Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1984-03-05 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK MARCH 5, 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE APPEAL NO. 1539 Ithaca Friends Meeting 3 227 Willard Way APPEAL NO. 1539 Action of the Board 17 APPEAL NO. 1547 Raymond H. Kaaret 19 1113 East State Street APPEAL NO. 1547 Action of the Board 27 APPEAL NO. 1548 James 0. Garrison 28 810 East Seneca Street APPEAL NO. 1548 Action of the Board 36 APPEAL NO. 1549 Richard Bartlett (Burger King Rest.) 37 340 Elmira Road APPEAL NO. 1549 Action of the Board 41 APPEAL NO. 1550 John Novarr 42 103-09 Sage Place APPEAL NO. 1550 Action of the Board 55 APPEAL NO. 1551 William L. Reed, et al WITHDRAWN 56 307-09 Warren Place APPEAL NO. 1552 Reverend Afi B. Binta-Lloyd 56 510 West Clinton Street APPEAL NO. 1552 Action of the Board 61 APPEAL NO, 1553 Robert Leathers, Architect POSTPONED 216 & 218 Second Street APPEAL NO. 1554 Nick Plataniotis 62 315-17 College AVenue APPEAL NO. 1554 Action of the Board 72 r/ B2A MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 1 BOARD OF 20NIN6 APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK MARCH 5, 1984 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I have a couple of matters that are unrelated to the public hearing tonight that I would be pleased to have the Board dispose of before we start the hearing . The first matter is the recommended changes of the Rules and Regulations of the Board as recommended by Paul Bennett, the Assistant City Attorney . You' ve all had a copy of the revised rules, do I hear a motion? MS . COOKINGHAM: Mr . Chairman, I move that we accept the Rules and Regulations as proposed by the Assistant City Attorney , MR . TOMLAN: Second. MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a motion and a second, any discussion? Those in favor? 6 AYES MR. CHAIRMAN: Opposed? a Opposed. Now as I read both the old and the newly adopted rules, the new rules apply immediately and I believe will have no bearing on tonight 's proceedings but I would like to have it understood that we are operating under the new rules . The second matter was a question raised at last month's meeting and we all have a copy of a letter responding to that . With your permission I ' ll ask the Secretary to pin a copy of that response to the official minutes of that meeting so that both the question and the response will be a matter of the off- icial record. Is that acceptable? OFFICE OF ALLAN H. TREMAN (1899-1975) TWO STATE STREET JAMES J. CLYNES, JR. �0 '' ' �• ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14614 (716) 232.4440 1730 M STREET, N.w. JOAN B. HARMAN WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW (202) 223-9250 EDWARD C. HOOKS SENECA BUILDING, THIRD FLOOR 243 LAKE STREET POST OFFICE BOX 580 ELMIRA, N.Y. 14901 ,y� (607) 734-4114 SALLY T. TRUE �./S!/ Baca, TELEPHONE (607) 273-6444 February 24 , 1984 Chairman Charles Weaver Board of Zoning Appeals C/O Building Commissioner ' s Office City Hall Ithaca , New York 14850 Dear Chairman Weaver : I understand that the propriety of my practicing law before the Board of Zoning Appeals has been raised by Professor Richard Booth . Please advise Professor Booth that years ago I consulted with the office of Court Administration and the Administrative Judge and it was determined that it was perfectly proper for me to do so , since my appeal from the Board of Zoning Appeals would go to Supreme Court and not to City Court . City Court is only used for enforcement problems , and obviously , I am not going to the Board of Zoning Appeals on an enforcement problem. Having learned that this newcomer to the Board had questioned the matter , I once again consulted with the office of the Court Administration and the Administrative Judge and I am entitled to practice before the Board of Zoning . Appeals . Also, your board should realize that although my title is City Judge of the City of Ithaca , 1 am paid by the State and am a State Court Judge . Very truly yours , James "J . Clynes , Jr . JJC/ime Enclosure BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 2 MS . BAGNARDI : Yes . MR. BOOTH: Do you deem it would be advisable to ask the City Attorney for his opinion on that matter? MR. CHAIRMAN: Well I don' t think we have an issue before us and in the event that - we keep him busy enough - in the event that we have this issue or another similar one, it would seem to me appropriate that we raise the question and refer it at that time, is that acceptable? MR. BOOTH: All right . MR. CHAIRMAN: This is a formal hearing by the duly appointed Board of Zoning Appeals in several matters as listed in the official notice of this meeting . First I would like to identify the people here at the table, members of the Board and our Staff , TRACY FARRELL JEAN COOKINGHAM MICHAEL TOMLAN BETTE BAGNARDI RICHARD BOOTH CHARLES WEAVER, CHAIRMAN THOMAS D . HOARD, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD 8 BUILDING COMMISSIONER BARBARA RUANE, RECORDING SECRETARY CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The Board is operating under the provisions of the City Charter of the City of Ithaca and the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board shall not be bound by strict rules of evidence in the conduct of this hearing but the determination shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidence to sustain the same. We request that all participants come for-ward and identify themselves as to name and address and make use of these chairs that are left vacant here and the microphones . This will also BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 3 facilitate the recording of any testimony that we hear for the record. Any free comments from where you are sitting now will not be recorded and are a waste of our time and yours because they will not have an effect . Our procedure is to take the cases in the order in which they were filed and are listed on the offi- cial notice and we first hear the appellant and those who are in support of the application, followed by any person who wishes to oppose the application. Upon the completion of that procedure the Board has findings of fact and takes action and votes by written ballot and immediately upon receiving all of the ballots the results are announced. The Ordinance requires four affirm- ative votes to approve or four affirmative votes to pass any mo- tion on an issue . I believe that we are ready for the first case . SECRETARY HOARD: The first case, Mr . Chairman, is appeal number 1539, 227 WILLARD WAY : Appeal of Ithaca Friends Meeting for an area variance under Section 30 . 25, Column 14 (minimum setback requirement for rear yard), and Section 30 . 57 ( requirement for Certificate of Occupancy for a change in use) of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the conversion of the single-family dwelling at 227 WILLARD WAY to a church or meeting place. The property is located in an R-U ( residential, multiple-dwelling) use district in which the proposed use is permitted; however, under Section 30 . 57 an area variance must be obtained for the deficient rear yard setback before a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the new use. This appeal was heard by the Planning and Development Board at its December 1983 meeting, but that Board failed to make a recommendation; under Section 30 . 58, Paragraph C-6 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Zoning Appeals may now BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 4 act on the variance requested. This appeal was held over from the February 6, 1984 meeting of the Board at the request of the appellant . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there someone here to present this appeal? MR. RUFF : My name is David Ruff, I live at 105 W. Miller Road, Ithaca. The Ithaca Fiends Meeting has been told by Edwin Burke, who is the owner of this property, that this land will be deeded to the Friends Meeting upon his death and he has asked us if we would - it is his desire that we would use it as a meeting house . He has asked if we would go ahead with whatever arrangements were necessary to ensure that this was legal and everything was done according to the Ordinances that would apply. We have contacted the Building Commissioner ' s office and got a list of the things that we were required to do and we' ve carried out those things -we' ve updated the electrical system on the house, we' ve install- ed a fire detection system and the other thing was this variance. The variance itself would mean that the rear yard - which is, according to the law is supposed to have a depth of 34' and it has only a depth of 22' and the rear of the house - that boundary is bordered by a fraternity . The area itself is raised - the fraternity house is raised by a rock ledge and it is screened by a fence and we don' t anticipate this presenting any problem for the neighbors on the east side of the property. That ' s all . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions from the Board? MS . COOKINGHAM: Mr . Chairman, I ' d like to raise the question that this request for a zoning change is premature. 1 understand that Friends will not acquire title to this property until the BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 page 5 death of the present owner . That may be some years from now and the situation in the area could very well change in that period. MR . RUFF : We - it is true that we would not be getting title to that until his death, but we quite possibly would be making use of it as a meeting house before that time . MS . BAGNARDI : How many people currently occupy that house? MR. RUFF : Just one. Just the owner . MS . BAGNARDI : Just the owner . What is the membership of Ithaca Friends? MR. RUFF : It is around 80 people total . MS . COOKINGHAM: Mr . Chairman at this point I would like to - I ' m going to move that we not consider this request for a change in zoning because of the prematurity . Mr . Chairman, I would like to move that we not consider this appeal because it is premature . MR. TOMLAN: Second, for the sake of discussion. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We have a motion and a second. We are prepared for discussion. MR. BOOTH: Tom, is there anything in the Ordinance about how long a person has to effectuate a variance? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes, that if they got the variance and they didn' t act on it within six months, it would be lost . Now my understanding is that they would be using the property in the meantime. MR . BOOTH: As a meeting house? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes, and that they also have the authorization of the owner to make this appeal . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 6 MS . COOKINGHAM: I didn' t feel that the - Mr . Ruff had made that very clear . He said that "we may" - is he in fact going to be using it in six months . I think that is the critical issue . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Can you respond to that David? MR . RUFF : We will be using it as a meeting house for certain meetings . I don' t know that we will be having our Sunday morning worship meeting there but it will be used for other• meetings during the week and that ' s definitely planned. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We have two things, it seems to me. If we have an appellant with a case and our question whether he will avail himself of his rights under it is a matter of his concern. We couldn' t - other than remind him of the requirements of the law - we couldn' t - it seems to me - prevent him from pursuing his application if, in fact, he has been authorized by the owner to do so and the question to consider or not to consider is a matter upon which the Board ought to have very profound reason for refusing to hear the applicant in a timely fashion and I am aware and I suppose you all are that this case was scheduled in January and February and now is here to be heard in March. So as far as the owner and the interested party is concerned there has been a two month delay - by them, not by any action of this Board so it would seem appropriate that we consider the case if our action either positive or negative is of no avail but by inaction by the appellant, that is a matter for the enforcement officer, not for us it would seem. SECRETARY HOARD: I ' d like to clarify or correct what I said BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 7 earlier . It says "when a variance is granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals, a building permit to construct the building or part thereof for which the variance has been granted has not been obtained within one year from the day of the granting of the variance said variance shall become void. " So they have a year . MR. BOOTH: That ' s what I ,just found. SECRETARY HOARD: I thought I would beat you to it . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So twelve instead of six months - but otherwise it has the same effect . Is there any further discussion on this motion? MS . BAGNARDI : Then if he had life use of the house, apparently that is what - if they are going to be allowed to have meetings - does this indicate that he would have life use of the house? MR. RUFF : Yes . MR. BOOTH: My understanding is, it is not going to be deeded to Friends until this person passes away, is that true? MR. RUFF : That is true . MS . BAGNARDI : But in the meantime he will live there and you will proceed to have services? MR . RUFF : Right . MS . BAGNARDI : How many times a week? MR. RUFF : Right now we would be having the - once a week, for sure, on Wednesday evening we would be having services . Right now we have our Sunday morning worship service at Annabell Taylor and I am not sure exactly when we would be able to change to having that at the Burke property . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 8 MR. BOOTH: I take it there is no outside construction connected with this? MR. RUFF : Not at this time, no. That may be down the road in the future but that ' s . . . SECRETARY HOARD: Parking area MR . RUFF : Yes, parking area . MR. TOMLAN: At the present time . MR. RUFF : We would have to provide parking - off-street parking . MS . COOKINGHAM: Mr . Chairman, I call for the question . MR . CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? Those opposed? 4 opposed. The motion fails . Is there any other question of the appellant? MR. TOMLAN: You say there are eighty people in the congregation, do you have any idea what kind of traffic you would have by virtue of the number of automobiles you would have to accommodate? MR . RUFF : I would assume that we would be talking in the neighborhood - at a peak meeting of thirty to forty - that would not be the average meeting, that would be the . . . . I understand from Mr . Hoard that we would be required by the City to provide one parking space for every ten people in attendance at that meeting . That particular number of spaces we can provide already without any changes to the property . There is adequate room on the south side of the building to provide quite a few more spaces upwards of thirty spaces if we so desire. VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE : It .is very difficult to hear back here. BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 9 MR. TOMLAN: Is that mike on? MR. RUFF : It says it is on . SECRETARY HOARD: You might move it closer to you . MR. RUFF : Is that better? VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE : Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We' ll have to get an official monitor in the back row, can you hear? Could you hear Mr . Ruff? VOICES : Please speak up . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I can only recommend at the next Common Council meeting that you remind them that the sound system hasn' t been improved in the last ten years . Any further questions from the Board? All right, thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? Yes . MR . PROTO: My name is Frank Proto, I ' m the alumni advisor for Alpha Sigma Phi Fraternity which is the fraternity to the east of this property that is in question. I want to remind the Board also, we did not receive a copy of this notification and I understand that anyone within 200' was supposed to and one of the residents was kind enough to let me borrow hers Just now. While we are not formally against this proposal, we are concerned about being for it because we are a fraternity house and we have been there since 1912 and our major concern, although we don' t see any problem with them as neighbors, we, of course, are concerned about ten years down the road, twenty-five years down the road or whatever it happens to be, the house consists - our house con- sists right now of thirty-two live-in brothers . It is a frater- BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 10 nity, there are nights when they are a little rowdy, there are days when they are a little rowdy . Generally we try to be re- spective and respectful citizens of the community but this is a church, essentially, that is going in there. We do not have a problem - that is why I am on the pro side of this proposal - we don' t have a problem with the setback because it would not affect us whatsoever . But I want to bring to this Board' s concern and I would like to have it entered into the minutes that we are con-- cerned in another regard and that is that we will try to be good neighbors but we also hope that in the future whoever occupies the church - the individuals that are here this evening may not be the people who are in control several years from now and we' d like to remind this Board of that . With me tonight is the Presi- dent of our Corporation because we own our house as a corporation and the President of the fraternity and they have agreed to an- swer questions that you might have. But that is our primary con- cern - that of what happens several years down the road and I ' d like very much to get that on the record. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any questions from the Board? Thank you Mr . Proto. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposi- tion of this application? Come forward please. MRS . REICHMANN: My name is Mrs . Reichmann, Lily Reichmann and I speak both for my husband and also for a neighbor at 225 Willard Way who is a direct neighbor of the Burkes and our main concern is - I mean we have nothing against the group - but our main BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 11 concern is that it is a very narrow street, it used to be a two-way street, it is hardly a one-way street now because there is so much parking . And even if the Society converts the beautiful front yard into fifteen parking places, I mean it would destroy completely the residential character of our street and we are a dead-end street, a little loop - we have hardly any room to navigate now and with a whole congregation coming in, even if it is only eighty or one hundred people, it seems to me a big problem. As I say, we have nothing against the society of Friends - they are a wonderful group of people but we thought it had been - the residence has been a family dwelling since its inception - since Austin Willard built it, for whom Willard Way was called - I mean named - and there were only one-family people in that house until now - when it is supposed to become (unintel- ligible) We thought there were enough affluent people around, I think, who could buy this house. The last tenants, before the Burkes, were a father, a mother and a son. I don't know how many bedrooms this house has, maybe as many as six, I don' t know. Ours has five. The Tierneys, on the same street - five bedrooms . They are all large houses and I think there are enough affluent people still around who would buy this place and the Quakers could build a meeting house or rent one . This is our main objec- tion . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions? Yes, Dick . MR. BOOTH: There is a fraternity house across Willard Way? MRS . REICHMANN: Right, correct . I don' t know if any Sigma Nus BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 12 are here tonight . MR. BOOTH: Does that use contribute substantially to the parking traffic difficulties on your street? MRS . REICHMANN: Occasionally yes . But they have their own parking place behind Sigma - they don' t always use it but they do have a parking place. Of course it contributes and some of the houses have tenants and that contributes but I think - and especially to destroy the yard and making it a blacktop parking lot out of this beautiful residential place, it seems to me very sad. And to most of us on the street . There are other people from Willard Way who are here and might want to confirm this . Thank you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to be heard? Yes . MR. O' LEARY : My name is Steve O' Leary and I ' m the president of Sigma Nu Fraternity and that is the fraternity directly across the way from the Burke residence. Like Rock Ledge or Alpha Sigma Phi, we didn' t also not receive notification of this meeting and again I got this one from the neighbors across the street . I don' t know if you got a copy of the letter that was sent to City of Ithaca, City Building Department from my property association which is the organization which owns Sigma Nu and we are opposed to this variance for a number of reasons . Do you want me to read this? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We received a copy of that letter . MR. O' LEARY: Okay . The few - the big reason, again, is the park- BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 13 ing 1 know Sigma Nu does create a lot of parking problems . We have parties on nights and we try to tell all of our guests not to park on Willard Way because there is such a big problem on that street . I don' t know if you ever looked up the Ithaca Po- lice records about parking violations on that street - they would be too numerous to count I am sure. I know a big event such as Homecoming and such - we have a lot of alumni come back -the par- king is - you can' t even move on the street . That ' s one of the biggest concerns - again with that . There is a "lookout" down - that goes off to the side of our property and to the Burkes which overlooks the water falls . It is a nice area and a lot of high school people, I know, go up there - they come up, they park in the loop - causing a lot of problems there - they will sit back there in the loop and go down to look out and drink and throw balls around what have you. I don' t know what they would actual- ly do with a new parking lot right across the street from us . I know we have numerous problems with them already -just with caus- ing bottle throwing, music and what have you at all times of the night . So the street is really not made for that kind of traffic . Again, as Mrs . Reichmann said, this is gorgeous and turning it into a blacktop is really not what anybody in Sigma Nu would like to see and that ' s . . . . are there any questions? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It is refreshing to hear a fraternity complain about loud music and bottles . MR. O' LEARY: Oh we like to sleep occasionally . MR. BOOTH: I have a question. How many units - or how many BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 14 people live in the fraternity? MR. O' LEARY : In the Sigma Nu there is fifty-four . MR. BOOTH: How many cars are customarily associated with the fraternity? MR. O' LEARY : At the present time we have probably about twen- ty-two. We park a lot in our front driveway and we have a large parking area in the back and that still doesn' t accommodate all of the cars and the front half of Willard Way is - there is al- lowed street parking on the right side of the street and that makes it so that you can only squeeze one car by at a time and a lot of our brothers take up these parking spaces on the road be- cause we have just a few too many cars for the spaces already as it is . Down at the end of Willard Way there is no parking al- lowed along the street whatsoever although many people - not just high school people but people who like to - in the daytime -like to go down to the lookout and - it is a gorgeous view from up there - if you have never seen it come on up . It 's really nice - it is right above Fall Creek House - you can see it from the bridge going across there - it is right above the water falls MR. BOOTH: Obviously it is the major contributor, I would guess, to traffic problems on Willard Way. A somewhat ironic position. MR. O' LEARY : Yes, it is true - well we have been there since 1908 so we' ve always been there and we' ve had problems with parking and I think anything more than that is going to make it unbearable . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 15 speak in opposition to this application? SECRETARY HOARD: We do have a letter that was referred to . This is from Russell C. Marron, Jr . "Dear Members of the City Board of Planning and Development . I am treasurer of the Gamma Theta Property Association which owns the real estate commonly known as 230 Willard Way, Ithaca, New York on which presently sits the Sigma Nu Fraternity House. I am also an attorney and am author- ized on behalf of the property association to state that we op- pose the application for the requested variance . This opposition is based on the fact that the area and its surrounding homes and buildings is a good and substantial residential area and that to allow a variance of this type is exactly the opposite of what the existing ordinance affecting this situation wishes to avoid. If this variance is allowed, it will create additional traffic on Willard Way, it will create parking problems and it will violate the reliance of those who are owners of property in the immediate area to accept a use and a property deviation from the code which will not help the beauty and desirability of the other existing homeowners' properties . 1 am an attorney duly licensed to prac- tice law in the State of New York and will not appear personally in opposition. I would appreciate hearing as soon as possible • the determination of the Board of Planning and Development if this request for- a variance is granted . Very truly yours, /s/ Russell C . Marron, Jr . " This brings up a question that was raised in a couple of cases on notification . The requirement of the Ordinance is that the appellant notify the property owners as 9 BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 16 listed in the Assessment records and Sigma Nu was listed to con- tact Russell C . Marron, Jr . of Rochester . Alpha Sigma Phi was listed as Maxfield, Randolph and Carpenter . So that may explain why the Fraternities didn' t get the letters directly . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 17 The Board considered the appeal of the Ithaca Friends Meeting for an area variance to permit the conversion of the single-family dwelling at 227 Willard Way to a church or meeting place. The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . TOMLAN: I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1539 . MS . COOKINGHAM: I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1) The character of the neighborhood would be adversely affected by the increased traffic as there are already off-street parking problems in the area. 2) There is a substantial rear yard deficiency . 3) Testimony from neighbors indicates they feel the conversion would be harmful to the neighborhood. VOTE : 3 Yes; 3 No Request denied for lack of 4 affirmative votes . #1539-A MR . BOOTH: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1539 . MS . FARRELL : I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1) The existing building has been there historically and would be very difficult to move to bring it into conformance with the rear yard requirement . 2) While there are important considerations of parking and traffic associated with this use, there is sufficient land BZA MINUTES OF MARCH S, 1984 Page 18 available on this property to make reasonable provision for parking required by City Ordinances . 3) On the basis of the evidence that we have, this use would be compatible with the character of this neighborhood. VOTE : 3 Yes; 3 No Motion failed for lack of 4 affirmative votes . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Rage 19 SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1547 : Appeal of Raymond H. Kaaret for an area variance under Section 30 . 25, Columns 10, 11, 13 of the Zoning Ordinance for lot coverage exceeding the maximum permitted, and deficient setbacks for both front yards and one side yard, to permit the construction of a garage in the front yard at 1113 EAST STATE STREET . The property is located in an R-lb ( residential, single family) use district where the existing use as a single-family house is permitted; however, the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit can be issued for the proposed garage . MR . KAARET : My name is Raymond Kaaret and I live at 1113 E . State Street and ,jointly own the property along with my wife, my four kids and my dog . I constructed this house, you may be fami- liar with it - it is at the corner of E . State and Giles Street which is a California redwood and stone. The lot itself is, of course, somewhat smaller than you people might want but that pri- marily was caused by the city itself . When it relocated Giles Street back in the 30' s . I was not here then, I was out in the California redwoods . So they ran Giles Street up to meet Cornell rather than run it up to Woodcrest Avenue. And then also since I constructed that house, I constructed it myself, I designed it too - the zoning has been changed from R-1 to R-2 . I might add that on Giles Street - on that particular block, my address is on East State but actually the front of the house really fronts on Giles - and there is - on Giles Street there is no curb, there is no sidewalk nor is there likely to be in place -a curb or a sid- ewalk simply because the area is fully built up . (unintelli- BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 20 Bible) my neighbor down (unintelligible), Mrs . Erie J . Miller is across the street . That really constitutes pretty much the extent of it . In the other direction there is the six-mile creek (unintelliglble) . So there isn' t much likelihood of any signifi- cant change - in other words it is a built up area. The real problem I have and the reason I am asking for this eight foot setback rather than the twenty-five is simply because of the smallness of the lot and secondly because of the very steep slope in both directions . In other words going down hill from (unin- tell . ) going south down Giles Street is a very significant slope - it drops something on the order of sixteen to seventeen feet over the length of my lot which measures some hundred and eight feet (unintelligible) as long as there is an entrance . Also it slopes in the other direction going from east to west . In other words from Giles Street inwards, coming towards the city there is a significant slope. That roughly measures some eight feet . The point is if I attempted to place the garage twenty-five feet in from Giles Street I would have - it really varies - you would really have me, in fact, up in the corner - a very low corner . I would have a steep driveway - an alternative if I (unintelligi- ble) I would have to bring in literally tons of fill dirt and create in effect a tremendous dike there, so to speak which would trap water and so forth. The point is, it isn' t really practical to have the garage at the required setback it simply would not work . So what I am really asking is simply to extend the present concrete slab that I have there upon which I presently park my BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 21 seventeen foot long car . And that slab would provide the drive- way plus an apron that would be added of approximately two feet . So it would have roughly from the gutter, measuring in, I would have a driveway of approximately twenty-two and one-half or twen- ty-three feet . The reason I mention this is because at the Plan- ning Commission meeting the question was raised about the danger of backing out of the garage into Giles Street . Well there is no such danger because I already park my car in there and there is a clear view both up and down the street and if I had an apron of approximately two feet extending that . . . (changed tape here so the recorder missed the rest of this sentence) So I believe that from a practical standpoint it is necessary to move the setback to approximately eight feet from the property line to avoid the impossibility, really of filling in there or alternatively having a very steep driveway . And, of course, the other element, if I do place the garage where the requirements would indicate that it should be, I would have no effective lot - usable lot - it simply would be destroyed because the so-called back yard is really only about seven or, eight feet wide. And I might add, too, the bound- ary, -the property lines with the adjoining property on East State Street as well as the southern property line adjoining Mr . and Mrs . Coles ' property are rather steep embankments, in other words I would have to fill in in order to level it out a little bit to make it usable after having constructed the house itself . So to require me to place it back there simply would not, in any way be feasible, I think it would tend to destroy the property in BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 22 terms of its utility and also even aesthetically because you would have a rather extended driveway there and, of course I am a senior citizen, I don' t want to be shoveling snow off an extended driveway, I want to keep that to a minimum. Of course, I won' t be around forever, I don' t know who will take over the property after I leave. I do have support of my neighbors, particularly the Coles who are most directly affected . They do live south - in other words down Giles Street . Their address is 1004 Giles -they are my very adjacent neighbors and you may have in your files a letter from them supporting my appeal for this variance . And then across the street the only other neighbor who would be in any way directly affected is Mrs . Erie J . Miller . Well she came over- after she received my letter and gave me verbal support I did not ask her to write a letter because of her somewhat advan- ced age and I didn' t want to put her to any trouble. She did indicate that she is quite willing to support the building of this garage. She watched me build the house, which I think was well done . And, of course, any garage that I would build would be harmonious in terms of conforming with the design of my own house. I wouldn' t want to, in any way, diminish its - what I would really call beauty . To me a California redwood - with Ith- aca stones is truly a beautiful combination. I am not planning to build the garage with those but it would look very much the same in terms of general appearance . So I really believe that even though the garage would project slightly beyond the house as presently located, which I might add is not twenty-five feet BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 23 back, it is something on the order of seventeen feet back from the property line . Eight feet setback for the garage would not be unduly blatant, it would not cause any negative impact upon the general appearance of the neighborhood, either on my own pro- perty or adjoining properties . And partly the reason is simply because we do have the number of trees there. They would tend to disguise or hide to some extent - or even actually embellish the appearance of this proposed garage. The only thing I would say in conclusion here is I really believe that the spirit of the zoning laws will have been met if this variance is granted. My neighbors are, once again, giving me support . I know of nobody who will object to it seriously if at all for that matter and you can rest assured that the design would be in conformity with the present excellent appearance of the general neighborhood. Thank you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you. Are there any questions? MR . BOOTH: Two questions . I am not asking them because I suggest this is possible but I want to hear your response . Why not put the garage right behind the house and not at the southern edge of the lot? MR. KAARET : Behind the house? MR , BOOTH: Immediately south of the house. MR. KAARET : Well I do have a projecting - well first I have a tree that is in the way - a locust tree - which is quite a beau- tiful tree and in the springtime - to me - it has the smell of orange blossoms, believe it or not . If I were to do that I would BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 24 have to cut the tree, that would be a serious loss . And also there would be a steep embankment there immediately coming off Giles Street - you go down an embankment . (unintelligible) the ground is almost on the level with Giles, then there is a very steep embankment . Also at the rear of my house I do have a porch that extends - I have a door out of my own bedroom that I can see the entire south hill, Ithaca College and the entire south hill and underneath, below that porch I do have a twelve foot patio which, I might add, (unintelligible) because of the steep slope of the existing (unintelligible) drops approximately three feet so that it simply isn' t feasible . MR. BOOTH: What about building the garage back, not eight feet, but seventeen feet? That is as far back as the existing . . . MR . KAARET : Once again, the drop is so precipitous there MR . BOOTH: If you went that far that would get you into the drop portion of the . . . MR . KAARET : Oh yes . In fact I actually checked the heights - the elevation I should say, taking what would in effect be the north east corner of the proposed garage and then measuring down to the southwest corner of my lot - that drops eight feet and that is roughly only forty feet from that diagonal line . Even with the garage itself - twenty-two feet - it drops four feet . In other words, if you look at the property . . MR . BOOTH: I have looked at the property . MR . KAARET : Yes - and visualize where you could put it - it would be extremely difficult to do anything other than what I am BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 25 proposing . MS . BAGNARDI : Mr . Kaaret, how long ago did you build the house? MR . KAARET : I built this during the period 1963 and 64 and 65 . MS . BAGNARDI : And it always has been a single family home and it currently is now? MR . KAARET : Yes it has . And I understand under present regulations, it has to remain so . MS . BAGNARDI : Was any portion of the house ever a garage? MR . KAARET : Yes it was . I have four children . Because of this very steep incline I built it - a driveway which still is there . MS . BAGNARDI : Okay . MR. KAARET : And it went into the house. I had a built-in garage . But we found that it really wasn' t feasible to use it . My wife, I shouldn' t talk this way - the clutch, I should say, on the English Ford that she had at the time got burned out at least three times, in trying to back out of the garage, it was so steep . And also my children were growing up and I needed another roam so we decided to stop burning clutches and really get ahold of the problem and make a bedroom out of it . So now it really is it was made into a bedroom . MS . BAGNARDI : So when did you enclose that area? MR , KAARET : That was some - I did get approval from the Building Commissioner . I think - I know it was - it was 1972 . Yes it was in 1972 and in the summer - in August 1972 . MS . BAGNARDI : So since 1972 until this present time you' ve used the concrete slab to park your car? BZA MINUTES OF MARCH S, 1964 Page 26 MR. KAARET : Yes, well in fact I had the concrete slab ever since I constructed the house because the Building Commissioner and generally the attitude in those days was somewhat more informal than it is today . This is not necessarily a dig at you people, it might be a compliment . In other words, I did have permission to put the slab where it is and I did that almost immediately upon completion of the house because we had two cars . I had a very large car- at the time. It was an eight cylinder Mercury station wagon. MS . BAGNARDI : Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? Do we have any mail Tom? SECRETARY HOARD : No sir . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 27 The Board considered the appeal of Raymond H. Kearet for an area variance to permit the construction of a garage in the front yard at 1113 EAST STATE STREET . The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . COOKINGHAM: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1547 . MS . BAGNARDI : I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT : 1) The proposed garage doesn' t change the character of the area . 2) The location of the garage and the area required by the Ordinance presents a practical difficulty . 3) The area requirements could not be met without undue hardship . 4) It also appears very difficult to move the garage back even as far as the existing house, that is the seventeen foot line. VOTE : 6 Yes; 0 No VARIANCE REQUEST GRANTED BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 28 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Can we hear the next case please? SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1548, 810 East Seneca Street : Appeal of James 0. Garrison for an area var- iance under Section 30 . 25, Columns 4, 6, and 14 of the Zoning Ordinance for deficient off- street parking, deficient lot size and defi- cient rear yard depth, to permit the conver- sion of an apartment house containing three dwelling units at 810 EAST SENECA STREET to a cooperative dwelling . The property is located in an R-3b ( residential, multiple dwelling) use district in which the proposed use is permit- ted; however, under Section 30 . 57 an area vari- ance must be obtained for the listed deficien- cies before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the new use . MR. PFANN: My name is George Pfann, Jr . , I am an attorney . I represent Mr . lames Garrison, who is the prospective purchaser of this property . We are here asking for an area variance and Jim will go into all the details . MR . GARRISON: Basically the current house is at the upper corner of Seneca and Eddy Street for those of you who didn' t have a chance to see it . The house at the corner of the two streets is used for three apartments currently, eight residents in those three apartments . Let me show you the interior layout to give you an idea of what the problems are. The first floor of the house - can everyone see that? It has a living room, a bedroom in the back, a dining area in the front and a kitchen area and then stairs that go up to a landing and up into the second floor . In order to turn this house into three apartments a number of years ago, someone put a door across the top of this landing and BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 29 then on the outside porch here, built a side porch up the side and another entrance to go into the landing and up to the second and third floor . The second floor of the . . . people entered, came up to the second floor and where the red lines were was an artificial wall built across a small hallway with a door so that this became one of the apartment units for four persons . There was a refrigerator, sink and a stove put in this room, natural gas stove, put in this room back here (pointing to diagram) one of the other bedrooms was for two people, one person - one per- son, making a total of four on that particular floor . Because of the door there, the persons could continue up the stairs to the third floor to the third apartment . The apartment then - you entered through the door here (pointing to the diagram) in this large room there was a stove, a refrigerator, and a sink also placed and there was two persons then occupied this third apart- ment . Now at some point in time in the past., and I don' t know when, but prior to June of last year the second floor wall was removed and the sink, stove and refrigerator removed from the second and third floor . In June of last year, my daughter and seven ,others from her freshman dorm got together and rented the building together and have been occupying it since then in the eight bedrooms that exist in the building, using the kitchen as a single occupancy . What we are asking for is a change then from a three bedroom unit to a coop unit - the same number of residents but without having separate stoves, basically kitchens, on the second and third floor . In addition to that, currently there is BZA MINUTES OF MARCH S, 1984 Page 30 space for one parking, one car parked on the outside. What we are proposing doing is making available in the back yard, two additional spaces by - the yellow blocks here - by putting a stone driveway into the back yard so that there would be a total of three - could be three cars - versus the current space which is basically - there is a little stone left over here in the front yard and one car can park in the front yard. There has been a car there for the last month, it ' s been pulled to the back but, for example, last week during the thaw they couldn' t get the car because it was just mud - there is not anything there - but we wanted to make sure that we could, in fact, get the cars in there so we have a car that we' ve been putting back there in the back lot . That ' s basically what we are asking . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So as now operated, this has one kitchen? MR . GARRISON: It has one kitchen on the first floor . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And one bath? MR. GARRISON: No, there are three baths, one bath on each floor and a half bath in the lower level . There is three and one-half baths in the house - three full baths and one half bath . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Does this new arrangement allow for the remov- al of that pipe supported porch addition, stairway or whatever -appendage? MR . GARRISON: Yes it does . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Will that be a part of your revamping or . . . MR. GARRISON: Well we don' t have the final survey yet back, but I believe that that actually is not even on the property - that BZA MINUTES OF MARCH S, 1984 Page 31 that goes over the adjoining property . The intention would be that that would be removed - that side appendage, for lack of a better word, would be removed and the house would be - really taken back to the original . The house originally was a single- family dwelling, I understand someone, X number of years ago, was ,just a man and a woman, and they decided to rent out the se- cond and third floor and they are the ones that put in the door and then started this apartment that you see on the second and third floor of the house. What we are really doing is taking the house back to the original house with eight bedrooms, plus a liv- ing room, plus a dining room, plus a single kitchen this time. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well do I understand the record to show that this was a multiple dwelling and as a coop apartment, it will be a multiple dwelling? MR. GARRISON: That is correct . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It won' t be a conversion? j MR. GARRISON: No . It is currently - it has a current certifi- cate that is good for another year for three apartments on the scheme that I showed here - that is what the certificate was is- sued on for a total of eight people . And we are not - all we are talking about is changing it from the three apartment, eight peo- ple, to a co-op, eight people, with the addition of two parking spaces and the removal of the appendage from the side. And the removal of the appendage is what I consider to be fire hazards -having stoves on the second and third floor of an older struc- ture like this, personally I don' t think it is the safest thing BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 32 to do, particularly when you block the hallway - it is a small hallway, putting artificial wooden barrier across that is not the best thing either, in the internal structure. MS . BAGNARDI : You' ve owned the property since 1982 or 83 rather? MR . GARRISON: No . I am a prospective purchaser of the property . If this were to pass then I would purchase the property under a contract that has been signed with the present owner . MS . BAGNARDI : When were those photographs taken? MR . GARRISON: They were taken within the last two weeks . MS . BAGNARDI : Could we see them? MR. GARRISON: Certainly, yes ma' am. Four of the students in there are engineers and you can tell - they did all of the work on that . MS . BAGNARDI : I am familiar with the house . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions from members of the Board? And it is your proposal to provide the three parking spaces? MR . GARRISON: Yes sir . That is part of what we are applying for . MR . BOOTH: So there would not be a deficiency of parking spaces? MR . GARRISON: Yes there would be a deciency because - my understanding is on a Co-op you need one for each two persons - so we have eight people so we need four parking spaces . It is physically not possible to get any more parking spaces on that property . MR . BOOTH: So it will be deficient by one? BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 33 MR. GARRISON: We will still be deficient by one . Right now we are deficient by two . MR . BOOTH: That ' s right . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? You and your attorney would consider a conditional variance on 'the removal of that alternate exit as a friendly restriction? MR . GARRISON: Absolutely. MS . FARRELL * I have a question . Have all of those partitions been removed now? MR . GARRISON: Yes . All the partitions and the appliances . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: We are restricted to zoning considerations alone here but you understand that there may be building code or multiple residence code requirements for fire separations and that sort of thing that are not a matter before this Board . Our approval will be an approval on zoning matters only . MR . GARRISON: Right . We had an inspection by the Building Inspection Office and there were certain deficiencies noted which also obviously, have to be corrected before they would issue the Certificate. Without the Certificate the house is not worth anything to me . MR . TOMLAN: On your diagram here, how much space is there between the building lot and the edge of the porch there, any idea? I mean are the drawings to scale? MR . GARRISON: Pretty much, yes . This is an embankment . . . MR . TOMLAN: I guess I am concerned with how wide is the driveway from here to here (pointing to the diagram . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 34 MR . GARRISON: At this point the driveway is probably ten feet or maybe twelve . MR. TOMLAN: So that in fact one car could park there but another may not be able to get past? MR. GARRISON: You can get by . We tried that . MR. PFANN: I believe it is at least twelve feet because. . . MR. GARRISON: Twelve feet - whatever it is, we put a car there and drove another car past it . MR . TOMLAN: I see . MR . GARRISON: There is an embankment there and for sure . . Actually we only expect one car to be at the house but what we are doing is providing for three vehicles . I had to give certain things in in order to go through this too . My daughter has twisted my arm. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? Thank you . Anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? MS . FARRELL : I have a questions . If this is granted and it is for eight people, the parking - there is supposed to be four parking places, would the size of the bedrooms indicate that they could put more than eight people in the house? It would get a certificate for eight people? SECRETARY HOARD: For an eight person Co-operative because of the limit on parking . MS . FARRELL : Okay, so if it changed it would have to get another BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 35 variance? SECRETARY HOARD: We would place that condition on it . MR. BOOTH: But a change would have to go through you or I mean through your office? SECRETARY HOARD: And back through you . MR . BOOTH: Even as to the number of people? SECRETARY HOARD: Sure . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: On an eight person Co-op - if approved we would be approving an eight person Co-op with a parking deficiency of one, increased personnel would bring on additional parking re- quirements and in fact we can be precise in our granting . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1884 Page 36 The Board considered the appeal of James 0. Garrison for an area variance to permit the conversion of an apartment house containing three dwelling units at 810 EAST SENECA STREET to a cooperative dwelling . The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . FARRELL : I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1548 with conditions 1 ) limiting the occupancy to an eight person Cooperative and 2) removal of the nonconforming addition on the west side of the house. MR. TOMLAN: I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) It would improve the parking situation in the area . 2) It would not negatively affect the character of the neighborhood . 3) The deficiencies are existing and meeting them would require moving the building . VOTE : 6 Yes; 0 No AREA VARIANCE GRANTED BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 37 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May we hear the next case please? SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1549, 340 ELMIRA ROAD: Appeal of Richard Bartlett for an area variance under Section 30 . 25, Column 11, of the Zoning Ordinance for a deficient front yard to permit an addition to the front of the Burger King Restaurant at 340 ELMIRA ROAD . The proposed use is permitted in the B-5 (business) use district in which the property is located; however, since the addition will extend into the required front yard the appellant must obtain an area variance under Section 30 . 57 for the deficient front yard that will result before a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the addition . MR . BARTLETT : I 'm Richard Bartlett, President of Bart-Rich En- terprises who currently has a Burger King Restaurant at 340 Elmi- ra Road. I would like to appeal to the Board for an area vari- ance to add a greenhouse to the existing building that we now occupy . We feel that it is impossible to move the existing buil- ding which would create a hardship . We feel this is infringing upon the setback more than anything else . We realize that it does necessitate an area variance . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do you want to speak to the need for the greenhouse? MR . BARTLETT : More than anything else, it is to keep up with our current image . We have been there approximately four years now and we would like to do some remodelling, upgrading of our own buildings, riot only to update our building but the total area on the Elmira Road. BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 38 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any questions? MR. TOMLAN: Is there any reason why the new addition couldn' t be made flush with the foremost front line of the present building? MR. BARTLETT : If we did that we would lose the total effect of the greenhouse . We are trying to comply with the existing struc- ture there . MR . TOMLAN: So you are saying that the unit is a pre-fab unit in some sense or it (unintelligible) and what you are going to do is bring it into line? MR. BARTLETT : That ' s right, that is correct . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: What are the dimensions of that, I don' t see them on this plan? MR. BARTLETT : They are right there. . . . MS . BAGNARDI : How many more people will that area seat? Will that be a sitting area or will that be just a . . . . MR. BARTLETT : Yes, in fact we are going to rearrange the inside we are going to relocate the existing salad bar - we are going to relocate it . What we are going to do is going to even lessen the seating capacity . We feel we have ample seating right now. MS . BAGNARDI : So what will you, indeed, have in that greenhouse area? Plants and . . . . MR . BARTLETT : There will be some seating, we feel that we will have just about fourteen seats in that immediate area . Some in the greenhouse and some in a new area that we will create . MS . BAGNARDI : Okay, thank you . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 39 MR, BOOTH: When was the Burger king built? MR. BARTLETT : October of 79 . It was an existing building that we remodelled . MR . BOOTH: It was an existing building? MR . BARTLETT : That is correct . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? MR. BOOTH: I ' m still not clear why you couldn' t build this without going over the setback line. Is that because it is a pre-fab unit, it only comes in a certain size? MR . BARTLETT : That, and in order to keep the affect and have the overhead glass we need that . We are using part of the existing soffit that is there now . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Did I recognize this as - this sets out from the eaves of the existing building, 5' 7" and will be 2 ' into the setback requirement, is that correct? MR. BARTLET : A minimum of 6" and we feel a maximum of 22" . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So it varies but the maximum would be 2 ' at the most extreme, is that right? MR. BARTLETT : That is correct . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And at the north end it would be inches? MR . BARTLETT : That ' s right . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions?. Thank you . Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? Please come up . MR. CUTTING: I am Dave Cutting, the owner of that property. It was Carroll ' s Restaurant, actually, in ' 68. It was vacant for BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 40 about two years and then Burger King took it over and really did an excellent job in remodelling - they spent $200, 000 . 00 and they made it a very, very nice facility . We had a meeting of the El- mira Road Association about a month ago and the management came and discussed it with the owners of the properties along the El- mira Road and all of us felt that it would be a nice addition . In fact I think the entire Elmira Road has been upgraded tremen- dously in the last ten years and we have a group that we discuss this type of operation with and the changes that are made on the road and we think we can continue to make the Elmira Road a much more viable place for businesses . And the group, in its entirety felt that this would be a real plus for the neighborhood . Thank you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions? Thank you. Anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? (no one) BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 41 The Board considered the request of Richard Bartlett for an area variance to permit an addition to the front of the Burger King Restaurant at 340 ELMIRA ROAD. The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . TOMLAN: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1549 . MS . BAGNARDI : I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1) The deficiency created is so small as to be negligible . 2) The proposed alterations will not affect the character of the neighborhood . 3) Moving the building to some other location from where it is now built presents a practical difficulty and makes compliance impossible . VOTE : G Yes; 0 No AREA VARIANCE REQUEST GRANTED BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 42 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May we hear the next case . SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1550, 103-09 SAGE PLACE : Appeal of John Novarr for an area variance under Section 30 . 25, Column 13, of the Zoning Ordinance for a deficient side yard to permit the conversion of the single family home at 103-09 SAGE PLACE to a rooming house . The property is located in an R-3a (residential-multiple dwelling) use district, in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 the appellant must obtain an area variance for the existing deficiency listed before a building permit and a Certificate of Compliance can be issued for the conversion . MR. NOVARR: I ' m going to pass out plans . They are a little on the sketchy side but they show basically what we plan to do . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: While you are doing that, the one side yard deficiency is the east line? SECRETARY HOARD: The east line, yes . The reason for that is that the property frontage is on State Street even though the house faces Sage Place, the front yard, under the Ordinance shows a State Street front yard . Could you identify yourself for the record? MR . NOVARR: I ' m John Novarr, the prospective purchaser of 103 and 109 Sage Place. I have just one set of the original plans for the house here. I brought them along just in case there were any questions concerning just the house . The plans that I have handed to you are the plans for the building basically - that are connected to the house. It is a kind of complicated set of buil- BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 43 dings that are generally quite narrow and ar•e about 160 ' long and at the moment are all interconnected, in other words it is pos- sible to start in the room that is closest to State Street and walk all the way through the buildings until you get to the room that is closest to Seneca Street . So if there are any questions about the house, I ' ve got the plans right here for you . The Bai- ley house and the buildings which are connected to it were once all part of the Bailey property . In 1945 Liberty Hyde Bailey gifted the horitorium and the carriage house - those are the two buildings closest to Seneca Street - to Cornell University . I am buying the Bailey House from the Bailey estate and I am obtaining the adjoining buildings from Cornell University . I will be trad- ing the land under the Bailey Estate Buildings to Cornell for their buildings . I will then own all the buildings, Cornell will own all the land and thirty (30) years after this agreement, Cor- nell will get possession of the buildings, thereby owning every- thing . I will have a thirty year lease from Cornell for the par- cels on which the buildings sit . The Cornell side is presently being used for storage space and the Bailey side has always been used as a single family house. I would like to use the combined property as multi-family . The entire property which is approxi- mately one-half an acre, is zoned R-3a (multi-family) and meets all requirements for multi-family use except one five foot set- back yard - sorry - one five foot sideyard setback . The uphill side, which is the east side of the buildings, sits on the prop- erty line . There is a practical difficulty in moving the build- BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 44 ings, so I am asking for a side lot variance . The use of the property around the Bailey property is generally multi-family. The eastern neighbor is a halfway or safe house for mentally dis- abled people and the western neighbor is now called Schuyler House - that was the old Cornell Infirmary it is now a graduate school dormitory . There is the old Sage Mansion in there too and the old Sage Mansion is currently being used by the University, I believe as office space . Many houses, though not all on State and Seneca Streets, are multi-family. The character of the dis- trict is therefore generally multi-family and the proposed use does not deviate from it . The group of buildings include approx- imately 10, 000 square feet . My plan is to build five, two to three bedroom apartments in the Cornell buildings and use the Bailey House as a house for rent . In other words, this set of drawings is the house for rent and the drawings that I have dis- tributed represent the five apartments . The rehabilitation work in the house relates mostly to updating the mechanicals and drop- ping the heating bill from $5, 000 . per year to something less . In other words, we plan on insulating the building, rewiring it, replumbing it, putting storm windows on, but we won' t be making any significant changes to the inside or the outside of that building . I will build from scratch the apartments within the other existing buildings and there will be no new construction on the property . In other words, we are not going to put on any additions to what is already there but the rest of the buildings are bearing wall brick buildings, they don' t have any frame so BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 45 there is no way to insulate the exterior walls of any of the existing buildings, so in reality we will be building a wooden building within the confines of the bearing wall of the brick buildings . Again, those are the plans that we have . The area of apartment construction is in poor shape, and unlike the house there is little of architectural or historic value worth pre- srving . I am aware of the architectural significance of the ex- terior of all the buildings and we will restore the exterior of them with the help of Andrea Laaarski, City of Ithaca Historic Preservation Coordinator . This, like 505 East Seneca Street - which you gave me a hand with about 8 months ago - will be a Tax Act project and without spending a lot of time explaining what that is, basically I get tax credits for redoing old buildings in Historic neighborhoods if I do it in conformance to the Historic - there are certain designations that the State, I guess, lays out that forces you to fix these buildings up in a way that con- forms with the integrity of the building and we would propose to do that . I would expect approximately seventeen to twenty-three people to live in the whole space . With up to nine people in the house and fifteen in the apartments . That, by the way, doesn' t add up as you may have noticed. The parking requirements are for eight parking places which will be supplied. If a different of people necessitates an extra parking place, I will supply it . I guess the only thing that I have to say, other than what this says, is that sometime ago we made sort of a deal with the City on 505 East Seneca Street, and I feel that - for those people BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 46 that drive by the house - we met our end of it - we are asking to be allowed to do this another time and I hope we can pull it off as nicely as I feel we pulled off. 505. I have a letter from the people who own, what I believe to be the closest single family house to the proposed property . That is Mrs . Mendenhall and Mr . Mack, who is her brother . Mr . Mack lives in an apartment in that house and I believe Mrs . Mendenhall owns the house . It reads : "Dear Mr . Novarr . Welcome again to our segment of the East Hill neighborhood. In our forty-add years at 507 East Seneca Street, the property next door (No. 505 E . Seneca) has never looked so nice since your recent renovation 6f it . The occupants are friendly, considerate, and quiet, there having been but one ex- ception to quietness, and that only briefly and some time past . The property at 103 Sage Place, whose responsibility you are now considering, has for decades received under Miss Bailey the af- fectionate grooming of Mr . C . J . Newbury; but the lawn at 109 Sage Place has for several years been practically neglected by (Mr . Newbury has taken care of that property since 1935) the Uni- versity , It does possess possibilities of great attractiveness . If you are now able to find us ' seventeen to twenty-three' new neighbors as good as were the two we have lately lost, Miss Ethel Bailey and Dr . William Dress, then by all means proceed with your venture . (Mr . Dress lived in the upstairs of the carriage house and, I believe, had a connection with the Cornell Horitor- ium. I think he was its director and he may still be . ) Then by all means proceed with your venture. As you recall, our one BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 47 great concern is quiet . If radio and hi-fi sounds are to pass beyond head phones and even beyond apartment partitions, we pray that they stop at the property line . Even the preliminary sounds of construction work we would limit to hammer strokes, brush snapping, and whistling while you work . No unannounced public concerts from a black box, please. Best of luck to you . Let us know how we can be helpful . /s/ Ione Mack Mendenhall and Marion W. Mack" They live on Seneca Street and their house roughly backs to the property that I am applying for the variance for . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Do you actually have fingers that can paint without a radio? MR. NOVARR: I think that may be what he was referring to . I think it might be easier to answer some of your questions now if you want . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well can the assembly here clarify one thing . There was a great deal of discussion in the Planning and Development Board about Historic District . Those regulations do not apply to the modification of interiors in any respect do they? MR . NOVARR: No they don' t . Just to exteriors . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So your responsibility here will be to maintain the exterior in an acceptable manner? MR . NOVARR: Yes . Though I have made my own special little deal with Andrea Lazarski about this and we have agreed that the in- terior of the house will only get better, not worse. In other words we are not going to pull out any wainscoting or move any BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 48 walls or do anything that will affect . . . This is quite a beau- tiful home inside . It is very much as it was built in 1900 and it is our wish that it remain that way and hopefully thirty years from now Cornell will take it over, as perhaps it should have now, and use it as some sort of a place for visiting ag profes- sors to live or something like that . We hope to sort of hold it, and be nice to it until a more enlightened point of view from Cornell comes around and then, hopefully, they will take it and use it properly . MR . TOMLAN: 1 wouldn' t hold my breath about Cornell ' s enlightenment . Could you tell me something about the parking John? MR. NOVARR: Sure. I currently have six parking spaces there and according to Tom, I need eight or nine, depending on how many people live there. The six are: two inside the existing garage we are not going to build an apartment in the garage . We have two parking places outside the garage, we have two parking places at 505 East Seneca Street which in fact are connected to the Cor- nell parking that is in that whole back Schuyler House lot . These are two parking places which my tenants don' t use and are in addition to four others which I have for the currently six people who are living in 505 . That gives us six parking places, of the either eight or nine we need. There is a road which is off Sage Place that heads east, that' goes toward an existing par- king lot which Cornell uses but doesn' t get heavy use because it is the furthest removed from the Schuyler House and Sage Mansion . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 49 We will either have two or three parking places in that lot or we will create two or three bordering that lot on the existing prop- erty which we will be getting as part of this deal from Cornell University. MR . TOMLAN: So in other words, you are planning on extending the parking lot - that parking lot which you are speaking of - onto the present rear yard? MR . NOVARR: Only if it is necessary . That is not my wish but if I have no other way of making my parking requirement, then, yes, that is our plan . MR . BOOTH: What other way might you make it? MR. NOVARR: I ' m not sure at the moment, whether Cornell has ob- ligated every single parking place in the entire Schuyler House parking area to the City of Ithaca in one way shape or form. If they have, then clearly they can' t obligate parking to me that is obligated to somebody else . If that happens to be the case, then I will cut two to three parking places into the far back corner of the property which we will be acquiring from the University . MS . COOK.INGHAM: Are the two spaces at 505 East Seneca, unobli- gated spaces, they were over the amount that was required when 505 was approved? MR. NOVARR: I believe that they are . MS . COOKINGHAM: Is that true? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes, they are . MR . NOVARR: By the way the two parking places that we are talk- ing about, given their location on the lot at 505, appear to be BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 50 part of the Cornell parking in the Schuyler House and we found that it has been difficult to keep Schuyler House people out of those two places, and so, in my initial discussions with Cornell, I would guess what will happen, is we will let Cornell use those parking places, if they are in fact using them anyway, and we will go up and take two in return for that, from the area that I earlier described which is much closer to my proposed apartments than those two in back of 505 . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? MR. TOMLAN: Could you say something about the difference in the numbers being twenty-two or twenty-five or twenty-four or however many . . . . MR . NOVARR: Yes, I think I have seventeen to twenty-three . And then later I said, if you add those up you will get twenty-four . In order to make - to come to you with this, there is a time schedule that we had to meet and we met that schedule without having plans and so I didn' t know at that time how big my apart- ments would be when I asked to come to you with what I have come to you with. So in fact you can now see that we plan to have one two bedroom - sorry, two, two-bedrooms and three, three-bedroom apartments . I believe that is (unintelligible) And I also didn' t know precisely how many people would be living in the house and I am still a little vague about that, but clearly it is not going to be twenty people - that is not in keeping with the way that house needs to be treated. So I would guess that some- where between eight or ten people would be sufficient . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 51 MR . BOOTH: But it is going to be a one-family house? MR. NOVARR: It is going to be used as a home but not by the family . By a group of students . This is an enormous house . MR. BOOTH: I ' ve looked at it . MR . NOVARR: It is three floors and eight or nine bedrooms, depending on what you call a bedroom. MS . BAGNARDI : What are the size of the bedrooms, John, roughly? Enough to accommodate two beds apiece? MR. NOVARR: The majority of them - by law - could accommodate two beds apiece, I would guess . There are a couple of maids rooms that are in the neighborhood of one hundred square feet but there is one room that must be two-hundred and fifty square feet . This is a very spacious, nicely laid out house . There is a couple of bedrooms that have fire places in them. It is not my plan to put - to take eight or nine possible bedrooms, dump two people in every bedroom - I have the urge to maintain the house, not tear it apart and I might point out that you were kind enough to give me the lee-way last summer, to put eight people in 505 Seneca Street, in fact there are six living there. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May I comment that a granting will, in itself, be restrictive - if you get too many people in the house then you will have a parking deficiency . So the present plan does (unintelligible) limitations . MR . NOVARR: That ' s right . That is why I say that I am going to need either eight or nine parking places . As I recall from dis- cussions with Tom, you need - I need one parking place for every BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 52 three people in the house and one parking place for each apart- ment, provided that we are talking about nothing larger than a three bedroom apartment . So if you figure five apartments and one parking place for each apartment, that ' s five parking places if there are nine people then that ' s three more parking places and - that is nine people in the house - so that ' s a total of eight parking places needed and you' ve heard me say earlier that we would supply eight or nine depending on how many people live there . MR . TOMLAN: And you presently have how many on the site? MR. NOVARR: There are two in the garage, two in front of the garage, two at the back corner of 505 and two to three, either on the back corner of the existing property or if there is space in the Cornell lot, in back of this area, there is none in the Schuyler lot but - over here - we will get them from the University . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? MR. NOVARR: The other thing that I might note is this - that if those parking places are not forthcoming, I ' m going to be in a position where I ' m building apartments that I can' t get Certificates of Occupancy for - so it is as important a questions to me as it is to you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? Come forward. MR . FLANNERY : Did the Board receive a - I ' m Frank Flannery, and BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 53 my father owns the house directly to the east of this building or this lot that Mr . Novarr wants to develop . Did the Board receive a letter from my dad? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . MR, FLANNERY : Okay. The letter will explain. Thank you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? SECRETARY HOARD: This is the letter . "Gentlemen: We received notice of appeal from Mr , Novarr February 29th, one day after the meeting because it was addressed to 110 N. Geneva Street, not our legal Ithaca residence listed in the telephone book, tax rolls, etc . We own 518 East State Street . We lease it to Residential Services, who house up to 10 disadvantaged people under qualified supervision. This is New York State approved and City of ithaca approved. The occupants of 518 East State Street use every part of the property and I believe are entitled to the continued quiet enjoyment of the premises . Based on our limited rental experiences in Ithaca, we feel that the influx of 23 tenants, their 23 cars and friends and live- ins would constitute congestion beyond reasonable use. There is obvious lack of parking spaces which Mr . Novarr says he will furnish, from where? We feel this is unnecessary saturation of the area and must come out against it . Sincerely yours, /s/ Robert W. Flannery and Frances E . Flannery, 1371 Taughannock Blvd, Ithaca, New York 14850" I called the Assessor ' s Office because there was a question on two of the addresses and they were - the Assessor ' s BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 54 records were as Mr . Novarr used them so he did comply with the Ordinance . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 55 The Board considered the request of John Novarr for an area variance to permit the conversion of the single family home at 103-109 SAGE PLACE to a rooming house. The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . BAGNARDI : I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1550 . MR. TOMLAN: I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT : 1) Adequate provision for off-street parking has been provided . 2) This use would not affect the character of the neighborhood . 3) The historic character of the buildings in the area would be preserved . 4) The side yard deficiency is a practical difficulty that cannot be resolved . VOTE : 6 Yes; 0 No AREA VARIANCE GRANTED BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 56 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: May we hear the next case? SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1551, 307-09 Warren Place: Appeal of William L . Reed, et al, for an area variance under Section 30 . 25, Columns 4, 5 and 7 of the Zoning Ordinance for deficient off street parking, lot size and lot width, to permit a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued for the addition of an apartment to the single-family home at 307-09 WARREN PLACE . The property is located in an R-la ( residential-single-family homes and single- family homes with apartment) use district in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 the appellants must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a Certificate of Occu- pancy can be issued for use of the property as a single-family home with apartment . You have withdrawn? MR. REED: Yes . SECRETARY HOARD: So this one has been withdrawn by the appellant . The next appeal is appeal number 1552, 510 WEST CLINTON STREET : Appeal of Reverend Afi B . Binta-Lloyd for an area variance under Section 30 . 25, Columns 4, 6, 7, 10, 11 , 12 and 14 of the Zoning Ordinance for deficient off-street parking, lot area, lot width, excessive lot coverage by buildings, and deficient front, side and rear yard setbacks, to permit the conversion of the grocery store at 510 WEST CLINTON STREET to a church. The property is located in an R-2b ( residential, one-and two-family homes) use district in which the proposed use is permitted; however, under Section 30 . 57 the appellants must obtain an area variance for existing deficiencies listed before a building permit can be issued for the conversion . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 57 REV. BINTA-LLOYD: My name is Reverend Afi Binta-Lloyd and I am the pastor of the Imani Healing Temple and we have searched dili- gently for approximately almost two years to find a building that we could use . We have experienced quite a difficult time in that we spent about thirteen to fifteen thousand fixing up an apart- ment at our house whereby we could bring the downstairs into com- pliance for the zoning commission and also for whatever was re- quired and we found this building and we are desirous of building up so that it would look very attractive, for as you know, the southside is in the process of sort of upgrading itself and I have talked with people and I believe I gave him two petitions - I believe it was concerning the southside residents -most of them were in agreement - we have support from most of the neighbors - all of the neighbors, in fact, around there and also throughout the city., there were some other people - because we do service more than just those on the southside . We also plan to come into compliance. One of the problems - we spoke with the Building Department on the various things that would be needed, such as two forty inch doors and we stated that that would be done and the panic bars, and so forth - whatever they said that we had to comply with, we did desire to come up with . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions from the Board? MR . TOMLAN: Are you aware of the number of deficiencies that the property would have for the proposed use? REVEREND BINTA-LLOYD: Yes I am aware of them. They speak in the original - they said something about seventy-five - we have BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 58 fifteen people that normally come to church - we have only one car and there is use - there is enough room for four cars I believe on the property that is adjoining, which is also owned by the landlord and which he has gone to the attorney to get something legal that we might be able to use also - that lot for our parking . And as far as the building itself, it has been there for quite a few years and it would be impossible to move it back . MS . BAGNARDI : How long has that building been vacant, do you have any idea? MR . HEFFRON: Two months . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: You are? MR . HEFFRON: I am Irwin Heffron, owner of the building, excuse me . I am located at 260 Main Street, Newfield . MS . BAGNARDI : And do you live - there is an apartment upstairs? MR . HEFFRON: Yes, one bedroom . MS . BAGNARDI : That you rent out? MR . HEFFRON: Yes . MR , TOMLAN: How long (unintelligible) previous uses - was used in that fashion? Has it always been used as a small grocery store? MR . HEFFRON: I would say in the range of fifty years it has been a grocery store . Only a grocery store, I put the apartment in there seven or eight years ago . MR. BOOTH: Would the church rent the building? REVEREND BINTA-LLOYD: We have talked with him about a five years BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1084 Page 59 lease with option to buy . MR. BOOTH: You say there would be an opportunity for four parking spaces on the other land that you own that is next door, - that is west of the . . . . . MR . HEFFRON: Yes, currently that is an empty lot there which - the lot itself is under my deed which goes right up tight to the other house there . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Clarification here, Commissioner . Is this the legal use for this, grandfathered, would be for a retail merchandising operation, would require no changes in the structure and any deficiency would be non-conforming so the building would be grandfathered? SECRETARY HOARD: Right . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: If this were to be changed into living quarters, the deficiencies would then apply because of change of use? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So any change, other than putting a store back in there would bring with it all of the deficienci-es except the question of off-street parking which would vary with the occupancy . Is that a reasonable - in other words, we are looking at columns 14, 12, 11, 10, 7 and 6 . . . SECRETARY HOARD: Lot size requirements will vary . MR. BOOTH: Those are all existing . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: However is there 100% occupancy . . . okay - so the occupancy changed to some use other than the grandfathered BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 60 use, could bring in lot area - minimum lot size and off-street parking that would be variable. I am trying to talk about this property being used for anything other than the next A 8 P, starting from scratch . The next grocery store or similar mercantile operation, the requirements of lot width, in other words, 7 through 14 would remain no matter what use is made . MR . BOOTH: And this use will not increase any of those deficiencies? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Not those, but the Commissioner points out that the lot area - there are minimum lot areas with different types of occupancy and there are different off-street parking requirements based upon the proposed new use as it may apply . REVEREND BINTA-LLOYD: I also have been trying to contact the owner of Clinton West to see if there was ever any over-flow that we would need to have parking there. We' ve never had - well too many there - except for my twenty-fifth ordination and there were a lot there at that time, but otherwise, they have not been there -as I say, we only have one car . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions from the Board? Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? (no one) BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 61 The Board considered the request of Afi Binta-Lloyd for an area variance to permit the conversion of the grocery store at 510 WEST CLINTON STREET to a church. The decision of the Board was as follows : MR. BOOTH: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1552 conditioned upon the provision of four (4) off-street parking spaces within 500 ' of the proposed church . A further condition - if the four (4) parking spaces are created on the adjacent lot to the west, visual screening will be provided between the parking lot and the property to the west . MR. TOMLAN: I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT : 1) The existing building would be very difficult to move in a manner that would bring it into conformance with the various requirements of the several columns . 2) That the proposed use is compatible with the area . 3) It will in fact enhance the area . VOTE : 6 Yes; 0 No AREA VARIANCE GRANTED BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 62 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Let ' s hear the next case please . SECRETARY HOARD: The next case, appeal number 1553 was postponed at the request of the appellant and appeal number 1554, 315-317 COLLEGE AVENUE : Appeal of Nick Plataniotis for an area vari- ance under Section 30 . 25, Column 14 ( require- ments for rear yard setbacks) and Section 30 . 57 ( requirements for a Certificate of Oc- cupancy for an altered structure) of the Zon- ing Ordinance, to permit the extension of restaurant uses into the rear building (now a two-bay garage) at 315-317 College Avenue (Cosmopolitan Restaurant) . The property is located in a B-2b (business) use district where the existing and proposed uses are per- mitted; however the appellant must obtain an area variance for conversion of the rear building before a building permit or a Certi- ficate of Occupancy can be issued for the conversion . An earlier appeal (#1541 ) for this proposal was heard and denied by the Board at its February 6, 1984 meeting . The appellant is returning with new information to request a new hearing on this appeal . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Before we start, there are two questions, I believe, before the Board. One is whether to rehear this case and then if we agree to rehear, it, the substance of the new information be provided. I think at this time I would like to direct you to spend some effort on the merits of the new information, and its relative availability at the last hearing and now . MR. WIGGINS : My name is Walter Wiggins, I am an attorney and I am representing Mr . Plataniotis and Mr . Katsoulis who are behind me in the first row. I was not present at the last hearing and I believe that one of the problems that developed was a language BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 63 difficulty as a presentation was made between - was made by Mr . Plataniotis . Also at that time he had certain drawings which had been prepared which, I think, would have explained the proposal with some greater clarity, but he did not understand that it was an appropriate time and place to deliver them although he had done so at the Planning Board hearing at which there was a unanimous approval of the proposal . So with regard to asking to reconsider this, when I review the minutes of your meeting, there are throughout the minutes the words that say "unintelligible", "unintelligible", "unintelligible" in three or four rather critical places . I hope that my understanding is correct that that was not an adequate presentation of the appeal, and that you would hear it on that basis . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: To the Board now, our first question is whether there has been a presentation of adequate reason for a rehearing and we need a motion to proceed or a motion to deny that action, as a first act of business . MR . BOOTH: I move that we proceed to hear the appeal . MS . BAGNARDI : I second the motion . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any discussion? All of those in favor? 6 AYES . MR . WIGGINS : Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. Basically here is the problem. This Board does not have copies of the material that was presented to the Planning Board or do you? Not the drawings . SECRETARY HOARD: The material was . . . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH S, 1984 Page 64 MR . WIGGINS : You do have it . . fine. Mr . Plataniotis is the operator of the Cosmopolitan Restaurant which appears in the drawing - second drawing which you have - as the blank space or the blank building beneath the one that is shown in greater de- tail . Mr . Plataniotis and Mr . Katsoulis intend to be partners in the restaurant which is shown in detail . Mr . Katsoulis is the operator of Zorba' s Restaurant on West State Street . The differ- ence between these two facilities is that the Cosmopolitan Res- taurant is more in the nature of a diner which serves breakfast, lunch and dinner- up until about 8: 00 o' clock . This new restaurant, which will be a ,joint effort of these two gentle- men, is to be a first class restaurant, which will open at 4: 00 in the evening and serve dinner only. The Cosmopolitan Restau- rants hours will be reduced from 8: 00 o' clock when it is now closing, to 4: 00 o' clock so that the two restaurants would not be operating simultaneously but rather in tandom. We have some question about whether or not a variance of any kind was required but that ' s a difference of opinion between ourselves as attorneys and the Board - or the Commissioner - or the Zoning Officer . The question is whether or not a rear yard setback is required . This is not a use variance. The use is approved in this area. The building that you see in this back part, is a cinder block garage that has been there for more than forty years and indeed there is no back yard of any kind and there never has been nor is there in any of the properties - or most of the properties that border these two facilities . The practical difficulty is two-fold here . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 55 In order to have a restaurant that is a first class restaurant, you have to have a kitchen that consists of more than just a grill and usually in a first class restaurant, the restaurant will be anywhere from 50% to 100% of the size of the dining area . That ' s not true in a diner, as you well know, you have a grill and some heat pans and that is all you need but in a first class restaurant, you need more than that . So it is impossible to de- velop a first class restaurant in this building which is now oc- cupied as a video game., teenage video game facility . Because if you take the - if you put the kitchen into the building as it exists, there isn' t enough seats to support a first class res- taurant . That is one problem. The second problem is that the duct work in the kitchen, if it were to be contained in the exis- ting building, would have to go up through the building, whereas if it is contained within - in the garage area, which will then become both storage and kitchen, it would be a self contained kitchen without the danger and the disadvantage and difficulties in trying to duct exhaust and smoke and whatever else is required in a kitchen, up through the second -up through the three floors to get up through the roof . With regard to some comments that I saw made in the minutes, and if you have had a chance to reread them, you will see that indeed they do seem somewhat confusing - that there may be some problems with this building being less safe with the kitchen area making the building less safe if it is in the garage. I would urge you to consider that in fact the reverse is true . It is a separate and independent building, it BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 66 will be much easier to control the safety factors and, indeed, a condition which (unintelligible) and welcome is that it meet all of the necessary fire code requirements for a safe facility . Your last vote, as I understand it was 3 to 3 and my hope is that perhaps I have been able to explain some details that were not available before . I think as I read through the minutes, some of you are or one of you believe that this was to be an expansion of the existing Cosmopolitan Restaurant . They are two separate identies although Mr . Plataniotis is the operator of the Cosmo- politan Restaurant . There will be two different companies in effect, one is a partnership and one is a single proprietorship . Both of these facilities are on lease from two different owners . Mr . Gus - I am mistaken - who owns the Cosmopolitan Restaurant? MR. PLATANIOTIS : It is the same owner . MR. WIGGINS : Who owns the Cosmopolitan Restaurant? MR. PLATANIOTIS: Gus owns both places . MR . WIGGINS : Gus owns both places - all right, I am mistaken, I am sorry . It is not to be a single effort - two separate entities with a partnership on one side and Mr . Plataniotis on the other . Are there any questions that I might be able to answer? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: You are addressing yourself to the difficulty of the appellant in placing a first class restaurant in this building in the adjacent garage. The owner of this building is Lambrou? MR. WIGGINS : Yes . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 67 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The use of the space other than for a restaurant, is that something that has not been considered or . . . MR , WIGGINS : At the present time, I know that it is being operated as a game room, video game room and the garage is being used as storage of some kind . It no longer serves a purpose as a garage, in fact, I think there isn' t even access to it . MR . PLATANIOTIS : You can' t fit a car in there. RMR. WIGGINS : You can' t get a car to the garage. MR. PLATANIOTIS : You cannot drive a car comfortable through - you have to be very careful (unintelligible) . MR . WIGGINS: It is not so much the practical difficulty here, recognizing that is a necessary element but you realize we are here because of the ten foot setback rule . It is not a use variance that we are asking for but a recognition that this building really has been there for over forty years and it seems not to be an applicable rule of law although the Zoning Officer has determined that he cannot grant a permit until this question is resolved . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well let ' s defend the Zoning Officer for the moment . It seems to me that you are expanding what is a storage accessory building, connecting it to an existing building and certainly increasing the utilization of the site. During most of those forty years I have been quite familiar with that property, that is a seven foot alley there, which is rather uncomfortable, being pretty narrow for an automobile to negotiate, although it is common for a former owner of the building to get a Cadillac BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 68 in and out of there . MR . PLATANIOTIS : (Unintelligible) right next door, they have a problem, to get in it . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Yes . I would say that I clearly see an extension of and an increase in the intensity of use of the site and whether that required back yard should, even though it is occupied with a building, whether the development of it into a restaurant kitchen would certainly be an extension of a non-conforming building - a non-conforming building (unintelligible) place exception for the connection, I will agree . SECRETARY HOARD: With all due respect, Mr . Chairman, maybe the Zoning Officer should defend himself . The reason that I inter- preted this, this way, is that the garage was an accessory struc- ture and an accessory structure is not bound to the rear yard setback . In other words, the rear yard would have been measured, was measured from the main building back to the rear property line ignoring the accessory structure. Now with this being at- tached and used and actually connected to the main structure it becomes part of the main building and therefore the rear lot line is from the back of this building . It is a technicality but it ' s one that, in some cases, can make quite a difference. MR . WIGGINS : I assume, Tom, that what you are saying is if they made that building a storage area for the restaurant, there would be no problem here at all? SECRETARY HOARD: Just a storage area . BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 69 CHAIRMAN WEAVER: That ' s correct . MR . WIGGINS : But as a practical matter it would be - we suggest that without changing anything - it certainly doesn' t change the character of the neighborhood or anything else, and probably makes the building a lot more safe to be able to put the kitchen facility in together with the storage facility . That is, in ef- fect, f-fect, what we are asking for . Legally it could stay exactly the way it is and be storage back there and the kitchen up front could just - makes the problem more complex - makes the likeli- hood of it being a successful first class restaurant less, and I think it would increase the fire hazard as it is designed, it seems to make the restaurant work decrease the fire hazard with- out really changing anything . MR . BOOTH: What about the opportunity to use the property for other commercial uses? MR . WIGGINS : I have no answer to that, I don' t think that question has been addressed because it is a proper use for a restaurant in that area, so they are not coming before you and saying it can only be a restaurant because we can' t do anything else with it . We are merely saying that it seems appropriate to put a kitchen in a place where, at the moment, it could be just storage instead of storage and a kitchen . MS . COOKINGHAM: Mr . Wiggins, a list that you gave us where it says adjacent space - that is the present Cosmopolitan? MR . WIGGINS : Yes that is the Cosmopolitan. MS . COOKINGHAM: And then the restroom for the new restaurant is BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 70 going to be over in the Cosmopolitan? MR . WIGGINS : The restroom. . . has that already - always been there? MR . PLATANIOTIS : Those are existing right now, they are there . MR. WIGGINS : They are restrooms for the game room? MR . PLATANIOTIS : Yes . MS , COOKINGHAM: But not for Cosmopolitan? MR . PLATANIOTIS : No . MS . BAGNARDI : So does that part of that go into the other building then? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: It is all one building . It has traditionally been -well I better be careful . . . MS . COOKINGHAM: But it is divided for purposes of the lease . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: When Wilcox Press was there, the whole first floor was occupied by the printer, although he started in half of it and expanded into the other - that was about the age of the garage too . But it is a single multi-story building with apartments on the upper floors . MS . COOKINGHAM: But treated for the purposes of the lease as two buildings, I guess . MR. WIGGINS : There have been traditionally, I don' t know - traditionally there have been two different tenants who are, I gather, some fairly extended period of time. Mr . Plataniotis purchased the operation, the restaurant operation, from another gentleman and began operating there about a year ago, I think . Is that right? BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 71 MR . PLATANIOTIS : A year and a half . MR . WIGGINS : A year and a half ago? He is operating there under a lease that he inherited from the person who previously operated the restaurant . Now Mr . Lambrou has agreed to lease this new restaurant to Mr . Plataniotis and Mr . Katsoulis . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further questions? (none) Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? (no one) BZA MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 1984 Page 72 THE Board considered the request of Nick Plataniotis for an area variance to permit the extension of restaurant uses into the rear building at 315-317 College Avenue. The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . BAGNARDI ' I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1554. MR . TOMLAN: I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The rear yard deficiency is a practical difficulty which makes compliance impossible . 2) The use would not affect the character of the neighborhood . 3) The proposed renovations are obviously not going to affect the neighborhood . VOTE : 3 YES; 3 NO REQUEST DENIED FOR LACK OF FOUR (4) AFFIRMATIVE VOTES I , BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY THAT I took the minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, .New York, in the matters of Appeals numbered 1539, 1547, 1548, 1549, 1550, 1552 and 1553 on March 5, 1984 in the Common Council Chambers, City of Ithaca, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York; that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the action taken of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability. Barbara C. Ruane Recording Secretary Sworn to before me this day of 7X4-L--A-) 1984 Notary Public JEAN J. NANKINSON NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF NEW YORK No. 53-1630800 Q1,1,JL!TIED IN TOMPKINS COUNT / MY EXPIE.ES MARCH 30,19-2,—;