Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1984-07-02 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK JULY 2, 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE APPEAL NO. 1572 Ethel Harrell 2 611 W. Green Street APPEAL NO. 1572 Action of the Board 7 APPEAL NO. 1572 Decision 12 0 APPEAL NO. 1573 Robert J. Shannon 14 740 South Meadow Street APPEAL NO. 1573 Action of the Board 23 APPEAL NO. 1573 Decision 25 APPEAL NO. 1574 Ellen Baer 32 306-308 South Corn Street APPEAL NO. 1574 Action of the Board 35 APPEAL NO. 1575 George and Judith Nemethy 36 118 Wait Avenue APPEAL NO. 1575 Action of the Board 38 APPEAL NO. 1576 Mark & Peter Zaharis 39 517 North Cayuga Street APPEAL NO. 1576 Action of the Board 65 APPEAL NO. 1576 Decision 67 CERTIFICATE OF RECORDING SECRETARY 68 6ZA MINUTES JULY 2 , 1984 PAGE ', 1 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK ,JULY 2, 1984 CHAIRMAN 'WEAKER : I ' d like to call this meeting to order , This is a formal meeting and hearing of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Ithaca . The first thing I would like to do is introduce the members of the Board : JEAN COOKINGHAM BETTE BAGNARDI MICHAEL TOMLAN RICHARD BOOTH CHARLES WEAKER, CHAIRMAN THOMAS D , HOARD, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD & BUILDING COMMISSIONER j BARBARA. RUANE; RECORDING SECRETARY ABSENT : TRACY FARRELL ! i This meeting is being conducted under the rules adopted by this Board in accordance with the Ordinance of the City of Ithaca in its formal hearing . We do not swear witnesses nor follow other formal procedure however our findings must be based upon proper legal evidence. The method of procedure is that we will hear case; in the carder in which they are listed on the official no- tice and first the appellant is to be heard and anyone who wishes to speak: in support of the appeal . Following that anyone who wishes to speak: in opposition is given art opportunity to speak . We hope you will confine ;your r-emarks to the issue which is the circ:umstanc:es required under the Ordinance and I would like to explain to you that we were in the other room in executive ses- sion over an issue that is subject to litigation and is not a matter that is going to be before this Board tonight so its other BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 2 business . So may we have the first case please? SECRETARY HOARD ,. The first appeal is appeal number 1572 for 611 W . Green Street : Appeal of Ethel Harrell for an area variance for deficient off-street parking., lot width, and front and one side yard setbacks under Section 30 . 25, Columns 4, 7, 11 and 12 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the conversion of the second dwelling unit of the two-unit house at 511 W . Green Street from an efficiency apartment to a two-bedroom apart- ment . The property is located in an R-3b ( resi- dential, multiple dwelling) use district where the proposed use is permitted; however the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed defi- ciencies under Section 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 before a building permit or certificate of compliance can be issued for the conversion . CHAIRMAN WEAKER. Come forward and have a chair here . The microphone is plugged in, yes: . If you will pull a mike over - that ' s good . First we need your, name and address and your interest in the case . MS . HARRELL ; My name is Ethel Harrell and 11ive at 611 West Green Street and I am asking for an apartment on the second floor C:HAIR'.MAN WEAKER , I ' ve read your script . Can you explain what is on the second floor now? MS . HARR.ELL , Well , at the time now it is just a one-room upstairs . There is room enough that we can put two bedrooms and a bath up there and a kitchen if it is possible . CHAIRMAN WEAK=ER;: Would the new construction go beyond the outlines of the present house? MS . HARRELL : No it wouldn ' t , MS . BAGNARDI -. Where would the entrance be for the second floor BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 3 +a«it' MS . HARRELL : The entrance would be to the side of the house on the - what would you call it - CHAIRMAN WEAVER : Uptown or west end or . . . MS . HARRELL ' My house is fatting you now and it is on the east side I quess., the opening or entrance would be on the east side . MR . BOOTH: Is the upstairs room currently used as an apartment"' MS . HAR.R'.ELL : No . It is ,just one big room. When they remodelled the house, they left all this space up there and there is nothing Lip there but one big room and a back: window to the outside , on the back: of the house . MR . TOMLAN; Would you anticipate putting any dormers or any kind of additions to the side or does the roof stay about the same? MS . HAR'.RELL : I had made plans to put dormers on the east side of the house . On the west side of the house has to be repaired because the roof is ( unintelligible) . If you would like to talk: with the contractor ., he is here with me . CHAIRMAN WEAVER, We' ll give him a chance when you are through . MS , HARRELL : All right . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions from the Board? MR . BOOTH: I guess my, only question is, the sheet that we have says that it is currently a two-family dwelling and you are saying it is not curr-ently a two-family? MS . HARR'.ELL , No I {.didn' t stay that , There is a studio apartment on the back . MR . BOOTH: Will that continue to be a studio apartment' OZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 4 MS . HAF.',RELL : Well that depends on what you all give me tonight . MR . DOOTH : But your plan is to incorporate that studio apartment into this larger apartment? MR . TOMLAN' What happens to the studio apartment after you convert, assuming you are: granted the variance? MS , HARRELL ' What happens? Oh, I hadn' t made any plans for it yet . The only thing that I - with the upstairs, with so much room up there, I thought I would - and I know that I have to repair the roof as soon as possible because if I don ' t it will be a hazard and I decided that I would go ahead but I have made no decisions to that yet . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there further questions? Thank: you . You say your contractor is here? Send him up . MS . HARRELL : Okay . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Can you give us some more details on the proposed design? MR . COLLACCHI : Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAKER: First we need your name and address . MR . C.OLLACC:HI : The name is Richard C.ollacchi and what is proposed here., on the east side of the house they want approximately twenty foot of the roof to be raised eight foot, okay, to make a dormer . One reason is that the roof is structurally unsafe as it is - it is cracking on the west side right now and it does show some apparent damage on the east side . It is going to get more and more serious as it noes along . The west side right now is cracked, I ' d say maybe seven of the SZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 PAGE : S rafters are broke and ready to go - coming in from the street side . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: khat is the ceiling height in that existing large room? MR.. COLLAC`.CHI : The peak height right now is: twelve eight - twelve: foot, eight, so it ' s about twenty-four foot wide from the center , twelve foot each way , so the pitch would not - we' d have a good pitch with the twelve foot to get the variance of about eight foot ceiling height and still have a nice pitch. MS , BAGNARDI : So this would create a two-bedroom unit upstairs, with a kitchen and a bath? MR . COLLAC:CHI : Correct . There is one bedroom up there right now., okay, which was incorporated into her last appeal - you know, her permit that she had was two-bedrooms only we could only fit one downstairs so there is already one upstairs, so actually what we are adding is another bedroom a bath and a living room. i MS . BAGNARDI : My next question to you is going to be, what is the layout of the rooms on the first floor, living room, dining room, how many bedrooms? MR . COLLACCHI : One . MS , BAGNARDI : Just one? MR . C OLLAC:C:HI : Cir►e bedroom, one bath, one living room and a kitchen and then a small efficiency apartment that ' s a combination kitchen - oh, excuse, combination living room, bedroom all in one room, and a small kitchenette . MS : BAGNARDI : Thank you . EZA MINUTES JULY t, 1984 PAGE : C, MR . BOOTH: So is the potential of this three apartments instead of two? MR, COLLAC:C:HI : Actually, well, the woman, Ethel., lives downstairs anyway so it is not what you would call an apartment, that is: her living area - but yes it would he one extra apartment upstairs and a small efficiency apartment which would probably house one person., it is not a big portion of the downstairs as to floor space . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Further questions? Is there anyone who wishes to speak: in support of this application? Is there anyone who wishes: to speak: in opposition to this application? There being no one further to be heard on this ease, do I hear a motion? BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 7 ACTION OF THE BOARD CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Before we have any finding and before we make a motion, I would like to ask a question of the Building Commissioner The working sheet indicates that the existing off street parking column 4 on our worksheet, indicates that it is present non-conforming condition is deficient by two spaces and with approval of this variance it would remain deficient by two, is that correct? SECRETARY HOARD: That depends on the outcome of the efficiency apartment . I understood that the efficiency apartment was going to be inc:or-por-ated as part of the other apartment, and there . would be two apartments . MR. BOOTH; That ' s the way I understood the application . MR . TOMLAN: But yet from what we have heard that seems not to be the case . SECRETARY HOARD : Right . M_ , BAGNARDI , There would be actually three units . MR • TOMLAN'. But there will actually be three units therefore the parking would increase . SECRETARY HOARD; It requires three parking spaces . MR . TOMLAN: Three , MR , BOOTH. All right., as I understand the requirements for R-3 being , would not the =_:quare footage required increase if it is three units instead of two units? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Ms . Harrell, this question about the efficiency BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 FADE : 8 apartment, puts us in a dilemma. If you are going to maintain that the requirements are different than would they be if you are going to incorporate that in the first floor apartment and create a second apartment , Now the house is looked upon by the law as being a two-apartment house and if it is to become a three apart ment house the: requirements would be heavier than they are in the existing condition , If you were to create the second floor apartment as: you propose, and the efficiency apartment were in- corporated into the space and was not a separate unit, so that you started out with a two-apartment !-rouse and ended up with a two apartment house that had more room in it, the requirements would remain the same as far as off-street parking is concerned particularly . It is: a little difficult for the Board - we don' t wish to make that decision for you. If we were to take your pro- posal as a request to create three apartments - a third apartment it would - and your appeal were to fail, it would not preclude the possibility of your applying for a variance for a duplex., in other words, a two-apartment house . MS . HARRELL : Right, so . . CHAIRMAN WEAVEW I ' m not predicting what the Board is going to do with this;, I ' m ,just saying - trying to explain to you that the difficulty here of you sitting here and telling us that you haven' t decided yet, we would have to assume that if you haven' t decided yet, you are going to go out of here - if we grant the variance - with; the right to create a third apartment in your house rather than two apartments . Okay? BZA MINUTES JULY 2 , 1984 PAGE : 9 MS . HARR.ELL : I understand what you are saying . All right . MR . COLLAC.C.HI ; What the actual problem here . . . SECRETARY HOARD: Could you come up to the microphone please? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Both of you come up . MR . COLLAC:C:HI : (unintelligible) you are looking at three off-street parking areas right? CHAIRMAN WEAVER! If this were to become a three-apartment house, certainly it mould bring on the requirement for an additional off-street parking space beyond the present deficiency , It would also possibly change some other requirements, I - quick: read here -flow about the area of the lot? SECRETARY HOARD! The lot would still be all right but the requirement for frontage on the street would increase to a minimum of forty feet and this property only has a thirty-three foot width at the street . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So the third apartment brines on at least two - would create at least two additional deficiencies from what you now have and you have a right to have. As I understand it, you - we call it "grandfathered" the right to have a two-apartment house at that location which you do have and we could look at that as this is a request to increase it not to three apartments but to increase it to two larger apartments or as I guess you are asking us for a third apartment, so if I ' m not reading your request properly, you are asking for a three apartment house, is that correct? MS . HAR.RELL ! The question has come up about the three apartments BZA MINUTES JULY t, 1984 PAGE : 10 acid at this particular time - what are you suggesting I do? CHAIRMAN WEAKER: It is, pretty hard for anyone to advise you . MS . HARRELL : Well I am asking - would it be a difference if I just complete the two bedrooms upstairs and have a bathroom up there without an apartment? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Well the key is whether you have two apartments or three . MS . HARRELL : Two apartments . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: There is - please don' t let me talk: you out of a request for- three apartments . You ask: for that and we will make our ,judgment based Upon that request but if., in fact., you may be interested in two apartments and have decided, then there would be a different set of rules applied . MR . C011AC:C.HI : I would like to say one thing - there is going to be some: difficulty in incorporating this downstairs apartment into the first floor . CHAIRMAN WEAVER , All right - I just want to make sure the appellant understands why we are dwelling on this maybe too long . So our judgment will be based on your appeal as we read it for three apartments, the present efficiency apartment, the apartment you occupy and the new one you are going to create. All right? MS . HARRELL : Yes . MR , COLLACC:HI ; There is: one thing - Ethel here has checked into t off-street parking and she does have the availability of off-street parking in the area . CHAIRMAN WEAVER, The Board cart take that into consideration in a DZA MINUTES _JULY 2, 1984 PACE : 11 condition, if it sees fit . All right . MR . BOOTH: Where is that? MR . COLLAC.CHI : Kentucky Fried Chicken . She has already checked with the owners to see if she: could have off-street parking and they said that they would grant her one parking space . CHAIRMAN WEAKER: All right . I ' m treating this as questions of the Board in its deliberations and I hope that you will all appreciate the situation. Thank you very much. If we have further questions we will get back to you . MS . COOKINGHAM: Mr . Chairman, will this make a difference as far as the Planning and Development Board is concerned because they looked at it from a standpoint of the way 1 had understood it to be, a conversion of a two apartment building into a two . . . C'.HAIRM.AN WEAKER: And obviously the Zoning Office took it to be so , so I .just want to make sure that the misunderstanding that we clearly have on the record and the understanding of the appellant that she is tonight, at least, asking to create a third apart- ment . And the worksheets are not accurate, therefore. Now whether we have received a proper hearing with the Planners is a most appropriate question . MS . C:OOKINGHAM . It appears; that they understood it the way I did . MR . BOOTH: I could also point out Charlie that there may be a problem with the notice that was in the Journal . SECRETARY HOARD! That is ,just what I was looking at . 82A MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE * 12 APPEAL NO . 1572, 611 WEST GREEN STREET MR . BOOTH: I would make a motion that we defer decision on this matter and have the appellant bring this: matter- back to us at our August meeting . The reason for that is that I think there is a number of ambiguities now in the record that perhaps would be better cleared up for all concerned . MR . TOMLAN: I second the motion . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Those in favor? 5 AYES UNANIMOUS VOTE CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Ms , Harrell, the Board has deferred this to the August meeting , In the interim, I recommend that you get ahold of Mr- . Hoard and clear- up your- application if, in fact, you are going for a third apartment . That should go before the Planning Board just as if it were a new appeal because it is clearly the understanding in the papers that we have before us, both from the Planning Board and also. the Zoning Office., indicate ark applica- tion for a two-apartment house and other- interested parties, in- cluding the Planners could well come up with a reason to object or to give a different recommendation . MS . HAR.RELL . May I ask: a question? C:'HAIRMAN WEAVER : Certainly . MS , HARRELL : When can I talk: to him to see what tie want to have done? CHAIRMAN WEAVES'.: 8: 30 TO 4; 30 except Saturday., Sunday and the 4th of July . DZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 13 MS . HARRELL : Pardon? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Week: days during office hours . MS , HAR'.RELL : All right., that means I have to make another appeal? CHAIRMAN WEAVER : Yes . MS . HAR'.RELL : All right., thank you . BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 14 SECRETARY HOARE) , The next appeal is appeal number 1573, 740 SOUTH MEADOW STREET : Appeal of Robert J . Shannon for an area var- iance for one deficient sideyard under Sec- tion 30 . 25, Column 13 of the Toning Ordi- nance to permit an addition to the existing building at 740 South Meadow Street (Bruce' s Car Wash) for automobile servicing . The property is located in a 8-5 (business, - automobile related) use district in which the proposed and existing uses are permit- ted; however the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiency under Section 30 . 57 before a building permit or certificate of occupancy can be issued for the addition . MR . SHANNON: How would you like me to proceed? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Name and address . MR . 'SHANNON: Robert Shannon, 217 Valley Road., Ithaca., New York. . CHAIRMAN 'WEAVER.: And you are the owner of the property? MR . SHANNON: Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAKER: The application that we have here has a - this much script on why you need the variance, so if you care expand on that dissertation. it would be helpful to the Board. MR . SHANNON: Of actually what I am going to do there or . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER : No . MR . SHANNON: No? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Why you need to do it? MR . SHANNON: Well it can' t be done - well what I need is a variance for the five foot setback: on the south side of the property . The setback: on the north side is sufficient and in the rear and the front is sufficient so what I need or am requesting is the five foot setback: from the lot line so that I care build to BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 19S4 WAGE ; 15 the lot line: and anything less than fifteen feet - what I have from my present building to the lot lire just wouldn' t work: . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: And your proposal is on the lot line,, correct? MR . SHANNON: Yes . MR, BOOTH: What is this new facility going to do Mr . Shannon? MR , SHANNON! It is going to be a ten minute oil change . MR . BOOTH : A what? MR. SHANNON! A ten minute oil change . MR . BOOTH: Is that a typical structure associated with a car wash? MR. SHANNON: It has been incorporated in car washes, yes, in other areas: . You drive in over a pit - that drops, a filter and drains it - guide on top fills everything up - drive out . MR . BOOTH: You have a fair amount of room behind the existing building, why couldn' t this be good there? MR . SHANNON: Well, I suppose it is traffic: flow . I don' t know how much room you show behind the building . There is a fence that ' s outside storage for motorcycles behind the building - a fenced in area - I don' t know if that shows on the map that you are looking at . MR , BOOTH: Well I have the diagram that you submitted. MR . SHANNON: Correct . It doesn' t show the fenced in area, I ' m sorry . MR. TOMLAN: Is there any reason why the proposed addition couldn' t be to the rear of the property further? MR . :SHANNON: Well actually that is parking across the back: lot BZA MINUTES JULY 1., 1984 PAGE , 16 line - customer parking . MR . TOMLAN. Is there any reason that you couldn' t move the proposed addition to the rear? MR . SHANNON, Well the traffic flow on the lot - I don' t know if You are familiar with the car wash., it is one that ,just washes - would be on one side of the entrance to the wash and the entrance to the quick change oil would be right next to it . It is ,just a matter of controls and traffic: flow. All the traffic: would go around the building and come back: towards route 13 - one going through the czar wash and one going through the quick: oil change . MR. TOMLAN: But for example, .just to play devil ' s advocate, in a sense, could you riot move the proposed new construction perhaps directly behind back; here - back to the southwest corner of the lot and still effect the same result? MR . SHANNON: No, you need a backup area, in other words you have to enter and exit naturally, so if you were knack. in the corner - what you need is a line up area so you could line up - you couldn' t exit . . . MR . TOMLAN' SO you are going all the way around the building" MR . SHANNON: Well that is how the wash runs - to go around like that and the oil change thing would be right next to it . We' ve looked at it and studied it pretty carefully and that ' s the most feasible place to put it . MR . TOMLAN: I noticed that at the front of your establishment along the southern boundery, there is a light there - the entranceway to the K-Mart has a light, and also that there is a BZA MINUTES JULY 1., 1984 PAGE : 17 pedestrian crosswalk: across South Meadow Street which assumably would lirbk; the two =_:hc:ppin�4 centers, the one across the street and the K-Mart shopping center . MR . SHANNON. That is correct . MR . TOMLAN: How would You propose the pedestrians move from one side to the other., is: there =_sufficient room for someone to walk: without walking in the street? MR . SHANNON: Oh, yes: . Between the proposed addition, the outside wall and the edge of the driveway there is a grass strip that is thirteen feet and the driveway is fifteen foot wide . it is riot that I am building next to a building . MR . BOOTH: Where is this? MR . SHANNON: On the Southside . MR. BOOTH: But not on your property? MR . SHANNON: That is correct . MR . BOOTH: Have you explored with the K-Mart people of obtaining some kind of an easement so no building would be built on that property? MR . SHANNON. No . But I don' t think: - that doesn' t mean anything what I think:., but the State prescribed that entranceway so it ties in with the light to go back, and forth and I think: it would be very difficult., if not impossible, for K-Mart to change the entranceway and make it something else . t:HAIRMAN WEAVER: Well reading the minutes- of the Planning Board in discussing this., there obviously was a great deal of interest in traffic: flow and that sort of thing and I looked at the OZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 18 property myself and watched some of the traffic: - fairly common driving back: and forth across that property line, currently . � There was a suggestion from the Planners that a curb be constructed to prevent that , Well, K-Mart has a curb that isn' t high enough to discourage anyone the flow of traffic over it . Did you propose that curbing or? MR . SHANNON: No, I would like to address that . Most of the people that come out of the czar wash., which would generate most of the traffic,, the oil change service wouldn' t generate the amount of traffic anywhere near what the car wash does . Most of the people turn, at least local people, and either go out to K.-Mart and shop or turn and go out with the light out of K-Mart ' s exit . There are some people who will coast up in front of our driveway and block: it, even though the sign says. "stop here" on red . So most people have learned that they go that way . We haven' t had any accidents in, I don' t know, twelve or thirteen years . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: well it would seem to me that having no expert knowledge of traffic flow or any way to control it, that the only public concern would be crossings that would be in front of your existing building or your proposed building - between that and the street rather than what happens out in the back: yard . If these two adjacent property owners want traffic: flow back: and forth across the property line, certainly on private property in all cases, not the public way, I wonder if, however, from the proposed building to the street that there be an effective bar- eZA MINUTES JULY 2,, 1984 PAGE , 19 rier to prevent crossing in either direction, which would be de- sirable, it would seem to me to your purpose, anybody in front of there would be., in fact, going the wrong way as far as your flow and would prevent any MR. SHANNON: Charlie would you run that by me again., I ' m not quite sure . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I 'm talking about the space between► the proposed building and the street - not K-Mart but Meadow Street that there be a barrier to prevent traffic across that piece of land. If that were prevented, what happens out in back: yard seems not to be a public matter . MR . SHANNON! Are you saying , to prevent people from entering Meadow Street . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: No to prevent people from crossing the property line between► the front of your building and Meadow Street . MR, BOOTH: No, between K-Mart and Meadow Street . CHAIRMAN WEAVER.: No., the front of your building and Meadow Street . This distance here which would be a cross without proper . . MR, SHANNON: Well that is where some of the czar wash - I mean., people that have not used the czar wash much., they will exit - they will go straight out and exit on route 13 . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I ' m familiar . MR . SHANNON: Okay . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: What I am saying is that someone comes into K.-Mart, you certainly don' t wart them cutting across here, nor BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 20 someone in f'r-ont of your building cutting across into K-Mart across the front, in back of that ( unintelligible) MR . SHANNON: They do . CHAIRMAN WEAVER, Well, that would seem to me to be quite undesirable, both for- you and for K-Mart., and for public safety . MS . BAGNARDI : Is there c:urbin►g there now ? Nothing? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Insignificant . MR , BOOTH: You ar-e doing a curbing along the property line:' CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I ' m not proposing a c:urbin►g., I ' m ,dust proposing a barrier . . . MR'.. BOOTH: I know., but that ' s what you are talking about - a barrier between the two properties . CHAIRMAN WEAVER, Yes sir . So that clearly traffic exiting from either of his ser,vi6es - his present or his proposed service, would have one choice - Meadow Street, at or immediately adjacent to the light . MR . SHANNON: If it were the difference between granting the variance and not granting the ,rarfiance., I ' d go along with that and build some type of barrier . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The reason I ' m asking you is to hear your, objections to such a requirement . MR . SHANNON: Well that the - the way it is right now., most of the people will turn► and the car wash is the biggest generator- of traffic: - that by adding the oil service, I think: they would still - that is why we recessed it twenty feet from the front of the car- wash exit so that people could come out - swing over- to BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 21 the: driveway and either- go to K-Mart or go out with the light . The curb or the barrier .. I think. the public would not like it because the public is used to going that way and so far we haven' t had any problem: with it - any accidents or - there is very little pedestrian traffic that comes in or crosses 13 and comes in that driveway . You' ll see somebody once in awhile. MR , BOOTH: If' somebody comes out of the car- wash, are they going to be able to go into the oil change place? MR . SHANNON: You' d have to drive around . Mk . BOOTH: All the way around . MR . SHANNON . That is the only way you could have a flow of traffic: that would make any sense . MR , BOOTH: Are the two lines - the one coming out of the oil change and the one coming out of the car wash, are they going to merge before they get to Meadow Street or do they come out of two different places? MR . SHANNON: No - well they come out of two different places, going in the same direction but the oil change is set back from the exit of the car wash twenty feet . MR. BOOTH: I understand that but when they get to Meadow Street, ar-e they going to be one line of traffic coming out . . . MR. SHANNON: No, that ' s about a thirty or forty foot curb cut so to either merge or MR . TOMLAN: There is a section about twenty feet three inches wide and judging from the scale about twenty feet deep of new constr-uction immediately behind the car- wash. BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE : 22 MR . SHANNON: Well we ,just show that - that wouldn' t need any variance. but that would ,just be an addition to the tsar wash - twenty more feet of convey area., some new equipment in there . CHAIRMAN WEAVER*. Further questions ! Thank; you . Is there anyone else who wishes to speak: in support of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? Seein.9 no one further to be heard on this application, do I hear a motion? BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1964 PAGE : 23 APPEAL NUMBER. 1573 - ACTION OF THE BOARD MR , BOOTH: I have a bit of discu!asion. Generally speaking I think: it is a bad idea to completely remove side: yards in busi- ness areas and in other areas . Here we are presented with a cir- cumstance where there is no immediately adjoining building or likely to be an immediately adjoining building and so perhaps the purpose of a side yard is somewhat diminished by that fact . On the other hand, I ' m not sure there is an assurance in the future that there wouldn' t be another, building built there. And second- ly, I would say that the idea of a barrier between the two pr-op- i erties seems to me to be imminently reasonable. CHAIRMAN WEAVER. The character- of the building hasn' t been fully laid out here . The appellant, if you will please., a question . The south wall of the proposed building., is that a blank masonry wall, no openings? MR , SHANNON: No openings that anyone: could go through, in other words you might be seeing some glass_:, a sliding glass door- type thing but not to use as a door . CHAIRMAN WEAVER' Looking at the outside possibility that the adjacent landowner had any reason to put a structur-e up, it would be burdensome to him to be protected against an opening in your building . MR. SHANNON' I see what you are saying . CHAIRMAN WEAVER' As I understand it . MR . SHANNON: I think: that I would want to have some type of a window on this side. - if' people: ar-e going to sit in thein car BZA MINUTE JULY t, 1984 PAIGE , 14 (unintelligible) But I think: if it came to where somebody wanted to build to their property line., it could be sealed up, if that ever happened . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you . Dick, I concur that the ordinary reason for a sideyard setback; doesn' t seem to have any beneficial effect on the neighbor- in this case. Do I hear- a motion . BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE , 25 APPEAL NO . 157 ., 740 SOUTH MEADOW STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Robert Shannon foran area var-iance for- one deficient side yard to permit an addition to the existing building at 740 South Meadow Street for- automobile servicing . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR. BOOTH: I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1573 . MR. TOMLAN: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) It appears that there may be other alternatives on this lot for- the design of a similar- facility . 2) There appears to be the likelihood of increased traffic entry problems on route 13 in the location of this business which would be aggravated by this proposal . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Discussion? It would seem to the Chair that the increased traffic flow would be a matter of a small element as far as the total traffic out there and if he has a booming business it ' ll be r-ar-e that they will run too many thr-ou, there . I ' ve sat there and watched the light, in fact , tried to get off this pr-oper-ty onto Meadow Street and I would anticipate that it won' t be a high traffic count . It would seem to me that if we were to restr-ict the constr-uction and use of the. property so that there won' t be cross traffic: in that area that I have been harp- ing on out in front of the building - the proposed building -that BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1994 PAGE : 26 the effect is merely a unit of the time of the additional traffic out the same slot that is already there., although it is not well defined, I propose that we require that it be defined to the de- gree that cross traffic: in front of the building into the adja- cent property., not be denied by some method and so I would be inclined to find that the property' s: potential use on some lard that now is not serving any useful purpose., public or private, that it would be a reasonable gray►ting of a variance that has a minor affect on the neighborhood or the adjacent property . SECRETARY HOARD: I ' d like to throw out the comment that that area, the B-5 zone is created to try to encourage auto related businesses and draw them to Elmira Road from other areas of the city so that these uses would not be in other areas where it was deemed inappropriate . MR BOOTH: I understand that and I agree with that and, in fact, this: is a czar wash that I have used and I haven' t had a great deal of difficulty getting back onto route 13 but I do note - I think: we do need to take some recognition of the staff recommen- dation to the Planning Board in that vein . And the other thing is, the map of the property indicates that there is sufficient room on the property to do this: other places . Now I understand that Mr . Shannon says there are other uses of the property, park- ing and so on., but this is a fairly large piece of property and it would seem to me that it is doable on another portion of it . MR . TOMLAN: Can we have a vote? CHAIRMAN WEAVEK Are you ready for a vote? We have a motion to BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE : 27 deny and that motion is based upon two findings of fact , MS . BAGNARDI : So a yes is a no . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The motion is to deny so a yes is to deny . VOTE : 2 YES; 3 NO.; 1 ABSENT MOTION FAILECD FOR LACK OF 4 AFFIRMATIVE VOTES . ( 1573A) CHAIRMAN WEAVER. Do we have a positive motion? MR . BOOTH: I ' ll make a positive motion - willing to look: at new circumstances . APPEAL NO . 1573B MR . BOOTH: I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1573 with two conditions : 1 ) that there be a barrier that prevents the traffic flow between the east side of the proposed addition and Meadow Street, 2) conditioned upon the owners obtaining an agreement that is legally binding with K-Mart people that nothing will be built within ten ( 10 ' ) feet of their property line . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I would like to second the motion if you will accept a friendly amendment to the barrier . It would seem to me not essential to control the traffic: flow in Meadow Street or any Public way to provide a barrier the full length of the property rather that., as the property lire approaches Meadow Street that control of cross traffic: might well be useful in preventing our SSA MINUTES JULY 1., 1984 PAGE : 28 cross traffic:, and if you will accept a limitation to . . . MR , BOOTH: I don' t understand your point . 1 CHAIRMAN WEAVER! Well, all right . ( discussion► took: place which wasn' t picked up by the tape recorder because Chairman Weaver went over the the map and discussed the problem with Mr . Booth . ) MR . BOOTH: The portion respecting the barrier is only between the east side of the proposed addition and Meadow Street . Goes that satisfy you? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I second the motion . SECRETARY HOARD: I wonder about the binding thing . When the Board passes something that binds someone into getting some kind of an agreement from someone who really has no interest in what happens on the property . MR. BOOTH: Well we' ve done that with parking . SECRETARY HOARD: Well parking I think: is different though , Whoever owns the K-Mart property really is in a catbird seat when it comes to naming a price: for not building there so why would they want to . . MR . TOMLAN: I have problems with that as well . Ma . BAGNARGI : Yes, I do torn . I ' d like to make a motion to strike the K-Mart agreement from that . MR . TOMLAN: I think: it would be better if you made another motion after we voted on this one unless Dick: is willing to recall this rather than start muddying the waters . MR. BOOTH: Let ' s not have this take any more time then it has to . The reason I think: - I think: it stets a bad precedent to BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 29 completely remove a side requirement and I think in these circumstances this is a r-easonable way to deal with these cir-cumstances, that is that K-Mart is not likely to want to guild there . Arid we have clone similar kinds of conditioning with respect to off-street parking . MR. TOMLAN: I think: parking is a bit different though Richard. MR. BOOTH: Well I agree it is different . MR . TOMLAN: It seems to me that it is kind of an unwarranted burden upon the future., let alone the present Building Commis- sioners to keep track: of that kind of stipulation . That ' s a tre- mendous amount of case history . Par-king., it seems to me is in some sense more a zoning matter to the degree that it would af- fect., as a principal, a larger group or number of structures are larger - maybe a larger planning issue. I ' m not sure that we should ret into and I always have difficulties with notions pro- viding screens and things of this sort because it is awfully dif- ficult to come hack: and police those. MR . BOOTH: Well I think. it is no more difficult to police this than it is off-street parking and I will - my motion will stand although I don' t want to extend this if the . . . MR . TOMLAN: Let ' s have a vote . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Simple. - let ' s vote. MR . BOOTH: It is a motion to gr-aht the variance with two conditions . The findings are as listed below . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 :1 The proposed use is consistent with the character of the 6ZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 30 neighborhood . 2:i The owner has made a case. for having to put the: proposed building in its proposed location because of traffic flow on his property . VOTE : 1 YES , 4 NO: 1 ABSENT DENIED ( 1573H) CHAIRMAN HEAVER: Do I hear a positive motion of a different character? APPEAL NO . 1573C : CHAIRMAN 'BEAVER: I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1573 conditioned upon the creation of an adequate barrier to prevent traffic crossing the property line between the east edge of the proposed building and South Meadow Street . MS . BAGNARDI : I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) Appellant has demonstrated the need in expanding his business to violate the side yard setback: because of the peculiar arrangement of his business that requires good traffic flow within the lot., which requires the proposed location . 2) The protection of the side yard setback: does not provide a particular advantage or protection to the adjacent property owner because the adjacent property owner uses that for an entryway rather than for structural and it is not conceivable under the present arrangement that the property and the exit will be rearranged in the reasonable future . BZA MINUTES JULY j, 1984 PAGE : 31 d) The use proposed is a most appropriate use for the area and consistent with the development of the Elmira Road area. VOTE , 3 YES, 2 NO; 1 ABSENT ( 1573C) MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF 4 AFFIRMATIVE VOTES CHAIRMAN BEAVER' It seems to me that the Board has tried all possible variations, does anyone wish to make a further motion ! MR. BOOTH: One thing, the applicant might come back: when we have six members . Seriously . MR . TOMLAN' It would have to be a substantially different application . CHAIRMAN 'BEAVER; Mr . Shannon the motion to grant the variance has failed for lack: of four affirmative votes . May we have the next case please? BZA MINUTES JULY 1984 F'A(iE : 32 SECRETARY HOARD: The next ease is appeal number 1574., for 306 SOUTH CORN STREET : Appeal of Ellen Baer for an area variance for deficient setbacks for the front yard and both sideyards under Section 30 . 25, Columns 11, 11 and 13 of the Zoning Ordinance., to permit re- moval of the existing rear, wing of the two- family dwelling at 306 South Corn Street and construction of a larger- addition. The prop- erty is located in an R-2b ( residential one- and two-family dwellings) use district in which the existing use is permitted however the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies under Section 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 before a building permit or certifi- cate of occupancy can be issued for the pro- posed construction . CHAIRMAN WEAVER' There is ,just one corr-ection in the reading and in the official notice . There is a question about whether' this is 308 or 306 . It is 308? MS , BAER : 306-308 . CHAIRMAN WEAVER' That is the right title of the property? MS . BAER: Right . CHAIRMAN WEAVER. Okay . The house says 308, is that correct? MS . BAER: Right . CHAIRMAN ',BEAVER: All right - so we all understand and the record shows that it is . . . Some of our- papers =shows 306 and some of it shows 308 but we ar-e talking about your structure, rightl` All right., you need to identify yourself . MS . BAER, I ' m Ellen Baer'., I live at 308 S . Cor-n Street , One thing that I would like to clear up which the Planning Board had a question about was, I forgot to put in on the drawing that there is a set of stair's that go to the second floor and that ' s BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE : 33 on the north side . CHAIRMAN WEAVERi Is there anything that you would like to add to the script? MS . BAER: I think: that ' s sufficient . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So as I understand it, you intend to remove the existing enclosed rear porch? MS . BAER: Yes . There is no way to make it livable . MR . TOMLAN; In what sense do you mean unlivable? MS . BAER: Well at present the ceiling height runs from eight foot to five foot and I suppose I could raise the roof except that the foundation is also falling apart and so I propose to take it down and thea rebuild it - put a whole new foundation in . MR . TOMLAN, And is there any reason for making it larger than what it presently now is? MS . BAER: Well I ' d like it to be a living room - eight by twelve is not sufficient space - it ,just wouldn' t make sense for me to put that much money in it to make that kind of space . MR . TOMLAN. But there is nothing magic: about eight by twelve, it could be eight by fifteen or ten by twelve or . . . MS . BAER: Well the eight was the problem - it was most of the problem. I originally wanted to go with twelve by eighteen and then thought that that wouldn' t work: so I ,just reduced it to twelve by fifteen. I would have gone with fourteen by fifteen but the roof coming down - I have to have a lot of (unintelligi- ble) down into the roof to have the roof height at the outer edge . BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE , 34 CHAIRMAN WEAVER , Will there be an exit out of the proposed room? MS . BAER: Yeas; there will be stairs that go out into the back yard . MR . BOOTH: You don' t propose to move any closer to your south property line? MS . BAER : No . MR . BOOTH, What is: now in back: Of the house on that long narrow piece? MS , BAER: My garden . MR. BOOTH' Is there a wood pile track: there'' I was looking at it from the street . MS , BAER: The wood pile is on the. north side of the house . MR . BOOTH: That is somebody else' s? MS , BAER: That is my wood pile, that is on the north side . MR. BOOTH: A shed with a lot of wood, way back:? MS . BAER: Oh no, that is: on the other property . MR. BOOTH: That ' s on the other property, okay . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there any questions from the Board? All right thank you . Is there anyone else who wishes to speak: in support of this; application? Anybody who wishes to speak: in opposition to this application? Do I hear a motion? BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE : 35 APPEAL NO , 1574 ACTION OF THE BOARD The: Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of Ellen Baer for an area variance for deficient setbacks for the front yard and both side yards to permit removal of the existing rear wing of the two-family dwelling at 106-308 South Corn Street and con- struction of a larger addition . The decision of the Board was as follows : MS , C.00KINGHAM: I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1574 . MS , BAGNARDI : I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The existing building cannot be moved in a manner that would bring it into conformity with the various requirements of the several columns of the zoning ordinance . 2) The result of the expansion will result in upgrading of the neighborhood . 3) Character of the neighborhood wit not be changed by this construction . 4) The narrow strip at the rear of the property creates a practical difficulty in conforming with the Ordinance . VOTE ! 5 YES; 0 NO: 1 ABSENT GRANTED I BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE : 36 SECRETARY HOARD . The next ease: is appeal number 1575, 118 WAIT AVENUE : Appeal of George and Judith Nemethy for an area variance for- deficient setbacks for the front yard and both sideyards under Section 30 . 15 , Columns 11, 11,, and 13 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construc- tion of an addition to the: rear of the single-family house at 118 Wait Avenue. The property is: located in an R-1a ( resi- dential one- and two-family dwelling) use district in which the existing use is per- mitted; however the appellants must obtain an area variance for the listed deficien- cies under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 before a building permit or certificate of com- pliance can be issued for the addition . MR. NEIMETH: I ' m George Neimeth, 118 Wait Avenue. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anything that you would like to say to expand your script on this application? MR . NEIMETH: No., I think: - if there are any questions I ' m willing to answer them . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: All right . Ar-e there any questions from the Board? MR , BOOTH: My only question is that I understand from your diagram that, I guess on the wester-r► side of your property - where the new deck: is being constr°ucted,, is that west? , CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Let ' s agree that it is the northwest corner- of the structure . MR , BOOTH: All right , northwest corner of the structure . You are not going to go any closer to that property line than from the existing building already is? MR . NEIMETH: No it will be a continuation of the existing BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1964 PAGE : 37 building . MR. BOOTH : All right . MR . TOMLAN: I don' t have a question., I would ,just like to make a comment that I would congratulate you on the clarity of your appeal . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Are there: any further questions or comments? Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes_, to speak: in support of this application? Is there anyone who Wishes to speak: in o►pposition to this application? Seeing no one further to be heard, do I hear a motion? BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1954 PAGE , Is APPEAL NO . 1575 ACTION OF THE BOARD The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of George and Judith Nemethy for aro area variance for deficient setbacks for the front yard and both sideyards to permit construction of an addition to the rear of the single-family house at 118 Wait Avenue . The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . BAGNARDI : I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1575 . MR. TOMLAN: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) This: addition observes the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance . 2) This construction doesn' t change the character of the area of the neighborhood . 3) Practical difficulties were: made in that the existing non- conforming side yard setbacks would require demolition of the building in order to conform to the Ordinance , ROTE : 5 YES; D NO; 1 ABSENT GRANTED BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PANE : 39 SECRETARY HOARD: Appeal number 1576 , 517 NORTH CAYUGA STREET : Appeal of Mark Zaharis and Peter Zaharis for an area variance for deficient setbacks for one side yard and the rear yard under Section 30 . 25, Columns 13 and 14 of the Zoning Ordi- nance to permit an addition to the north side of the existing building at 517 North Cayuga Street (formerly Ithaca Foreign Car Service) . The appellants plan to use the property for a laundromat . The property is located in a 8-2a (business) use district, in which the proposed use is permitted; however, the ap- pellants must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies under erections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 before a building permit or a certifi- cate of occupancy can be issued for the new addition and use . MR. KERRIGAN, Mr . Chairman, Members of the Board, Mr . Hoard, I ' m .Jim Kerrigan, I represent Mark and Peter Zaharis . I ' ll try to be very brief but I would also like to point out one change in terms of the application as originally made . The application is in a B-2a zone, the application is for a permitted use, it is an ap- plication for an area variance. At the present time the property is a non-conforming use of an automobile service station, I as- sume most members of the Board are familiar- with the Cayuga Street, Marshall Street., Mic:k:ey' s Market area and I will not dwell at length on that, there are three photographs on the ex- hibit., indicating the present use of the property, all of which photographs were: taken at a time when the business was closed - it was not in use at that time. I also apologize for the cut and paste sketch bort we discovered about quarter of five this after- noon that Acrogr aphics is closed for two weeks and it is probably a good opportunity to explain, if I may, the one change that we BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 WAGE : 40 have made: since the application . After appearing before the Planning Board, the Planning Board recommended the approval by five affirmative votes., no negative votes., and one abstention . As proposed to the Planning Board - let me back: up for- a moment -this: is: a site plan of the ( unintelligible') which shows the lot -the existing building and I am not sure (unintelligible) - I tried to outline in red - this structure here as is shown by the photographs . The original application that you have before you and which was submitted to the. Planning Board was for the exten- sion of the building along the east lot line for- a total distance of sixty-nine feet . It has been scaled tack; to an application for sixty-one feet., even with the support of the Planning Board . So the building now, as proposed, at a total length of sixty-one feet would meet the side. yard requirement and, in fact leaves a ten foot side yard requirement . I have tried to outline in a color that ' s perhaps too close - more than a foot and one-half in 4 orange, the addition which the appellants are asking to add to the building , Mr . Zahar-is, Mark: and Pete, wish to convert the use of the building to a laundr omat . The pr act ical difficulties in terms of the a=_:age of the lot at the present time even for the conforming use relates to the fact that the building is built on two lot lines within inches., if that much, on Moth sides . They considered expanding towards Cayuga Street to try and make an economically feasible use: for- the building as a laundromat, they have determined, in para, based on their experience. in operating a Laundromat in the west end that they need more square footage BZA MINUTES JULY 2 , 1984 PAGE , 41 than the existing building would permit to economically operate a laundromat . Two alternatives that were seriously considered would be, first to extend the building south, excuse me, extend the building north towards Marshall Street which is a residential zone. This is a residential zone. The other alternative would be to extend the building towards Cayuga Street or west . The consequence of and the reason that the extension west was turned down by the Zaharis' of their consideration is that if the build- ing is brought west, the four parking spaces required by the Or- dinance would dictate entrance to those parking spaces from Mar- shall Street, closer to the residential zone . Ever: if entrance were made right at the intersection we would only be able to park two spaces inside of the sidewalk, one behind - side by side and not be able to park: in back . So the determination was made that if construction cost limits required using existing and continua- tion of existing walls which is the reason for the practical dif- ficulty if-fic:ulty requested to make an application to extend the property to the north. As I ' ve indicated, we' ve brought it back: to sixty- one feet, the parking would be solely on the four spaces along Cayuga Street., there is an existing curb cut into the present automobile repair shop . They would propose to close completely the curb cut along Marshall Street,, which is a residential zone, and replace that with a grass strip and sidewalk, trees and addi- tional grass. In terms of the proposal that they are now making in the use of the property, as I ' ve indicated in the application, they would expect to operate open early in the morning when there 82A MINUTES JULY 2 , 1984 PAGE : 42 is not significant traffic and use based on their experience in another laundromat., they would expect to start closing at ten., but this means by the time the last quarter ire the last machine has run through it would be as late as eleven . They are pr-opos- ing that with the possible exception of a small window facing Marshall Street, all windows would face the commercially coned Cayuga Street . They will staff" it as needed. They expect that it will be staffed early in the morning to open. They expect that it will be staffed in the evening hour=_:, particularly for a couple of hours at clear►-up . If' additional times and traffic indicate that it will be required or suggest that it is staffed, it will be staffed as needed during the day . The Zahar is ' s oper- ate three businesses about a mile from this area, or► Taughannock Blvd , The permitted uses: in this: particular zone at the present time, with no change, would permit the use of that building for theater, or a bar , or- a restaurant., or an arcade., fast food or- retail shop . It would appear that so far as the concern of neighboring residents that this is perhaps the least intrusive application that can be made . The toning permits., I think., sixty or, seventy feet in this zone, they would riot talk: to me about any addition in height to this structure. It would remain at the existing height as extended, to what I believe is twenty feet to the north on the property . Their existing experience with a laundromat is that there is no noise, there is no oder ., there is no vibration, Ira terms of the property, both Mr , Zaharis' ,, Mark and Fete, are here to answer any questions that you have, so in BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 43 essence this is an application the: practical difficulties of the construction necessity of extending existing walls along a prop- erty line . 1 can answer questions. - the Zaharis ' s will . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Question that might become important . Who owns this property? MR. KERRIGAN: At the present time it is owned by Mr . Brumsted and his partner . Mr . €trumsted is here this evening . It is under -there is an option to purchase the property dependent upon this determination this evening . CHAIRMAN WEAVER! Is Mr . Brumsted the proprietor of the present business? MR . KERRIGAN: Yes . MR, BOOTH: Where would the vents be for the machines`' MR. KERRIGAN: There would be an exhaust for the driers in the roof at the front of the structure. With energy efficiency the exhaust is, not voluminous , On the Cayuga Street property I think: when they did a ten or five degree or colder day you can see the water vapor freezing when it hits below freezing air but other than that I don' t think: any exhaust - you can see condensation when it ' s down twenty degrees below the freezing level . MR . TUMLAN: I noted in your thesis or dissertation., as Charlie likes to call it., of the copy of the application, that it was stated the applicant ' s based on their experience in operating a laundromat have determined that the minimum size from which an efficient, economical and attractive laundromat can be operated BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE ., 44 is a building seventeen fifty square feet . Why can' t the present building serve adequately the needs for an efficient., economical and attractive laundromat? MR . KERRIGAN' The number of machines required to ,justify the use and cost of the building.. as 1 understand the determination. Economies of scale is the simpliest answer . MR : 3ClMLAAl: That ' s even c:c►r►siderir►�� the reduced operating hours? MR . KERRIGAN: What reduced operating hours? MR . TOMLAN: The hours that are perhaps a little smaller or shorter than other laundromats about the city . MR. KERRIGAN. Most of them operate about this time frame . There is no serious business conducted in any of the laundromats that I ' m aware of before seven or eight in the morning and after eight thirty or nine at right for the most part . There is use but: it is riot what - you are used to your peak: hours Saturday morning for example . . MR . BOOTH: How will this compare in square footage with other laundromats in the city? MR . KERRIGAN: It ' s half the sire of Taughannock: Blvd? About half the size of their operation on Taughannock: Blvd, I don' t know if you know the square footage of the other properties in the town or not . CHAIRMAN WEAKER: Pardon me just a moment . I assume those children are accompanied by at least one adult? I would hope you Could control at least the older, ones . Thank: you very much. Go ahead . BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 PAGE , 45 MR . ZAHARIS : I . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Wait a minute:., Pete. We have additional questions:., why don' t you come up and get yourself on the record . Sitting back there, you merely part of the chorus . MR . BOOTH: A voice in the wilderness . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Pull the mike over so that - pull it toward you or you won' t - still won' t make it . All right . Thank: you . MR. ZAHARIS: fir► the basis of that previous question, with the exception of the Coop Laundry on West Clinton Street and with the exception of our laundry which we have on Taughannock: Blvd . , I would say that the size of this as we hope to have it., would be very much in line within three or four hundred square feet of the majority of the laundromats in the city . And we are speaking in terms of roughly forty to forty-five pieces of equipment., where on Taughannoc:k: Blvd. we: have eighty-five pieces of equipment . SECRETARY HOARD: Would you identify yourself for the record? MR. ZAHARIS : I ' m sorry . I ' m Peter Zaharis., I live at 145 Iradell Road and operate a business in the west end of Ithaca . MR . BOOTH: I guess part of the question then is, I ' m not sure that this: is, if my reading of this is accurate, you are proposing to add seven hundred square feet to this existing building, approximately? MR. ZAHARIS : It ' s been changed a couple of times . MR. KERRIGAN: It is smaller than that now. MR. ZAHARIS : We were originally about forty-one feet by twenty- four or twenty-five feet and now we have proposed to add twenty 8ZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 WAGE : 46 feet by twenty-four- so that would be about five hundred -a little less than five hundred square feet . One of the things that hap- pens in this: situation is that we cannot use the existing struc- ture without serious improvement and one of the improvements be- ing the removal, almost completely, of - as we are looking at it -the left wall with the bevel on it because of the low ceiling and structural support that is there . So this is one expense., of course, in a new development that is going., in the long run, re- quire more business being developed at that site in order to com- pensate for the increased cost of construction . Therefore we stretch out a little bit in order to have a laundry with adequate equipment developing a volume that will support the new construc- tion . MR . TOMLAN; What would be the turning point insofar as the number of square foot that you see. - is this the bottom line, I mean you have already moved it back: once right from the edge. Where is the turning point so far as the number of machines or the square footage required? Your best guess . MR . ZAHARIS : Well I would dare say that we - five or six feet . In order to get the equipment in there . MR. TOMLAN. Is: that based on the number of machines, basically? MR . ZAHARIS : Yes . MR . TOMLAN: I see . MR . ZAHARIS : We have: scaled it down already and we find that one of the reasons we feel that our laundry has been successful at the other location is that it is a comfortable place for people BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 PAGE : 47 to come and do their laundry . People aren' t crowded., they have plenty of room to move around., there are folding tables - there is a lounging area., I mean it is a pretty nice place to come and do your laundry . We have the same intentions for this area - in fact we had hoped that we would even have something that we don' t have at our other place, a - it wouldn' t be an extended area but an area where parents could leave their children,, where they wouldn' t need to worry about their children running around and some of this extra space that we have, would permit us to do that . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Further questions? Is there anything either of you would like to add? Thank: you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak: in support of this application? I don' t want to confuse the issue but you said that the owner of the property is present tonight? MR . KERRIGAN: Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I have at least one question, so I assume you are interested in a sale, so you would please come up and identify yourself? MR . BRUMSTED: My name is David Brumsted., I ' m the owner of the property and I live at 601 .':youth Cayuga Street . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you . Is there a strong reason that the use of the building is impractical for other accepted uses in the district? MR . BRUMSTED: In that zoning district? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Yes . BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 PAGE : 48 MR , BRUMSTED : Not that I know of . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: If this sale is not consumated, have you had a long series of pr-oposals to purchase? MR. BRUMSTED: The sale of this property, we have a purchase offer signed with a larger facility that is properly toned that we would like to move into and the closing on that pr-operrty is directly dependent upon us selling this and there seems to be a time limit on buying the other property, therefore we ar-e . . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: But you haven' t had a long experience of having the property listed unsuccessfully . MR . BRUMSTED : No . MS , BAGNARDI : How long has it been on the market? MR . BRUMSTED: It hasn' t officially been can the market., it was not listed with a realtor so it has always been on the market . MS . BAGNARDI : Pardon me? MR . BRUMSTED: Well, it hasn' t officially been listed. MS . BAGNARDI : Thank you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Any further question of Mr . Brumsted? 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? I ' m aware there is quite a gallery here tonight and I doubt so if we could have - when we have this: mane - I ' m not going to the fir-ewor-ks tonight - but I would like to go away after awhile - so please, if all you are doing is saying "me too" please do it briefly and I don ' t mean to { shut off anyone that has something to acid to the facts of the 8ZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1904 WAGE : 49 ease . MR . HERMAN: My name is Harold Herman, 609 North Cayuga Street . I wish to speak succinctly in opposition to the laundromat . First and foremost I think we have to consider the Melice house- hold. They are the house that is directly east of the proposed laundromat . As it presently stands now the bottom level of - it ' s a two story house - the bottom level has only one window facing the west and a small porch. The other windows on the bottom are blocked by the existing structure . The proposal for the laundro- mat would block another window and possibly, I guess, part of the porch as it exists now. That is, A. B I wish to address: the traffic: density . They propose in excess of twenty machines . Maximum they could legally park: five cars . Where would the addi- tional czars park? In other parts of the neighborhood. Directly east, we are going right down Marshall Street three houses with no off-street parking . Each of these families: have little child- ren . I think: two of them are at least under two, perhaps: the third house up there that has a child may be four or five . A- cross the street., there is also limited parking . On Cayuga Street, directly west., North Cayuga :street, there is no parking allowed - the block: is: also used for the New York: State driving tests . That ' s another case and that is: B . C . Absenteeism. As it is now Cayuga Street is a very heavily traversed corridor . Kids go to the high school., the ,junior high school and Stewart Park: and also people pick it up to go to Route 13 . Are we going to bring in more people who are travelling this way with an un- BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 50 supervised place? Those are my main concerns . Another one is the neighborhood itself . I mean, if you look: in the the dictionary., the term of "neighbor" it means compatibility., friendship and getting along . I don' t think anybody here would consider a mood neighbor somebody who will be up at six a . m. , go to sleep at eleven p . m. , causing possible disturbances, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday., Wednesday., Thursday., Friday, Saturday - the en- tine weekend and every holiday . I wouldn' t call that a good neighbor . A good neighbor is somebody who is compatible and friendly . That is from the Merriman► dictionary., I looked it up . I also Wouldn' t call it a good neighbor if you are willing to block: a per-son' s windows: when there is limited light as is . If you go to the floor above and you look: out., you look: out on the roof of the existing structure . Not only will they look. out on the roof of the existing structure but they will also be looking out on the exhaust vents from the dryer . That was; my own person- al succinct statement . However there is a prepared statement - I don' t know if the members of the Board have received it or not -okay. It is signed by thirty-three people . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Could I identify this as a two page . . . MR . HERMAN: Yes, two pages, right . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: The second page of which is arguments one through five? MR . HERMAN : Five, yes . MR . TOMLAN. Do we: have copies of the signatures? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I assume the original is in the Building BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 51 Commissioner ' s office . MR . TOMLAN: Could we have a copy? MR . HERMAN: You can have: the: original . Now we, the neighborhood or the people who live in close proximity., you know., we are riot political protesters and we. feel that we have the right to come home to quiet after our- day of work and we are not against commercialism - we don't mind if it would be say a florist shop, professic: BZA MINUTES ,JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 52 - we want to limit the amounts of people that are passing through as is right now - that ' s one of our main thing: - the heavy usage of Cayuga Street . MR. BOOTH Well when I was there today there must have been seven or eight cars (unintelligible) MR . HERMAN: Okay . MR, BOOTH: They looked like they had been parked there for substantially a (unintelligible) ' MR . HERMAN: That ' s e:.ac:tly the point . If it ' s substantial, its fine, if you are going to go and have your car fixed., you leave it there and you pick: it up at a different hour . It isn' t a con- tinual thing . Laundries do business after people come from work: just when you are coming home, you want to relax, well when we come home we want to relax - this is whey► people are doing their- laundry., they do their laundry., they do their drying, and its in and out . It ' s a continual thing until eleven p . m. -seven days a week, including holidays . MR. BOOTH: How about noise from the existing business:, MR . HERMAN: Minimum. There isn' t any. I guess oc:c:asionally . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: This didn' t create any parking problem or anything in the neighborhood - the present business? MR. HERMAN: I mean., I would say occasionally there is a parking problem when► they are really busy but - you know - people come and they pick up the car- and it is gone but it is not a continual thing . MR , BOOTH: The house that is built immediately east of the BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 53 existing building., which was built first? MR . HERMAN: I don ' t know . VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE : The garage was built in 1938 . I don' t know when the house was built . MR . HERMAN: Could other people come up here - if they know the answers it would be a lot better . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: If you will get through with your remarks, someone else could come up . So if you don' t have arty further . . . . MR . HERMAN: I personally don' t have anything further to say . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you very much . MR. KERRIGAN: Mr . Chairman, before we start, is it possible that we could review the two page statement that has been submitted - is there a copy that we could look at while they are speaking? CHAIRMAN WEAVER : Yes . MS . ANDERSON, I ' m Alice Anderson,, 11ive at 604 North Cayuga Street, I have lived here for thirteen years . Ten years ago, many of us who - some of us are still in the rteighbor-hood - we signed a petition in 1974 for a variance to change from what was a gas station., a filling station, to a garage because 1 ) it was less disruptive to the neighborhood., 2) it was less noise than a gas station., 3) it dict not operate except during normal business hours of eight to five., Monday through Friday, eight to noon on Saturday . It seems to me that a laundromat coming in with hours from six a. m, to eleven p .m. is just reversing what had been done by this neighborhood ten years ago. There is going to be a tre- mendous increase in traffic,, parking is a severe problem and the BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 54 neighborhood will have: to absorb the parking . People generally, when they go do their laundry - when I ' ve used laundromat=_: -you go in, you put your wash in., you go out., and you do an errand, you come back: in and put your wash in the dryer, go out - do another errand - come back and collect your wash. I think that is going to generate a terrific: amount of traf'f'ic; in and out on Cayuga Street which is very busy already . The parking along the east side of that block: - the five hundred block of Cayuga Street is a one-hour parking zone . It takes longer than one hour to go and do a load of laundry and get it into the dryer and out and back into your czar . The parking is a severe problem. And that is what I wanted to add to what ' s not been said . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank; you. Yes sir . MR . VANBENSCOTEN: Guy VanBenscoten, 602 North Cayuga Street . I am not against a laundromat but I am concerned about what is go- ing to happen if it aloes in - I ' m going to be there - some sort of questions that have been raised, you asked have there been problems with parking and noise. Yes there had been at some paints in time - I think in the streets filed on the addresses that Commissioner Hoard had written to Dave saying that there were problems and he is going to ask: them to abide by the vari- ance that was granted by the Board of toning Appeals . But the problems were some parking., which would be more so by a laundro- mat and also noise at night . I called him once because (unintel- ligible) ten thirty they were open for business but there were folks who usually work down there using an air gun at ten thirty BZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE , 55 at night and I was trying to sleep in the summertime with the windows open. My house fronts Cayuga Street and we sleep in the front with the bedroom windows all open during the warmer hours , I am concer-ned., if it groes through., I am concerned what r-ecour-se do I have if there is: a lot of noise from folks going in and out at night while we are trying to sleep . Who do I complain to then because - what if I am forced to close those windows and buy a central air conditioner and stuff? Where is that going to come from? The cur-rent owners - this gentleman here asked how are they - Clave - they ar-e excellent neighbors., good friends -hope- fully after- I 'm through talking we' ll stili be good friends . The Zaharis ' s are (unintelligible) business people here in town and I don' t think: they are - you know - some fly by night firm is going to come in, but the conc:erro is , if it groes in., according to my interpretation of the laws., if' they want to use the existing building it would be a moot point, they would have no problem. I still have these concerns because the character- of the block is zoned 1Ba or whatever the official word is - B2a - could you help me:' BZa. The character of the business is - there was a gas station that was converted to a professional office by Dr . Gibson at 5011 North Cayuga and they ar-e open during the "conventional normal business hours" - the North side Wines and Liquors which used to be open late at night and had noise - had an unfortunate fire occur there and the building was r-azed - Northside Pharmacy is open seven clays a week: - normal business hours Monday through Thursday, I think they ar-e open late Friday - open Saturday until BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 56 three or five and open on Sundays until one . So the character of the block: is mor-e of a business: hours - more normal than what is proposed by the variance request . So there is concern there . Concern about more traffic coming through than with cars now. Now cars come in as Mr . Herman has said they come in and there is people drop off- their car-s at the repair, shop the night before or in the morning and from five o' clock on or- from sig o' clock on things are really quiet and ar-e relatively quiet on Saturday and Sunday . So I am concerned about the - I know it doesn' t really speak: to the: matter that this Boar-d can address - the use vari- ance but the question basically boils down to will the quality of life and the welfare of r-es-idential neighborhoods be equal to what it is now or- will it have a negative impact on the quality of life in the residential neighbor-hood and are we trying to - do we value that at ally' And if we don' t value it then so be it . Thank you folks very much . CHAIRMAN WEAVER : Thank you . MR. HINES : I ' m Bob Hines, 417 N. Cayuga Street . I hadn' t in- tended to speak tonight but I do know the history of this proper- ty and to the extent that it bears on this and is helpful, I ' d .just as soon pass it along . My cousin., Bill Porter-, operated a gas station at this location since its conception. It was built in 1938 . Prior- to its construction., this lot was occupied by two houses., the corner-most house was torn down and the house next door which would be the southernmost house, was moved to the lo- cation neat east of this structure. Now that is the one with the r . BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 PAGE , 57 windows overlooking the: property., was once located on Cayuga Street but when Speno bought the: property and built the station he moved this particular house around . When the station was first built., it was built as a one-bay station with a lift adja- cent to the room which has got the bevel . About ten years later they built a wash bay which then completely filled up the rest of the lot and adjoined the property line . The next north of what is the washrooms now, is a gas tank: - underground gas tank that developed a leak: and back in the days when there were a little different rules, they allowed Bill Porter to puncture it and fill it with cement so immediately north of where the northend of the building is:., there is a buried gasoline tank full of cement . I don' t know what bearing that would have on construction but I thought maybe they ought to know that before they bought it be- cause I think: it would be kind of hard to get around Now this information was gathered over a period of time in conversations with my cousin and I thought, for whatever help it gives the Board. I tt►+.ught they might be interested. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you very much. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? Yes . MR. BORDONARCI: My name is Anthony Bordonar o, I live at 110 E . Marshall Street . I ' ve been here over four- and one-half years . My main concern about this proposed laundromat is the. traffic problem. We are having a traffic problem now as it is . We have cars parked on both sides of your driveway ( unintelligible) get in and out of it , I think: traffic: will be increased tremendously BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1904 PAGE , 58 with the proposed laundromat, mainly because of what someone said earlier about the New York: State Driver ' s Testing area is right across the street - there is no parking there all day long - I think: it is from Monday through Thursday that would create a problem. And I think: there is only maybe room enough for four or five czars to park: in there so the rest are going to have to park: down Marshall Street on both sides of the street which leaves very little room for two-way traffic:, especially when you have big heavy trucks coming around constantly . New York State Gas and Electric: - everybody ,just uses that for a turn-around - they come right through there. So, I think: traffic:-wise, it is going to increase tremendously, I really don' t think: this variance should be granted mainly because of the traffic: problem. Also, I understand from what other laundromats experience late at night -they are having problems with bathrooms - with facilities not having a bathroom. People having to go to the bathroom after dark will go around the corner between a house and urinate . I know that sounds strange but I think: it does happen and there is no way - even if it is staffed - I don' t see how you are going to watch people or watch them twenty-four hours a day going around a corner and take - and urinating . Those are my main concerns -traffic and that . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you. Yes., come forward . MR. ANDERSON: My name is Robert Anderson and I live at 604 North Cayuga Street . I would ,just like to comment about the area vari- ance here. Mr . Kerrigan in his presentation indicated that the BZA MINUTES JULY 1, IS84 PAGE , 59 building was only going to extend a shorter distance now and kind of slipped in that now there would be no lack: of agreement with the use regulations and I ,just want to emphasize that . . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Chid you mean use., you ,just said? MR. ANDERSON: Excuse me, the area., right - with the area re- quirements and I just want to emphasise that the building is cry►ly two feet from the next door residence and that they will be ex- tending this along that same lire and so it would be a longer building only two feet away from the residence and it seems to me that the Board has indicated a concern for that type of problem and I ' d like to emphasize that it seems to me that this is a par- ticular serious: problem for this particular type of business be- cause it is a business which is: going to be generating some fumes and some emissions and with a laundromat that close to the build- ing it seems to me that that is a particular problem and that you ought to think: very seriously about granting a use variance in that particular situation. In their application they indicate that there are no fumes coming out of the dryers and it seems to me that that is obviously wrong - these are gas dryers -you have the .same type of fumes coming out of these things, that come out of a furnace, in addition to all the moisture and the lint and so on and if there weren' t these type of fumes, they wouldn' t have to be vented to the outside in the first place and it seems to me that no matter what you say., that there is a real problem here with the area regulations and that they ought to be upheld in this particular situation. They do great damage to -particularly BZA MINUTES JULY 1 , 1984 PAGE : 60 the building to the: east., even to the building on the south . CHAIRMAN WEAVER : Thank you . MR . FRANCESCO: My name: is Melice Francesco, I live at 1013 East Marshall Street . That is close to this - where they plan to block the window so I am against this laundromat . There will be more traffic: besides for the block and the windows . We already have two windows blocked - they are in back: of the building so we don' t want to have another one, too because that is the only one left . We ,just bought the house, me and my brother and my sister . MR . BOOTH: You own the house immediately east of this property? MR . FRANCESCO : Yes . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank you . MS . EVERSHEED! I ' m Donna Evershed and I live at 601 North Cayuga Street - that ' s right across East Marshall Street from this prop- erty and my main concerns are the parking . Most of the overflow is going to first park; basically in my front yard. 1 have off- street parking - enough provided for my tenant and myself but we have guests on weekends and evenings and the parking isn' t going to be available for them at that time. Another concern that ' s mentioned in the petition was the pollution and the lint and how this: could affect allergies adversely . My son and I both have allergies, that we are tieing treated for several times a year as it is now without extra pollution. We miss school and work re- lated to the allergies; and if this should increase it might be- come impossible for us to stay under those conditions if it were a laundromat . The hours that are currently used there for busi- BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 61 ness are adequate because evenings and weekends ar-e relatively quiet . I feel that if a variance - if' some business needed a variance to comply with these same hours that are presently being used, that it would be more adequate than the extensive hours that are being proposed with the Laundromat . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Thank: you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak: in opposition to this application' Anyone further to be heard on this application? Yes . MS . EATON: My name is Karos Eaton, I ' m a wife and mother, I ' m the mother- of a two year old ( unintelligible) , I also take care of other children . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Where do you live? MS . EATON: 105 E . Marshall Street . The conc:er-ri I have is that I take care of other- childr-en plug: mine. They play out front a lot and I ' m very much worried about the traffic: and the incoming, all the time of the different types of people at all hours - you know from six in the morning until ten at night and I feel that I wouldn' t want to see the accidents of the children . There is enough bad traffic. as is to have kids getting - you know -people coming irk and out . The other concer-ri I have is , I ' m very sensi- tive to fumes and every laundr�omat that I ' ve ever seen - you can smell them a mile away from the chemicals that are in the soap and I don' t feel that it is fain for the people that live in Fall Creek: - we pay our- taxes - to have to deal with those type of fumes . I also feel that there would be. a lot of different types of people walking around because they drop their laundry off and EZA MINUTES JULY 2., 1984 PAGE : 62 I feel that my children mould be affected that way - with people walking around the neighbor hood. Thanks a lot . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Is there anyone further- who wishes to be heard on this matter? Mr Zahar-is you may be heard . MR . ZAHARIS : 1 wanted to address just a couple of the remarks that were: made. We' ve operated our, laundry on Taughannoc:k. Blvd , for thirteen years . We have nevem in one instance in thirteen years had a complaint because of the noise factor- . The other matter, which I would like to point out is that the requirements -the parking requir-ements for, this proposed operation are tieing met and contrar-y to what has been said., the parking on the oppo- site side where the motor vehicle people do their testing -the restrictions there are Monday, Wednesday and Friday from eight a . m. to five p .m. and otherwise there ar-e no parking restrictions noted there on any of those signs . VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE , That is incorrect . Cur-r ent ly the signs read: : Monday., Tuesday., Wednesday - eight a . m. to five p . m. The Department of Motor Vehicles is consider-ing . . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: None of this is going on the r-ecord as long as you stay knack. there. If' we did., by chance pick it up., we wouldn' t know who is speaking . MS . ANDERSON: I ' m Alice Ander-son., do I need to give my address again! 604 North Cayuga Street , The Department of Motor Vehi- cles regulation on par-king is: eight a. m. to five p . m, ., Monday., Tuesday and Wednesday is: what the current sign says , I believe, in fact., it operates: Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, Thursday and BZA MINUTES JULY 1., 1984 PAGE : 63 the signs have not yet been c:han►ged. And there was a phone call to that Departmen►t today and there is consideration of expanding their testing period to Friday . The north side of the park, on West Marshall street is also a no parkin►g during those same hours because the trucks, buses., motorcycles -applicants for their dri- vers test use that area: Between► that and the one hour parking in front of the commercial district of the five hundred block: of North Cayuga Street where are the people going to park:? MR . BOOTH: I have a couple of questions for Mr . Zaharis . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Mr . Zaharis, would you come back to the mike, please . MR . BOOTH: What is - your operation on Taughannoc:k: Blvd . ., are there houses close by? MR . ZAHARIS : No . MR. BOOTH: Secondly., are you going to provide bathroom facilities in this laundromat? MR. ZAHARIS : We hadn' t intended to. If it were a requirement., we would consider it . MR . BOOTH: It is evidentally not a requirement , Does that mean you are not providing . . . MR. ZAHARIS : No I mean► if it were a stipulation► of the Board . MF'. . BOOTH: That would be a first . Thank you . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: So there: won' t be any misunderstanding . I ' ve called for further persons who wish to speak, and it is the Chair ' s understan►ding that no one further wishes to address this Board on this matter`' And so I ' ll now ask: the Board for a BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE : 64 snot ion MR. TOMLAN: I wanted to ask: Richard if he was going to get barriers., whether- he was going to get bathrooms., what ' s next Richard? BZA MINUTES JULY 1, 1984 PAGE , 65 APPEAL NO . 157+ - 517 NORTH C:AYUGA STREET The: Board considered the appeal of Mark: and Peter Zaharis for an area variance for deficient stbac:k:s for one side yard and the rear yard under Section 30 . 15, Columsn 13 and 14 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit an addition to the north side of the exist- ing building at 517 North Cayuga Street (formerly Ithaca Foreign Car Service) . The appellants plan to use the property for a laundromat . The property is located in a B-7a (business) use district, in which the proposed use is permitted; however the appellants must obtain art area variance for the listed deficien- CieS under Sections 30 , 49 and 30 . 57 before a building permit or a certificate of oc:cupanc:y can be issued for the new addition and use . The decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals was as follows : MR. TOMLAN; I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1576 . MS . COOKINGHAM: I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) Testimony from the neighbors and a petition indicated that there was feeling in the neighborhood that a conversion of the use of this as a laundromat would be harmful to the neighborhood . 1.1 The proposed variance would increase the congestion in the neighborhood and contribute to an already heavy traffic flow . 3) The proposed extension of the building would extend the deficiencies of the rear yard . 4) The practical difficulties and special conditions which would BZA MINUTES JULY 2, 1984 PAGE , 66 make compliance with the regulations impossible have not been fully or satisfactorily addressed . 5) Evidence suggests strongly that there is an existing viable economic use of this property . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Discussion? MR, BOOTH; I this►k it is: a particularly important point that this would be a very significant expansion of a building which, for all practical purposes has no setback: . In my opinion that is a very major factor . That, coupled with the fact that this is a commercial structure as opposed to a residential structure means that the use will be quite extensive . CHAIRMAN WEAVER: I ' d like to comment that, as I understand prac- tical difficulties, part of our determination is: based upon how the owner got into those difficulties . In this case., we don' t clearly identify the owner in our determination. The owner of record has demonstrated no difficulties other than his desire to sell it and he has: a buyer., apparently. Whether that demon- strates a difficulty that carries through to the proposed buyer is certainly debatable and I question whether it can survive that transition . If we are looking at an owner of a building who has the embarrassment of owning a building that has no setbacks or essentially no setbacks, he was having difficulty in maintaining or operating his business without expanding it., it would seem to me substantially different- than looking at a new proposal on the structure that would allow a variety - an expansion► that would allow a variety of possible purchasers - so I am "hung up" with BZA MINUTES ,.JULY 2,, 1984 PAGE : 67 finding a practical difficulty that applies to the property . There has been no demonstration of marry other- options for use of the property; - there is this one proposition we are tieing given complete details on., I hope., but this is only a proposition ver- sus looking at the potential of the building and the property . So I would be inclined to agree that the finding of practical difficulties in the use of this building have not been determined in the entirety but merely as it applies to the proposed use . VOTE , 5 YES; a NO; 1 ABSENT APPLICATION FAILS - 68 - 6 , 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 1572, 1573, 1574, 1575 and 1576 on July 2, 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. arbara C. Ruane Recording Secretary Sworn to before me this 7 day of ' 1984 Notary Public JEAN j. HANKINSON NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF NEW YORK No. 55-1660800 QUALIFIED IN TOMPKINS COUNje MY CO3:..YISSI0T4 EXPIRES MARCH 30,19