility. MS. BROWNELL: We have a sketch here that goes through from Seneca Street to State Street. . . MR. GALBRAITH: That is correct. MS. BROWNELL: This is the existing house owned by the Balisario's. MR. GALBRAITH: Right. MS. BROWNELL: And what you've done is you've taken off this back porch. . . is that what's missing? MR. GALBRAITH: No. MS. BROWNELL: Why is the shape of this. . .or. . .is it. . . MR. GALBRAITH: No. . .the only way I can explain that is , I suppose, is that it simply is not depicted there. To the best of my know- ledge. . .ah. . . MS. BROWNELL: Where is the shed you keep talking about. MR. GLABRAITH: Okay, this is the shed here. That's the existing shed. MS. BROWNELL: That's on this lot here. MR. GALBRAITH: No. That's this thing here. And what Mr. Cerrache -47- (contd. ) MR. GALBRAITH: wants to do is square the back of this off by constructing the dark shaded area, bringing trusses from the existing building on State Street back to the rear. . . MS. BROWNELL: Over the shed. . . MR. GLABRAITH: over the shed and this small area here.and use this rear area for what it' s being used for now which is storage. It's actually. . .it's a queer thing, although it's on the Balisario land it's physically connected to the building on his property. And then the. . . MS. BROWNELL: But he's adding these parking spaces in here. . . MR. GALBRAITH: Yes. He'd add those parking spaces in there. I believe he intends to convey off this strip to the ultimate owners of this property and then put in a deed restriction that no construction could occur in this area that's designated parking. MS BROWNELL: So then this is the existing building. MR. GALBRAITH: Yes. MS. BROWNELL: And this is what he wants to add. MR. GALBRAITH: That's correct. That's. . . MS. BROWNELL: So he's adding this and this. MR. GALBRAITH: Yes. MS. BROWNELL: These two pieces. This one is already here. MR. GALBRAITH: That's already there. MS. BROWNELL: Except that he's going to add the roof line over here so that the trusses come out this way. MR. GALBRAITH: Yes. MR. TOMLAN: What happens to the back yard of the house? MS. BROWNELL: It becomes a parking lot. 48- MR. GALBRAITH: No i.t doesn't become, I guess, completely a parking lot. Parking spaces would be added. MR. TOMLAN: If parking spaces are added then how do you get to the parking. . .how do you drive into the parking spaces, . . MR. GALBRAITH: The proposed driveway there. MR. BAGNARDI: I see so the proposed driveway in fact does extend pretty much over the back yard of the two story frame building. MR. GALBRAITH: That's correct. MS. BROWNELL: And this is the only yard there's going to be. is between the back of th-e house and the back of the parking space. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , that's not true as a practical matter, unless you're going to have a forklift to truck cars in there. MS. BROWNELL: I mean, this has to be paved doesn't it? So they can get in and out? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: There has to be some maneuvering room so they can get in there. MS. BROWNELL: So how—there isn't going to be any back yard. That was your question, right? So they are going to be backing right up to the existing house. MR. TOMLAN: That's right. MR. GALBRAITH: I guess the only thing I can say about that is that it's. . . I 'm really not prepared to address that because it wasn't part of the plans for the building on State Street. But you're correct. Obviously, you can't. . .you`d have to do something in that area because you simply couldn't drive laterally into those spaces. -49- MS. BROWNELL: It has to be all blacktopppd so that you have to back out. . . M Sort of like 315 North Tioga. . . MR. GALBRAITH: I know it well . . . MS. BROWNELL: So we are looking at the whole ball of wax now? Or are we just looking at this and this. . . MR. GALBRAITH: We're just looking at that and that. The two proposed additions at 522 West State. . . MS. BROWNELL: Okay. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: However, in order to look at the deficiencies that we wish to (garbled) the parking deficiences would be increased. MS. BROWNELL: For some reason I don 't have a deficiency sheet in my. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Would it be accurate to accept the statement in the planning development board's minutes that approximately 40 spaces exist and the total required for these uses is 59. We'll eliminate five so that will increase that deficiency, is that correct? MR. GALBRAITH: I believe that there's precisely 42 spaces now and. . .ah. . .my recollection of the count. And I believe that there would be 37 after this. That was I think the main reason that we circulated the petition among the merchants in that area and I don't know if the minutes you have reflect this, but several members of the planning board apparently live in that area commmented that there is no parking problem in this area now. And this is not a proposal that would intensify the present use in any way or generate a need for more parking. -50- (contd. ) MR. GALBRAITH: Although it concededly would eliminate five spaces. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: But the present parking space that is used for Zorba`s and for the U.S. Geological Survey people in the building immediately to the west of the long line shown on the west edge of the parking lot.. . I walked through there this morning and it was not filled to capacity, but it was pretty busy. In percentage I think there were two spaces that were not occupied. MR. GALBRAITH: One of the things that was pointed out to the planning board was that given the nature of Zorba's there are only certain times of the day, I think it's predominantly dinner time, that the customers in the restaurant use that parking lot, although. it does some luncheon business down there as well . And those are not the times that either the Geological Survey people would be using the parking lot or the employees of the reservation agency. MS. BROWNELL: Wouldn't the employees be parking there all day. MR. GALBRAITH: Yeah, but probably not at. . .probably until 5 o'clock ia''s generally after 5 o'clock that you see most of the traffic at Zorba`s. MS. BROWNELL: Except for lunch time, right? MR. GALBRAITH: Yes., and somewhat. . . MS. BROWNELL: They have a good lunch crowd. MR. GALBRAITH: I never eat there. I don't know. . . MS. BROWNELL: It's not bad, it's good food. -51- MR. GALBRAITH: It's too far to drive. MS. BROWNELL: So we're losing five spaces. Is that what we're saying here? That's the way I see it. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , that front addition occupies five existing parking spaces. Frankly, I don't know what. the subdivision implications are here, whether, in fact if we're going to even discuss the proposed parking in the rear of 515 West Seneca Street. MS. BROWNELL: That's why I was asking because there is six there. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: That jumps across the. . .my understanding of what a subdivision is incorporating two or more properties into a plan. MS. BROWNELL: That gives you your six spaces back again. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Yes, but in effect recognizing then it seems to me to have jumped on to approving the subdivision without that even being discussed. MR. GALBRAITH: If I could comment on that because the. . . . I understand it is the planning board, is it not, that gives subdivision approval and we did not make a subdivision application here for the reason that we didn't own the property—or all of it at the time that this was being done and we would certainly if the variance were granted conditionally upon obtaining sub- division approval from the planning board then go back and make an application to the planning board as soon as the closing had taken place on the Balisario property. MR. TOMLAN: Isn't that putting the cart before the horse? MS. BROWNELL: Not if you make it a condition, I don't think. -52- MR. TOMLAN: Well we've already got a motion from the planning board to recommend approval contingent upon securing the subdi,visi.on or to permit the construction. MS. BROWNELL: Right. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It seems to me what they`re suggesting is that if we grant the variance that we also grant the variance subject to the approval of the subdivision which. I guess would be, . .I better not guess. . .it seems to me would be a legal variance. . .a conditional variance. MR. GALBRAITH: If I could add one other thing that is probably not reflected in the. minutes there. . .the real concern of the planning board was this that if Mr. Cerrache were turned down. . . and I think I 'm almost paraphrasing what Mrs. Cummings said on the record. . .if Mr. Cerrache were turned down in this variance application because of a parking deficiency. . .one, an obvious recourse that he has is to buy the Balisario property and demolish the building and turn it into a sea of asphalt which members of the planning board found to be really the waste of a nice home or a nice residential type building and cure the parking deficiency in that way. That was what the planning board didn't want. Frankly, Mr. Cerrache doesn't want it either. MR. TOMLAN: But, you see the --same question comes up even if you pave over the back yard how much (life?) do you give the existing house? That's the other side of the question. MR. GALBRAITH: Well , uh, I don't know. . . MR. TOMLAN: I mean how long is it before somebody else -53- (contd. ) MR. TOMLAN: from Seneca Steet who owns that house comes in and is in a pickle as well for not having any room to expand in any area or get any variance issued. Whoever takes over the property really isn't left with any recourse. MS. BROWNELL: Is he going to keep the house? MR. GALBRAITH: No, I believe his intentions were to convey it off or lease it I 'm not really sure which. I 'm not sure those negotiations have firmed up. But the proposed parking area to the rear which is depicted on the diagram would be for the use of 515 West Seneca. MS. BROWNELL: And that would be in the deed? MR. GALBRAITH: Yes. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well we have an existing business in a structure that whether i.t conforms or not is legal and we propose to put a front addition into space that is required by the zoning ordinance to meet the off street parking require- ments of several properties owned by Mr. Cerrache, who is the appellant. A practical difficulty is that he chooses to expand the building creating. . .not trying to meet any difficulty with the structure. . .it seems to me the expansion of the building in itself eventually brings on an increased demand rather than a decreased demand for off street parking. At least the ordinance speaks in that direction and we're doing the opposite. I 'm speaking now of strictly off street parking as required by the ordinance. The difficulties are difficulties of these volumme ,businesses then Mr. Cerrache as the owner .of the building can't conduct his business successfully without more space? MR. GALBRAITH: Well the difficulty is too many personnel crampeo, -54- (contd. MR. GALBRAITH: in too small a space at the moment they do all of their business over the telephone and a lot of it's computerized and in the past year they've had to put this computer equipment moved into the building which is now crowding the employees out of their existing office spice. He hasn't planned to increase the scope of the business or the size of the staff he just wants some additional place to put the people he has. I think the real practical difficulty here is as the building's constructed is too near the east property line. That's the deficiency with it. . .actually by the construction of the front addition he does not create a side yard deficiency in any way. What he does do is the thing you pointed out he wipes out five existing parking spaces. What I 've tried to do with the petition we've submitted from the adjoining property owners is to show the board that there really isn't a parking problem here and that there really wouldn't be one created by this and in fact, parking is not one of the areas that's listed as deficient. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is a copy of that survey available to the board members? Is it being passed around? MS. BROWNELL: Which one is that now? This one? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I `m talking about the neighbor's who are referred to by SECY HOARD: When the computers are installed would that reduce the number of people working? MR. GALBRAITH: I don't think so. I 'm not worried if it did. -55- - JAPE CHANGE TO SIDE #4-- SECY HOARD: Would you mention that to your colleogue, Mr. (Sloan?) MR. GALBRAITH?: It's not a directlyirelated matter. MS. BROWNELL: Undertones of subversion. . . SECY HOARD: I didn't know Mr. (Sloughter?) had gone to computers. (?) No but the company has (too faint to understand) . SECY HOARD: Oh. (.Unintelligible comment) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , the quality of those comments deluded a little bit by who the landlord is (in case you do?) But, . . . MR. GALBRAITH: Yes, Mr. Cerrache, I 'd like to point out, is the landlord of the Geological Survey people and he's the landlord of Sherwin Williams. The other people, I believe of the total there, Mr. Barnett is the tenant of Sun Oil and the other people are property owners. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Questions from the board? SECY HOARD: Do you know how the square footage is utilized in the Geological building? Is it all office space or are there other uses in there? Do you know at all? MR. GALBRAITH: I really don't. MR. PATRICK HOURIGAN: There is a central garage area within there and the front area is purely office space and the back area is purely office space. Looking at the building from West State Street. The front area of the building is entirely office space and the back end of the building is entirely office space. The center part is, I believe, a four bay garage. You know four actual bays where they park their. . . (?) Would you give your name for the record here. -56- MR. HOURIGAN: I 'm Patrick Hourigan of American Community Cablevision. Our building is right across the street. I 've been in the Geological Survey a number of times. SECY HOARD: I was just wondering if (garbled) MR. HOURIGAN: You also mentioned that a certain portion of the property where you desire to put that building is used for parking. When in essence it does have parking signs on it and so and so forth and can be utilized as parking, but in my experience nobody's ever used it. . .the area where he's going to build that addition, it's just never utilized for parking, . .nobody ever parks there. It seems reasonably narrow when you're looking at it to park there that you might be blocking the driveway at that point so nobody ever bothers to park there. It's a clear indication that the parking is not deficient in that area. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there questions from the board? SECY HOARD: I 'm just wondering if I might get some better figures on the parking (faint) . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , without better figures we have a clear increase in the deficiency that already exists. (We have to listen to the board?) as far as the need for additional or further information. . . MS. BROWNELL: We're supposed to ignore the subdivision and those parking lots in our decision tonight. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'm not talking about the quality of our decision tonight. First of all , we make a decision, yes or no, and there is information that is not available to the board now. -57- (contd. ) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I would expect that it would not prejudice the ability to bring in (undecipherable) technically I suppose someone could have, but as a reasonable person, it seems to me, there is some question about exactly what the parking requirements would be for the total project. I 'm thinking of the subdivision, I 'm thinking of who'll get credit for what parking, how we'll meet the housing parking requirement, the Cerrache housing requirement, Zorba's and U.S.G.S. if there are any others that are leaning on this parking lot I don't know, but in my experience on this board this parking lot's got a lot of traffic. I 'm speaking now of appeals that were dependent upon off street parking. So that if we do make a negative decision on this appeal at the moment and there would be an improvement in the deficiency by a recalculation it would seem to me that we would be receptive to hearing that additional information in a further appeal . I 'm not predicting. I want to not close off the possibility of hearing this matter again with further information. MR. GALBRAITH: Would it be appropriate or possible, I 'm not sure exactly what the procedural rules of the board are at this point, I was frankly not prepared to speak tonight on the question of required amount of parking because I had kind of taken on faith I think the same figures that you were citing for the required amount of parking for the neighboring businesses. Now it appears the requirement may actually be something different than that. -58- (contd) MR. GALBRAITH: Would it be possible to request an adjournment of this proceeding until the next month's session or is possible to withdraw the application at this time (undecipherable) to bring it again next month when I have the information. 'Cause it seems to be a critical question. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: If you will bear with me, please. In each case set for public hearing, I was quoting from (Ward's) Rules and Regulations, page two, paragraph C. "In each case set for public hearing except those withdrawn or postponed shall be heard and the board shall make a determination of each case which has been heard. If, however, the board feels there is a question of law or a question of fact to be resolved prior to its determination of the case it may table the matter or continue it to another meeting pending such determination." So we clearly have in our rules the (undecipherable) to take two different actions that would defer the final decision. It would seem appropriate to me that we might well refer this back to the planning board on a procedural matter. I understood, I may very well be in error, but I understood that a subdivision approval was essential to a. . .was a prior requirement to coming to this board. . .but that may not be so. That may be an inde- pendent action. . . SECY HOARD: Generally the other way around. The subdivision creates deficiencies. . .zoning deficiencies or if there are existing zoning deficiencies that are not corrected by the -59- (contd) SECY HOARD: subdivision. In other words if they cut a line and make somebody's back yard too short or somebody's side yard too short, they have to get a variance for that. Usually what happens is that they file a subdivision proposal to the planning board and simultaneously request the zoning variance for the deficiencies. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do I hear questions or opinions from the board that would (undecipherable). MS. BROWNELL: Is it a question of tabling it or a question of sending it back? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We table it and ask for. . .if there is a question of fact to be resolved. . . MS. BROWNELL: Right. Which there is. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .and I believe there is. . . MS. BROWNELL: Certainly. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .as to the parking requirements and that would include the parking requirements for the. . . MS. BROWNELL: Subdivision. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . . (undecipherable) continues to exist in the proposal as well as the reduction caused by the proposed addition. It would certainly help this board to determine this case if we had an accurate count of exactly what is required by each of the several users of the lot. Do I hear a motion? MS. BROWNELL: I so move that we table it, until the August meeting. M . . .and refer to the planning board MS. BROWNELL: And refer to the planning board. . . (?) . . .for suggestions or of some sort of determination. . . MS. BROWNELL: the number of parking spaces. . . -60- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Just the number of parking spaces the requirements of the various buildings that are now using it in order to determine the final result in the event that this variance is granted. (Undecipherable conversation) MR. GALBRAITH?: That's what I 'll try determine then between now and next month. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do we have a motion to table? (Undecipherable) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Second? M : Second. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. (Undecipherable conversation) SECY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1510, appeal of American Community Cablevision for a special permit under Section 30.26 for a satellite televison antenna on the roof of the existing building at 519 West State Street (American Community Cablevision) . The property is located in a B-2a (business) use district, where the existing use is permitted; however, under Section 30.26 a special permit must be obtained by the appellant before the antenna can be put in place. MR. PATRICK HOURIGAN: Good evening, I 'm Patrick Hourigan of The American Community Cablevision, I 'm the chief engineer. MS.BAGNARDI: . . .long wait. . . MR. HOURIGAN: Well , it's been a long evening. I wish I had known I was going to be second to the last. . . -61- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: Basically what we're proposing to do is to build or place on the top of our rear roof. . .rear meaning the West Green Street side. . .a seven meter dish type antenna to receive satellite signals. Seven meters has been determined through electronic and mathematical calculations to be the minimum size required there are other sizes to these dish antennas, larger and smaller, than the one we've proposed. We have found this one to be adequate for our needs and desires for now and both for the future. We do not wish to put it up this year and come back here next year for a larger one or whatever. This should take care of our needs for the future. When we considered this project the first thing we did was look at alternate areas other than our existing building which as a matter of fact is our hub site. Hub means that the signals from our remote tower sites our head ends are brought down on hard cable back to our hub site which is in our office also then reprocessed and reconverted to :different channels and then broadcast out to our system personnel . So obviously one area that would be nice to put it at is the head end. That's the first area we checked. Both our existing head ends that are located on Snyder Hill and Connecticut Hill are unacceptable due to high levels of microwave interference. This would destroy the picture quality and it would not meet any of the state or federal regulations as far as technical specifications. So we were left with doing a study of our particular property, which after we completed that study, was -62- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: found that our particular location at West State Street was fantastic for satellite reception. In most cases antennas in a low lying area area detriment, but in a satellite receiving antenna that's about the perfect thing you could have because it provides you natural shielding, namely the mountains, for all that terrestrial microwave. So putting us down in a pit and then looking out over the horizon provides us with that angle so we don't get any reception problems or anything like that. We've enlisted the aid of Mr. Pflumerfelt who is a structural engineer. . .locally. . .associated with Miller & Co. and he will design a steel inner network. . .is what he's discussing at this point to our existing two story. . .the back end of the building is two story the front end is one story. And he will build a steel inner structure sticking out through the roof and then the antenna will be mounted on a steel plate and it will be pointed at the antenna. There is an attached diagram to our proposal which somewhat shows you the . . .what it will look like. It is a copy of a copy so it's probably not the cleanest thing in the world, but it should give you some perceptual idea of what is there now. Also, I understood that I needed to get a petition signed by the local landowners which I have enough copies for everybody. From what I under- stood we needed 50 percent or better and we did quite a bit better than that. We specifically looked at the properties directly adjacent to our property, namely the Cornell Laundry -63- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: Mrs. Volpicelli , who sits directly behind us, there's another medical building over on the corner of us and Sherwin Williams which I believe the lawyer for Cerrache claimed that he owned, and as a matter of fact, we own it. That's neither here nor there. So we specifically looked at the particular property surrounding us and those people are obviously on the petition along with everybody within two hundred feet of our radius. We had no direction as far as the statement was concerned so we tried to make it as broad and (garbled) as possible so they understood exactly what we were trying to do there. . .and also provided them exactly the same type of paperwork that you have before they signed the petition. . .this leaflet with the diagram and the proposal here. In discussing the location of the earth -station on the building there are two reasons why we would like to put it on the building itself. One, is the aesthetically we feel that putting it on the building. . .it will not be seen. . .most people who drive by or walk by will not look up on the roof of the building most of the people's attention is more ground level so to speak. . . and, you know, hopefully it will blend in with the environment a little bit better than placing it in our parking lot. If we placed it in our parking lot we also fear that we would lose. . .well we definitely know that we would lose four parking spots as a result of placing it in there which we presently use for both our vehicles which -64- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: are there overnight under normal circumstances and also for customer parking during the day. Normally our service fleet is out in the field during the day and that's used for customer parking. At night we use it for our service fleet when we don't have any customers pulling in and out to do business. And we fear that putting it in the parking lot would be a detriment to West State Street, in that our subscribers would have no place to go when they come down to pay their bills but to go out onto West State Street. And also to invade the other businesses in the area's parking; Sherwin Williams, which is our tenant, but still being adjacent to us our customers are obviously going to park there if there weren't sufficient spaces within our area. That's basically the proposal . MR. TOMLAN: What impact, if any, (garbled) does the electronic gear have on adjacent electronic gear? MR. HOURIGAN: It doesn't make the snow goose go off into the wilderness. Much to everybody's chagrin is that it doesn't. . . unless you are actually on top of the antenna at the point of the microwave bead horn which is at the center of the dish and directly have that go through your body which would be almost a physical impossibility the way it's constructed there is no harm whatsoever. There have been a number of locations. . . and I 've been in this business ten years so I 've installed quite a number of earth stations, we've had birds nesting in them, which have caused reception problems and we've had to go and remove the nest and the birds. .so .it creates no public -65- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: hazard in the fact of bounced radio waves. It's a capture antenna. Those radio waves are coming here anyway whether you want them to or not. They're being transmitted. All it is. . .the reason it's shaped in a dish is that it's a capture dish. It takes what's coming down anyways and just focuses it into a very narrow beam at the base of it. MR. TOMLAN: Okay. I notice in the materials submitted to us from the 28th of June from the planning board that a person on the planning staff indicated that a special permit request. . .this special permit request lacked a (?) plan, which in fact I note also in Section 30.26.b is also the case: "the applicant shall also furnish the board of zoning appeals a scale drawings of the proposal including a minimum. . . as a minimum a plot plan of the premises. " Any reasons for showing us elevations only? MR. HOURIGAN: I left that particular thing to Mr. Pflumerfelt in Mr. Miller and associates engineering. . . I was not aware that that was required. It is easily obtainable. . .it it. . . or I could sketch for you the. . . MR. TOMLAN: Well I noticed no one appeared from American Community Cablevision at all . . . MR. HOURIGAN: We were not notified or told when we MR. TOMLAN: . . .planning board. . . MR. HOURIGAN: when we made that application that it was required for us to go there. MR. TOMLAN: I see. -66- MR. HOURIGAN: We had no idea that it was. . .as a matter of fact, up until . . .uhm. . .a couple of days ago lewas-not aware that I had to attend this .particular meeting. It was. . .that was not done. . .at the application point we just handed in the application and that was it. It says no where that we should obtain this. . .you know, that the public is encouraged to come and that so on and so forth. But we had no idea that we should attend or we very well would have attended. SECY HOARD: Mike to answer this about the (garbled) primarily the intention of that was the tower and guy wires and that sort of thing. MR. TOMLAN: Well , I 'm still asking myself is this dead center in the building or is on the side. . .when it swings around MR. HOURIGAN: . . .it doesn't swing. . . MR. TOMLAN: . . .it doesn't swing? MR. HOURIGAN: No, it's fixed forever. MR. TOMLAN: I'm just wondering where it is in relationship to everything else around it. I think that's the purpose of the ordinance. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , maybe. . . I think. . .two extremes here. . . technically we don't have a plot plan. . .exactly how good a plot plan would meet the needs of this court is quite another matter. Do you know the frontage of your building down there? How many feet? MR. HOURIGAN: Including Sherwin Williams or just our. . . -67- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: No, how wide is your building? MR. TOMLAN: Twenty-five feet? MR. HOURIGAN: No, it's quite a bit different. . .quite a bit more than that 'cause there's parking on either side of the parking lot. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Just the building. MR. HOURIGAN: Twenty-five or 30 feet. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And how big is this addition? MR. HOURIGAN: It is 22 feet across. . .21 feet across. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So, if it's going to be on the roof then. . . MR. HOURIGAN: . . .it will not overhang any of the roof edges. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .there would be some space around it. . . MR. TOMLAN: But it is in essence as big as another story. . . in visual effect. . .if one looks at in elevation and likewise in spacial . . . MS. BROWNELL: Thirty-four feet it says for the width. of the building. Right here you can barely see it says 34 feet right smack in the middle of the dish on the bottom. The base of the thing-a-ma-jig doesn't look like it's more than. . . MR. HOURIGAN: . . .no, the base is not very large at all . . . MS. BROWNELL: . . .ten feet? MR. HOURTGAN: No, it isn't. . .more like five feet.. MS. BROWNELL: And the dish. is not. . .is it round so that it's as high. . . MR. HOURIGAN: It's more like this. MS. BROWNELL: Okay, so it's a little higher than it is wider is that what you're saying? _.68_ MR. HOURIGAN: No it's pretty symmetrical . MR. TOMLAN: It's round all the. . . MR. HOURIGAN: . . .as much as you can given manufacturing tolerances. . .. yes, you know, within an inch. . .yes. MR. TOMLAN: Are there any wires attached to it. . . MR. HOURIGAN: No. There are no guys everything is supported by that steel inner structure which I spoke of whi:ch. . .the existing building. . .where we're talking about putting th.i,s is two stories. It's not utilized as two stories. It`s used as warehouse space. . .it doesn't have a second floor, so to speak.. It's two stories high but it doesn't have a second floor it's a very tall garage area. . . MR. TOMLAN: And the total weight of the thing is what? MR. HOURIGAN: 17 hundred, 18 hundred pounds. . .it's in no way shape or form the weight of the thing that`s an engineering feat. In engineering the particular proj.ect�you're looking at wind load, ice load. . .what we're looking at is to take a one inch radian ice load of the entire dish. . .it's a physical impossibility, but we'll use that. And we look at the average wind from the weather bureau in this area, double it and it will withstand that plus 10 percent. . .Mr. Pflumerfelt is. . . this is the second earth station. . .the first one was not placed on the roof, but I will remind the board that I believe The Ithaca Journal must have applied to this board to place theirs on their roof and the same. . . I assume they had some form of engineering study to guarantee the structural soundness -69- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: of that installation on the roof. Mr. Pflumerfelt was contacted by us initially when we first thought of this project to firlst of all give us an idea of whether or not we had this completely out our. . .out of the question. . .although we had already known that it isn't because I 've actually done one specificallly like this in New York City. It's on the 27th floor of a tower in New York City and it's a (unclear. . .ting meter?) and it's considerably larger than this, so it's practically can be done and we contacted Mr. Pflumerfelt to see whether or not he could desig us a steel inner structure that would take the type of loadin that we're talking about here. And it's perfectly feasible and f om what he leads me to believe it's going to be easier than putting it in the parking lot, because in the parking lot we'd have to dig down about seven feet to pour a pad for a foundati n pad and rods and so on and so forth whereas, utilizing the existing building's framework which is concrete . . .there's fir walls. . .the building was. . .it was all built at the same time, but for some odd reason it's sectioned and it has complete c lumned firewalls. And we are going to straddle two of these complete columned firewalls and run steel right up alongside t ose walls including the footings. . .they will be physically mounted right into the footings of the building and then the o her structure will be placed on the top of the roof to Ihold it in. MS. BROWNELL: From the positive side what is this going to -70- Ocontd) MS. BROWNELL: do to everybody's t.v.? MR. HOURIGAN: Well , the entire reason for doing this or our reason for doing this is that we would like to get satellite programming. To date, Ithaca cable::systemhas no satellite programming q�ote, unquote. There are a good deal of services available. T ere's a good deal of programming available on those satelli es that we would like to at some point like . to add to the Ithaca system. There are services unavailable in any other w y except through satellite reception. Some of them are pa services. Some of them are free services, Cable (?) Netw, rk, Appalachian Arts Network, there's a multitude of varying services and we would like to tap into those services. And provide those to the viewers in Ithaca. MS. BROWNELL: , So it will increase our possibilities of different prog ams is what you're saying. MR. HOURIGAN: Definitely. And again I might add that that programming is unfortunately not available in any other way. SECY HOARD: A d the cost would be passed on to the subscribers (?) nuclear po er station. . . MR. HOURIGAN: It will not cost us any where near as much as a nuclear powe station, but of course the construction costs in some way sh pe or form will be passed on to. . . SECY HOARD: A far as the plot plan goes if you put a box over this thin it would be exempt. MR. TOMLAN: I just want to know how it fits in. . . I - 1- MR. HOURIGAN: Specifically we looked at that also and Mrs. Volpicelli . . .who owns the property. . .in fact, I could somewhat describe it. We straddle Green Street and West State. This is basically �ur property—this would be West State. . .and that's the pldt plan and the property. . .the building sits just. . .like tl�is. . .it's very long and reasonably narrow. This area back her is the two story area in question. This is Green Street again, Mrs. V 1picelli 's lot right here. We own from. . .this is Cornell LaulIndry right in along here and there is another house over here which is actually owned by Cornell Laundry too. The dish will I� it right here as centered as we can get it as far as wher we want to take those pilings off. We're definitely going to have it so it's within the roof fringes. If you took th roof and went straight up it would be within that cubical created. One of the obvious things is Mrs. Volpicelli 's garden which w did a sun study and the shadow will not hit her garden, as a matter of fact, aitreetthat is here—she has no afterno n sun. I don't know how she has a garden, but she has a viab a garden with no afternoon sun and the tree does more to d triment her. . .and she is one of the signatures on the petition here. This is a commercial establishment here, a doctor's office, over here is the paint store and this is our establishm nt and this across the street and over here is the laundry. So, the only real residential actually affected would be Mrs. V 1picelli . In the practical sense. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any more questions or further statements? MR. HOURIGAN: have one question. In reviewing the rules -7�- (contd) MR. HOURIGAN: I was looking to understand them. . .I have the required signatures in either direction. . .this is for my own interest more than anything else. . .in determining the number of signatures within a two hundred foot radius you ask for 50 percent. . .are you determining that by the number of plots or number of people, number of buildings, number of dog houses. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Owners. MR. HOURIGAN: Owners? Just owners. . .so, if a person owned seven lots. . .if around my property there was eight lots and a person owned seven of them and another person over here owned one of them. . .they would have equal . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I believe. . . MS. BROWNELL: . . .98 percent. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: with that many you'd have seven owners. . . if you got the right person. . . MR. H.OURIGAN: Seven owners. . .okay then you would have. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Now wait. . . MR. HOURIGAN: Okay, it's only for my own. ,. MR. HOARD: The way I look at it is the number of properties. . .total up the number of properties. . . MR. HOURIGAN: Lots. . .by the taxpayers? MS. BROWNELL: Taxpayers? MR. HOURIGAN: By the tax map. SECY HOARD: By the tax map. . .if there are ten of them around,i you and one guy owned seven and he signed it. . . -73- MR. HOURIGAN: That's seven. SECY HOARD: That is seven. MR. HOURIGAN: Okay, that's the way I understood it, but I . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The extreme would be if you were next door to an apartment house and all the tenants had a vote. . . you'd have to. . . MR. HOURIGAN: The other thing I was looking at too. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: . . .popular acclaim from the populous. . . MR. HOURIGAN: Well , in a number of cases in this you'll see that many people. . .Mr. Gorsky owns four lots, Mr. Cerrache owns four lots. . . I myself or my corporation owns one lot adjacent to me, as a matter of fact we are a yes vote for ourselves. . .I thought it a bit redundant. . .we would count then as a vote for ourselves. . . 'cause the lot next to us is considered a separate lot for taxation. . .Thank you. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? Thank you. --EX. SESS.-- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The chair will move approval of special permit under application 1510 to _erect a dish antenna on existing building at 519 West State Street finding the fact that the proposal meets the requirements of special Section 30.26 C, paragraph 4c. I so move. MR. TOMLAN: Second. MS. BROWNELL: Yes. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any discussion? (Extraneous conversation. . . ) -74- SECY HOARD: Appeal number 1511 : appeal of John Novarr for a use variance under Section 30.25, Column 2 (Permitted uses) and for an area variance under Section 30.49 and Section 30.25, Columns 7,11 , and 13 for deficiencies in minimum lot width, minimum front yard setback, and minimum setback for one sideyard, to permit the renovation of the existing house at 505 East Seneca Street to increase the occupancy from five to eight unrelated individuals. The property is located in an R-2a use district, in which the proposed and existing use is not permitted; therefore under Section 30.49 the appellants must obtain a use variance and an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit can be issued for the renovation. MR. JOHN NOVARR: I 'm John Novarr. I live at 202 Eddy Street. Cornell University has owned the property for many years and even a cursory look would tell anyone that Cornell has not maintained it properly. The home is over 4,000 square feet, it has no insulation and no storm windows. It needed a roof ten years ago. . .it does not appear to have been painted in 20 or more years. There are holes in the roof in which raccoons are living and birds are living under the siding on the second floor. The porch ceiling and back soffit are rotted because of the roofing problem. The house is a fine historic mortar home of brick and shingle in a designated historic district and needs some special care, but fixed up could be a landmark. Over the past seven years I have -75- (contd) MR. NOVARR: unsuccessfully attempted to purchase the house. The first time I had hopes of moving into the house, but at that time I was told it was not for sale. The second time I attempted to purchase the home I had made my move into town, but was looking for a project. Cornell listed the house at that time at 90,000, of course I considered it much too high given its condition. The house can be purchased very reasonably now, but it needs about $40,000 put into it. In order to make any financial sense out of this expenditure I need the income from eight people rather than the five for which thehome is (grandfathered?) presently. I realize that some people feel that 505 East Seneca ought still to be a private home, but the reality is that a beautiful house is falling apart. But it can be restored if there is an income level high enough to merit the expense of the restoration. I am therefore asking for a use variance as based upon a hardship which Cornell has incurred. It has tried over three years to sell the building, but has been unable to because five unrelated people will ,not support the cost of renovation. If the city gives the variance I would agree to work with. Richard Piper, the city's architectural conservatore and Andrea Laczarski, the Ithaca Planning Department's co-ordinator, in order to do a restoration of the exterior of the house. I have a couple of unsolicited letters from people I had to notify about this hearing. I guess you have copies. Would you like me -7 6- (contd) MR. NOVARR: to read those letters or just say you got them? MS. BROWNELL: We read them. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We'll just attach them to the record. MR. NOVARR: I don't have to read them? The idea here is that the house is a mess. I 've talked to a lot of people in the planning department and. . .specifically because it's in a historic neighborhood, but also because that's the Sage compound. . .and they'd like to see this building get fixed up. I 'm willing to undertake it with their help, but I can't go it without more income from the house. The house was originally built to- house far more, I would guess, than five people. It is an enormous three story home. I .think eight people could live there quite comfortably and wouldn't be crowded into the house. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: You think 500 square feet per person. . . MR. NOVARR: Yes, I rent studio apartments in Ballantyne that are 17 x 12 including the kitchen and the bathroom. And the people that we're renting to are extremely happy to have them. They pay 290 a month for a studio apartment. That's a 100 dollars less a month than Fairview charges. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: John, in order to approve this we need to clearly establish that a hardship exists and the limiting the building to a single family or duplex is not economically -77,- (contd) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: feasible. MR. NOVARR: Well , the building is not limited at the moment to single families. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well , it's merely grandfathered. . . MR. NOVARR: That's right. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: How many bedrooms are there. . .approximately according to Miller's plan. . .way back when. MR. NOVARR: Well , it is a little difficult to tell . There are four bedrooms on the second. . .there is a bedroom at each corner of the second floor and there are bathrooms in the middle on two sides. . .so, with doors interconnecting with two bedrooms to one bath. So each set of two bedrooms has a bath on the second floor and there are an additional three rooms on the third floor which interconnect with one another. And there's a bathroom that sits sort of in the middle of all of those. The bedrooms on the third floor would not qualify as being legal bedrooms because you go from one room into another unless the people who lived on the third floor lived in the same room. But there are three big rooms on the third floor. --TAPE CHANGE TO SIDE #5-- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'm trying to determine how large it is and how. . .if it is limited to five, to the present five limitations. MR. NOVARR: I might actually be able to help you with that. The heating costs that Cornell has given me are in excess of -78- (contd) MR. NOVARR: 3,000 dollars a year. That's a lot of heat for five people to pay. It would be easier if there were more. The. . . let's see what else did I want to tell you about it. . .The principle use, the original use that Cornell put the building was an annex to the infirmary. It hasn't been a single family house since somewhere in the mid-fifties. It later was used as a radiation laboratory, Tom?. . .something like that anyhow. . .and in recent years I believe there was one year that Cornell was trying to sell it and that house sat empty for a year. Presently, there is one guy living in the whole house. There's almost no furniture in there and it's very peculiar to see this guy eating his breakfast on a card table in a dining room that is approximately 16 x 16 across from a living room which is probably 12 or 13 feet x 35 feet. The majority of homes in the area are not owner- occupied homes, but the home that is closest to the house is owned by an elderly lady named, Mrs. Mendenhall ,,-yand-her brother, Mr. Mack. He came to the planning board meeting it must have been. . .what. . .about a week ago. And spoke about the house, but did not make any comments. . .specifically about my plan: He was concerned ofcourse that the eight people I hoped to put in there would be quiet and that I would maintain the property because Cornell had not been maintaining the property. There's a standing joke that Mr. Mack goes over there and mows the lawn and cuts the shrubs and he hoped that I would take care of that. Schuyler House, which is the new 79- (contd) MR. NOVARR: Cornell grad dormitory, which is in the old Cornell Infirmary is directly in back of this house. And I don't know how many people Schuyler houses, but probably 150 to 200 people. It would be difficult for Cornell , I believe, to pursuade somebody to use this as a single family house when it backs into a dormitory. Though I would admit that this is a problem that Cornell has created for itself because they of course built the dorm. On the other hand, it was an infirmary before that. I do .not wish to change the inside of the house at all . I 'm not going to split it up and turn it into eight little apartments or five little apartments. In fact, I 've agreed with the historical people in the planning department to not move any walls at all . They are concerned that this continues to represent a good piece of Miller's work. I would hope to rent it as a home that is completely redone to a group of people. I believe too that with all this bad press that Cornell has had that this is an effort on their part to divest itself of some of the property which they clearly aren't managing very well . I won't go into the morality of that situation, but I believe if given permission to do this the outcome would certainly benefit the neighborhood. And I think that my unsolicited letters show that there is at least some approval on the part of the neighbors to see that this happens. -80- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I don't have a deficiency sheet. MS. BROWNELL: Gee, I don't either. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So there is a question in my mind about the area variance required. MR. NOVARR: The right hand side of the house, which faces west hill lacks about three feet so. . . SECY HOARD: Side yard deficiency. Is there anything else? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: There's no parking deficiency? MR. NOVARR: No, no. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So it's existing front and sideyard deficiency. SECY HOARD: Correct. MR. TOMLAN: There's no parking deficiency even with eight? MR. NOVARR: No. MS. BAGNARDI: Are you keeping the garage? MR. NOVARR: Yes, in fact it's on my list of things to fix. The back wall is caved in on the garage. . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: John, I don 't want to short-circuit any comment that this board doesn't have the fine tuning that the planning and development board does as to the aesthetics. We're (undecipherable) quality. . .we need to find hardship in operating the building with only five tenants and we need to find a practical difficulties in doing anything about the existing. . .deficiencies. . .front and sideyard. . . this building would be hard to move? MR. NOVARR: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And your work-up of what has to be invested - (contd) CHAIRMAN WEAVER: in it in order to make the building safe from the elements has persuaded you that you'd have to have the income from at least eight tenants in order to support the investment. MR. NOVARR: That's correct. MS. BROWNELL: It costs 3,000 dollars a year to heat it. . . that's a lot of money. MR. NOVARR: We hope by insulating and stormwi'ndowing the building to cut those costs somewhat. But, if this house operates like my own. . .as fast as we cut those costs NYSEG will raise the prices on us some. I would like to try to. . . I 'll take two minutes more of your ti'me. . .I'll stop talking about the aesthetics of this. . .My theory of property in Lthaca is that if I 'm going to be a landlord, I 'd like to do it right. And I don't want to own any junky property. This is a beautiful home. It oughta be made nice. It's got all the qualities there, it just lacks a ton of maintenance. The hardship is in a sense wrapped up in the problems in the house has. Because as it stands now, it doesn't work as a home, neither from a heating point of view or a code point of view and what I hoped to try to persuade this board is that it would be a good thing if Cornell didn't own the house. It would be a good thing If I did. I am willing to work with the planning department to not just to fix this place up in the tradition of some landlords 82 (contd) MR. NOVARR: in town, but to make it a credit to the neighborhood. I 've even got a financial . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Let me ask you a question th_at'-s re-lated to that, this is in a historic district? MR. NOVARR: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anything about the renovation that would be more expensive because it is in the historic district. Given that. . .never mind your sensi'ti'vity about this grand structure.. . .but as a practi-cal matter doesorot cost you more to meet the requirements of the historic district? MR. NOVARR: Andrea Laczarski told me today that I coudn't go to work on the outside of the house without putting my plans past the landmark commission. When those plans go by them they will ask me, I believe, to fix the house in the way it was. built. In other words, if there"s a piece of molding missing I don't just nail up a board to cover the hole. I reproduce that piece of molding and put it on the house. So, to answer your question, yes. It's. . .to do it in the way the landmarks commission would like to see it done I have to spend more money to do it that way. MS. BROWNELL: We had to do that with a building,:we bought and it was really old. SECY HOARD: If the ch.ai'rman can lead the witness, I guess I can, too. -83- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I didn't know I was, but go ahead. SECY HOARD: Did you cover the time that the place has been for sale? MR. NOVARR: Yes, I mentioned that early on. SECY HOARD: Our files show that we've had 81 . . .82 calls for people interested in buying it for conversions to multiple dwellings, also for schools. . .each time lots of problems. . . MR. NOVARR: I will add, to give you a completely fair description of what I 'm up to, that neighborhood is currently up for consideration or they are filing for the neighborhood not to be the city historic district that it is, but a federal historic district or a state. It's worse, but you can get tax credit for the renovation of buildings in a state or federal historic district. If you are very careful about the way you do the work. Nothing's guaranteed, but I would make an attempt as long as I 'm going this far to document what I 'm up to so that if by chance this accreditation goes through and I 'm fortunate enough to get the state people in there to uphold my work that I might be eligible for those credits. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any further questions? MR. TOMLAN: Yes. MS. BROWNELL: Oh, we always have one of them in the crowd. -84- MR. TOMLAN: Cornell owns the land now? MR. NOVARR: Yes. MR. TOMLAN: . . .and you intend to lease it? MR. NOVARR: Yes this is a lease-back scheme whereby, I buy the building. . .they get the land. MR.TOMLAN: . . .and for how long do you intend to lease it? MR. NOVARR: My lease is written for 35 years—there are some hitches. . . MR. TOMLAN: . . .and those are. . . MR. NOVARR: That Cornell on one year's notice after year five can at any time buy the property back at market rate. . .they've got an odd way of figuring market rate which I 've changed somewhat to suit the particular needs of this deal —they have to show that it's for educational purposes ofcourse. . .anything that they do could conceivably be an educational purpose. It is unlikely, in my judgment, that Cornell will want this property back. They see themselves as bad property managers, at the moment. . .of this sort of property. They do not want to come in front of these boards any more. . .and it's generally. . .and you are apparently somewhat familiar with what they're doing. . .they're trying to unload the majority of their stuff over there across from the suspension bridge, but they are through this ground lease trying to protect a long term interest. My suspicion is that if they don't want the house now, they're not going to want it later. They're not interested in dealing with homes. -Pb (contd) MR. NOVARR: The thought has occurred to me that I might be putting myself in a position whereby, I 'm doing their work for them and that they could then come back. . .take the house in the sixth or seventh year and put eight people rather than five in. I don't think it's their urge. . .but, in fact, even if that should happen, I think everybody gains. Thank you. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any discussion of the board? (?) No. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do I hear a motion? MR. TOMLAN: I move-that the appeal number 1511 be approved that both the area variance and use grants: _ be approved for the following reasons: The fact being that the existing deficiencies, both front and sideyard are minimal and that there would be practical difficulties in complying with them. . .those deficiencies. Secondly, that financial hardship as incurred by Cornell was demonstrated and considerable investment will be necessary and that next there is adequate off-street parking provided. And fourthly, the property which has been for sale for some time when renovated will significantly aid the neighborhood. . . (?) : Do you want to have any condition on that? MR. TOMLAN: Yes, somehow Charlie I 'd like you to help me or tell me, either one, I think that 35 year lease should somehow (undeciphprable)as well . . .the landmark thing, per se, -66- (contd) MR. TOMLAN: may or may not go through. I',m kind of reluctant to put that down as-a. . . (?) Well , it's in a landmark zone now MR. TOMLAN: If you're going to comply with th.e landmark. .. MS. BROWNELL: It must. . .it has to. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: What I was asking the appellant about was that a further proof that hardship would exist in trying to preserve this building and renovate for the five tenants is indicated by the fact that it is in a district where it would bear the close scrutiny of the landmarks commission, and therefore, maintaining and preserving the building will be more expensive. . . MR. TOMLAN: I understand that before Barbara puts that down now, having talked historic preservation for a number of years knowing the tax (?) probably better than anybody in this room, just as a matter of point, it may be that if he gets his tax benefits, it wipes out that hardship completely, because the tax act will allow him to recoup whatever hardship may have incurred by the local legislationQsWk°:e�- CHAIRMAN WEAVER: My point is, that tonight he does not have any type of benefits and we're granting the variance on the condition that exists and had existed. MR. TOMLAN: You're not going to recognize that he's going for beyond anything beyond what he asks. MS. BROWNELL: It would be very doubtful that he'd get it anyways because it's not that easy to change city to state. . . -87- CHAIRMAN 87-CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It makes no difference on the probability of whether he does or doesn't. As far as our decision tonight it can't be based upon any future condition that makes this a more profitable enterprise. He might also go and get the assessment reduced and a whole number of other things that might benefit him, but it wouldn't alter our conditions tonight. This property has been on the market and has not been successfully sold over several attempts. And that the appellant has described to us a •greater expense, in fact, because of its historical importance. I 'm really just giving you a finding of fact supporting your finding that financial hardship exists. MR. TOMLAN: Right. Whatever number on it. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Two. MR. TOMLAN: Two. Right. Considerabhe investment necessary in the financial hardship demonstrated. By virtue of the fact of conforming to the local landmarks commission guidelines there will be additional expenses. I just want to make sure that we're not double-crossing ourselves. (Extraneous conversation) M Is there a second to that? M Second. SECY HOARD: In case 1511 four yes votes (Garbled conversation) End of tape. iI II � I , DO CERTIFY that I transcribed ii the minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing held on July 6, 1983 of Appeals numbered 1503, 1504 , 1505 , 1506 , 1508 , 1510 , j and 1511 , held at City Hall , City of Ithaca, New York; from � w recording tapes and notes provided by the Ithaca Building Depart- ment and that the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of I the minutes of the meeting on the above date , and the whole i! thereof has been transcribed to the best of my ability. i I i I � I o i a I l i Sworn to before me this i �! I i day of 1983 I !i Notary Public BARBARA C. RUANE Notary Public, State of New York No. 4524437 Qualified in Tompkins County G tlCommission expires March 30, i I � I I l� I I I i � I II � I� i