Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1984-12-03 i TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE APPEAL NO. 12-1-84 Ramada Inn 2 ` 222 South Cayuga Street APPEAL NO. 12-1-84 Decision 9 APPEAL NO. 1593 William Lower 10 310 Bryant Avenue APPEAL NO. 1593 Discussion by the Board 24 APPEAL NO. 1593 Decision of the Board 26 APPEAL NO. 1594 John Tilitz (no one showed) 27 ` 121 Cascadilla Street APPEAL NO. 1595 Carol H. McFadden 28 228 Ridgedale Road APPEAL NO. 1595 Decision 30 APPEAL NO. 1596 Project Growing Hope, Inc. 31 422 First Street APPEAL NO. 1596 Decision 39 APPEAL NO. 1597 Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency 40 610 West Court Street APPEAL NO. 1597 Decision 54 CERTIFICATION OF THE RECORDING SECRETARY 55 BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 31, 1984 PACE� 1 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEN YORK DECEMBER 3, 1984 CHAIRMAN WEAVER * I ' d like to call this meeting to order . First of all this is a formal hearing of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Ithaca in the matter of several cases listed on the official notice . First, I ' d like to introduce the members of the ' Board^ JEAN COOKINCHAM ' BETTE BACNARDI MICHAEL TDMLAN TRACY FARRELL RICHARD BOOTH CHARLES WEAVER, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD THOMAS D. HOARD, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD AND BUILDING COMMISSIONER BARBARA RUANE, RECORDING SECRETARY This Board operates under the provision of the City Charter of . the City of Ithaca and the provisions of the Zoning Ordinances~ ' The Board will not be bound by strict roles of evidence in the conduct of the hearing but the determination shall be founded ' ` upon sufficient legal evidence to sustain the same^ We request that all participants come forward and occupy one of these two . chairs at the end of this quad and identify themselves as to name ' and address and we will take these cases in the order in which � they are listed on the official notice and the first will be the ' hearing from the appellant and anyone who is in support of the ^ ' application. Followed will be an opportunity for anyone who . wishes to speak in opposition^ Upon hearing all of the testi- ` mony, the Board then - case by case - makes finding of fact and a ` | BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE! 2 decision, The voting is by written ballot and is announced here immediately upon its being taken. So, may we have the first case ' please. � SECRETARY HOARD! The first case is appeal no. 12-1-84 - 222 / SOUTH CAYUCA STREET: Appeal of the Ramada Inn for a sign variance under Section 34^8 of the Sign Ordinance to ' permit the installation of a free-standing sign approximately one foot over the front property ` line at 222 South Cayuga Street (Ramada Inn) , ' The property is located in a B-3 (business) use ` district in which a free-standing sign is permitted; however a ten foot setback is required ' from the front property line. . MV PARMALEK Good evening. My name is John Parmalee and I am � ` the General Manager of the Ramada Inn and my address is 967 Tao- � ghannock Blvd^ in Ithaca, I ' m sore most of you are familiar with . the circumstances of our previous request a couple of months ago ' to relocate the great sign on the Cayuga Street side, He have � come up with a compromise proposal by moving the sign away from � \ the intersection which was a major concern before^ Approximately forty feet away from the original request, farther down the Cay- ' o8a street - (unintelligible) , What I have done, is I have pre- pared a pictatoriaI explanation of the positioning of the sign on the (unintelligible) board, hoping that pictures are sobmissible ' evidence and if I could - would it be all right for me to show this? If I could just show this to each side, if that is accept- . able^ This is the sign as it exists now (Mr . Parmalee will be ' ' pointing to his picture as he is talking) - our primary concern is the fact that our (unintelligible) street is Clinton Street ' , ^ , � BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 3 and that is where our State Highway markers , etc. direct people to come - which is, now that we have built the tower , the sign is not visible from the Clinton Street exposure , This is exactly where the sign will be - where the bucket is - the exact height of the sign . This is where you would get the first exposure on Clinton Street, which is here on this map - this is the side of the building - about sixty feet or so from the intersection, This is where you would see the sign coming down 96B over the Cascadilla bridge by the Police Station, which is another major feeder street for os, if you will - people coming from Binghamton - and this is as you come down Cayuga Street side -you ' d be able to see it from before the driveway , coming down from Green Street, which is not as primary a concern for os as this exposure here. Originally we had asked to pot the sign right here at this corner , what we ' ve asked to do is to back it op, this far , and you can see that we will still have fairly good visibility coming op the Green Street in the easterly direction, which is our most (unintelligible) concern. MS. FARRELL� I like your bucket. MR . PARMALEE� Well that was the best facsimile I could find at the time^ Shall I take it over to the other side? CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Yes, bring it over . � MR, PARMALEE� This is where the sign exists now. This is where ' ' the tower is and the sign is across from Woolworths here. What we ' ve asked to do is to move the sign down to this location, which is right here . Our primary feeder street, or where oor - BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE! 4 State Highway signs direct people to come , is op Nest Clinton Street, Going in the east direction obviously. This is where the sign would first come into visibility - about sixty feet or so from the intersection. This is the side of the building right here and we would gain this exposure which we are most concerned about. Secondary to that, this is one of our second most impor- tant viewpoint coming down west on Clinton . This is right past the Cascadilla bridge - right here - it is taken from the bridge in fact, you can see the sign there. Coming down Cayuga street from this direction, you would see the sign right before the driveway here, just about - a little farther up. And that ' s really our least concern at this point^ And it is totally ob- structed in its existing location. MS, BACNARDI� How high is that going to be? MR . PARMALEE� How high? It is twenty feet and the sign is ten feet wide , � | MS, COOKINCHAM� It ' s the same - this one will come out? � MR~ PARMALEE� It ' s the same - right, this one will come oot � -it ' s the same sign, the same dimensions, it has a new face with � just brown block letters on a beige background, which is actually " aesthetically more attractive than the red and white one that we ^ have now. But there is no change in the structure of the sign, ' just the location, And again this is our primary concern right ^ here~ ' MS, COOKINCHAM' The existing sign conforms with the zoning requirements? BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE** 5 ' MR . PARMALEE� It does. The Code says that the sign has to be ten feet from the property line and the property line is fourteen feet from the center or from the face of the curb, so actually if ` / � we pot the sign right at the edge of the driveway here, which we ^ are going to do - that ' s four feet in from the property line so | | ^ we are asking for a six foot variance, actually. If we were to ` pot it ten feet, we would have been putting it over on the other , side of this driveway here, which is a needed access, it would . pot the sign op against the building, pretty much obstructing the ' visibility as you come down Clintonatreet^ . MS . BAGNARDI� Thank you . ^ ! � MR . BOOTH** If Clinton Street is your major access drive, how did ` the existing sign help serve the purpose of advertising the ^ Ramada Inn? ` MR. PARMALEE� Well it didn ' t adequately, but at least it was somewhat visible from Clinton Street. Now it is totally obstruc- ted. I would have to say the initial positioning of the sign, I i ' would question the logic from the beginning and then, of courser | with the building of the Tower it became totally apparent that we ` ^ had to make some changes because it was totally obscured from � that side . But originally I don ' t think it was the best posi- tion, bot, again, I wasn ' t involved at that time, to make that decision . � CHAIRMAN AEAVER� Any other questions? ` ^ MR . BOOTH� Yes^ Why not move your indicator signs out on the � | State Highway so people come op Nest Green Street? ' ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 6 MR. PARMALEE+ Nell , if we were to do that we ' d have to take the big evergreen tree down which we really don ' t want to do but I guess more primary to thatr this sign would be much closer to the street than if we were to approach it from the Green Street be- cause Green Street has the AM/PM lot adjacent to os, which is a diversion. So the sign would be much less obvious and one of the things that we are trying to do here is to make the sign as ob- vious to the incoming public as we can. We look at the sign, which is a service to our clientele, which are basically people of the tourism nature, business that we are trying to get into the community so I think it is definitely the best side for os to approach because of the distance factor ^ MR, BOOTH++ Why not pot the sign on the building? MR . PARMALEE� The cost of that is phenominal - that is a big concern for os now - I did mean to indicate that earlier as I did in the first appeal . This alternative is the most cost viable one for os which is a concern for os right now. We were talking in the neighborhood of sixty thousand dollars to pot op any type of attractive signage on the tower and the aesthetic impact or the importance of what that sign looks like I think is high, es- pecially if it were to So on the boildinS. At this particular / point that would difficult for os to address. � MR, TOMLAN� You assume that the question was addressed to putting the signage on the tower . If, in fact, it were on the . south face of the (unintelligible) building, facing Clinton ` ` Street, that wouldn ' t be a problem, necessarily, would it? ^ ' ^ BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE** 7 MR, PARMALEE! Well if you are talking about this side over here - it would become a problem because then we wouldn ' t have Cayuga Street view of the sign which we are getting in this. We are getting three viewpoints - three critical viewpoints to os in this position. Any of the other alternatives which we explored, such as that one, we are not getting the three viewpoints. MR . TOMLAN� Would you just follow that op, just a second, you mentioned that Clinton Street was a principle point (unintelligible) it woold seem to me that by pushing it around on to the Cayuga Street side , more toward the front of the building, you are kind of negating Your argument to the fact - that ' s what I wanted to make clear . MR, PARMALEE� Yes , you see, my initial appeal was to basically do what you are saying only use the free-standing sign . The problem with that, however , was there was some concern about the implications of the traffic at the intersection there and that the sign would be an obstroctiou, basically. So optimomally (unintelligible) bot~ , ^ ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Any other questions? Thank you, Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? Come right op, MR^ PORTER� My name is Paul Porter , I operate the9ara8e across the street from the Ramada Inn^ At least once or twice a day I have people come in and ask me where the Ramada Inn is, They ` can ' t see it. They don ' t even know it ' s there. So I just say, " in back of you. ' It is getting to be a joke but they do need . ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 8 that sign and I can ' t see any reason why it would bother anyone. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Thank you . Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? (no one) ` ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 37 1984 PACE� 9 APPEAL NO . 12-1-84 222 S . CAYUCA STREET RAMADA INN The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of the Ramada Inn for a sign variance under Section 34,8 of the Sign Ordinance to permit the installation of a free-standing sign approximately one foot over the front property line at 222 South Cayuga Street ^ The property is located in a B-3 (business) use district in which ' a free-standing sign is permitted; however a ten foot setback is required from the front property line. The decision of the Board was as follows� CHAIRMAN NEAVER� I move that the Board grant the requested sign variance in appeal number 12-1-84. MS^ BACNARDI� I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT� 1 ) Practical difficoltieshave been shown to placing the sign in the required set back position which would make it ineffective for the purposes of the business ~ 2) The fact that this property has been allowed to be constructed much closer to the right-of-way than is normal in that zone makes a sign ineffective in the normal set back � position, � 3) It seems that the placing of the sign in this location will be a minor infringement of the set back requirement . considering the size of the tower . It would be a little hard ` to say that we are doing any damage to the immediate neighborhood^ VOTE** 4 YES; 2 NO VARIANCE REQUEST GRANTED BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 10 CHAIRMAN NEAVER � Can we have the next case please? SECRETARY HOARD� The next case is appeal number 1593 for 310 Bryant Avenoe � Appeal of William Lower for an area variance for deficient off-street parking, deficient lot size, and deficient setbacks for the front yard and one side yard, under Section 30^25, Columns 4, 6, 119 and 12 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the enlargement of the front porch and creation of a one-bedroom apartment in the basement of the mul- tiple dwelling (two cooperative units) at 310 Bryant Avenue , The property is located in an R-3a (multiple dwelling) use district where the proposed use is permitted; however under Sections 30,49 and 30^57 the appellant most obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed alteration and conver- sion^ MR. CALBRAITH� Good evening. My name is Dirk Galbraith, I ' m an ' attorney, I have professional offices at 308 N ^ Tioga Street in Ithaca, New York, and I am appearing on behalf of the applicant, Mr ~ William Lower , With me this evening is Mr ^ David Lorenzini , who is Mr ^ Lower ' s architect . This particular property was for- merly a dormitory of the Cascadilla School ^ Mr . Lower purchased it in June of this year and has converted it from essentially � ' fourteen single rooms into presently two apartments -one contain- ' ` ing four bedrooms and one containing five bedrooms in the two . upper stories, The basement, at the time Mr , Lower purchased the property, was a finished basement ^ It has been used in the past as a sleeping room and a study and I have submitted to the Board a copy of a letter from one of the previous occupants of the property, indicating his use of it^ This was - that occurred in ' ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE** 11 the 1960 ' s^ After the Cascadilla School began using the property, the basement area, I think, fell into some disrepair , but it was nevertheless still a finished living area, Mr . Lower seeks a variance to enable him to install a single bedroom apart- ment in this basement area and we have provided a copy of plans prepared by Mr . Lorenzini which I think completely describe the proposed improvement. The property is deficient in total lot area under the terms of the Ordinance and this zone is R-3a, a total of seven thousand square feet would be required for compli- ance of the Ordinance. The lot - the total square footage of fifty-eight hundred square feet - so I would say that it is roughly eighteen percent deficient. In terms of the parking de- ficiency, Mr . Lower would intend to install off-street parking on the site and that is actually depicted on the - Mr , Lorenzini ' s diagram here, I believe - correct me if I ' m wrong on this - that the proposed parking which he seeks to install there would bring the property into compliance^ Finally, Mr . Lower would like to change the configuration of the front porch on the property and this is a separate issue from the basement apartment~ He is not actually enlarging the front porch but really changing in shape and, again the proposed improvement depicted on Mr . Lorenzini ' s drawing - the reason that this requires a variance is that the ` . front porch is located approximately seven feet from the street . line and a ten foot setback is required. Prior to ^ ^ ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Question if I may. Wouldn ' t that also increase the occupancy of the dwelling - the front porch - does it not BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3" 1984 PACE� 12 also increase the capacity? MR . CALBRAITH� I don ' t believe so, MR, LORENZINI� No* It is an open ^ ^ , CHAIRMAN NEAVER� It ' s an open porch~ It is going to remain an open porch? MR. CALBRAITH� On the subject of occopancy^ . ^ CHAIRMAN WEAVER� I don ' t have the plans here, that is why I wondered - that is one of the reasons why I wondered, ^ ^ MR, CALBRAITH� When this property was used by the Cascadilla School there were fourteen occupants in single rooms. The pre- sent plan, if this variance is granted, calls for occupancy by either ten or eleven persons , so he has actually diminished the total occupancy of the property. Before making this variance application Mr . Lower solicited the opinion of the neighbors in this area and we have submitted a petition signed by a number of the adjoining property owners and I think if the members of the Board will look at the names on the petition you will find that not only are the landlords there but also people who are actually residents of this area^ This is an area that is predominately multiple dwelling and many of the property owners do not live in . the area itself . Finally the practical difficulty which Mr . Lower has with this property is that unless- this variance is granted this living area in the basement, which exists there , simply can ' t be used by him for anything and he would be deprived of the use of a considerable amount of floor area within this building. If the variance is granted, again it is a one-bedroom ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 13 type apartment which would probably be suitable for a single per- son or possibly a couple. We don ' t believe that this would ma- terially increase the density of the property or the area in gen- eral since he - by the change that he has already made of the property - reduced the density and we believe that the matter of - the total lot square footage is something that one, it is not a serious deficiency - again I believe it is about an eighteen per- cent deficiency and second, it is also something that is common to most properties in that area. Now Mr ^ Lorenzini is with me this evening and I think that he could answer better than I can , any questions that the Board might have about the specifics of this proposed use and exactly what Mr , Lower would like to do with the basement, MS ^ FARRELL� I have a question, How many people are presently occupying the building? MR, GALBRAITH� It has nine bedrooms ^ ^ , MS. FARRELL� Nine bedrooms, but how big are the bedrooms^ What is the occupancy? MR^ CALBRAITH� Do you know that? MR^ LORENZINI� I do not know anything about the existing building as far as size ^ , ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER � Really, the Building Commissioner might have some information . I, too, am interested - was fourteen the legal maximum when Mr ^ Lower purchased the property or was that above or below , ^ ^ MR. CALBRAITH� I don ' t know whether it was - I expect that this BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE� 14 was probably a grandfathered use at the time that he bought it, CHAIRMAN NEAVER� But the Housing Code doesn ' t have any ' grandfathered , , , ^ I ' m just trying to find out ^ , # what the . actual situation was. It could be that we had an illegal fourteen person occupancy and we are down to a legal limit at the moment or some other number - I don ' t know whether ^ , ~ ' MR, CALBRAITH! I would suggest this, Chairman Neaver , that if ^ this were a case where the Board were concerned about the ' occupancy of the structure as a whole, and some condition were to ' be placed on this variance that the property as a whole might not . be occupied by more than say eleven people, that would certainly ' ` be fine with the applicant. He don ' t ^ ° ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� I wasn ' t anxious to get into that. It can be that the Board may be able to understand what this pruperty was ' when the - when Mr ^ Lower purchased it. ' SECRETARY HOARD� It went from fourteen - under the previous ` owner , Cascadilla School , to ten and so he is proposing, if he pots in this basement apartment, to add two more - maximum of two . more people. MS. FARRELL� And that ' s the legal maximum or that ' s ` (unintelligible) or that ' s how many are said to be there ^ ^ ^? SECRETARY HOARD� No that will be his maximum,, CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Under the Housing Code. MS, FARRELL� Okay, Depending on size of bedrooms and all that , ' So twelve was not quite - oh, because there were extra bedrooms ' that are now kitchens or whatever . Fourteen. , , ' ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE** 15 SECRETARY HOARD� Yes , because he has made conversions , Some ' people were living in living rooms before. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Co ahead, First of all we wanted to nail down ' whether the fourteen was a situation Mr . Lower purchased and in the conversion, what had happened^ Are you satisfied Tracy? MS^ FARRELL� Yes . ' CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Proceed^ ^ MR, CALBRAITH� I was hoping that if the Board had any questions ^ ^ about the proposed renovation of the property or in connection , with this application that those questions might be addressed to Mr ^ Lorenzini , who is the architect, MR, TOMLAN� I would like to ask one question and that is why is ^ it necessary to replace the porch? It seems to me you are ' not really adding or subtracting anything to the square footage ` - it turns out, essentially the same and yet I see there is a ` new front porch, I ' m just curious. ^ MR^ LORENZINI� I think what Mr . Lower had in mind was the fact that - it was two things " CHAIRMAN NEAVER� We are going to have a little trouble - this is ` being taped and we are going to have a little trouble tomorrow ' morning ^ ^ ^ ^ MR. LORENZINI� Okay. I think there were two considerations that Mr ~ Lower had in mind* One was exitin8^ He wanted to add stairs ' - which there are none existing. MR~ TOMLAN� But there were at one time^ I mean he has recently removed them by virtue of renovating the front porch, ' ' � BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE** 16 MR . LORENZINI� Right . I guess there were steps. MR. TOMLAN� I mean, it wasn ' t a balcony, it was a porch (unintelligible) 8o down to the 8roond. You did, as a matter of course go out the front door and 8o down the front stairs. MR. LORENZINI� Okay, I have, personally, never seen the front stairs. I guess there were stairs there and I can ' t tell you why he removed them. That was before I , ^ ^ MR. TOMLAN� But there is no intent to enclose or any way - it is to remain an open porch? MR . LORENZINI� That is true - it is to remain an open porch^ And I think the other thing that he had in mind was to try to eliminate the balcony~ It seems that it turns into a party type sitoation^ It is a hangout on the porch area and it was a source of complaint from the neighbors. MR ~ BOOTH� What ' s that got to do with enlarging the other porch? Why is removing the balcony have anything to do with enlarging the porch? Or did I misunderstand you? MR, CALBRAITH** Maybe I could clarify something here, if I could interrupt for a second ^ This has been relayed to me by the applicant. One of the things that Mr . Lower wanted to do is install a stairway leading to the second floor which is the second means of egress and provide additional fire safety . I think those were the stairs that Mr . Lorenzini was referring to^ That is actually depicted on the diagram which we forwarded to � the Board^ ` ^ SECRETARY HOARD� I can probably shed some light on this. There ` ' � BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 17 were some steel stairs - as you face the building from Bryant Avenue, going off to the left of the porch and Mr . Lower removed those and originally wanted to pot a roof on that porch so that it wouldn ' t be a hangout - the upper level of that - and I told him that I wanted a second means out of there . But we agreed that he should get an architect to try to come op with something that was more attractive than what was there before, which is why this configuration was changed. Now there is a stairway going off to the right as you face ^ ^ . MR . BOOTH. On the north side of the building? SECRETARY HOARD! Yes. MR . BOOTH� That is the egress from the second floor? SECRETARY HOARD� Yes^ There is a stairway on the other end of the building - an interior stairway that goes down but the win- dows are so high, the topography drops off quite severely going , away from Bryant Avenue and the windows are too high to qualify ' ` as emergency exits so I told him that I wanted a stairway at this end of the building so that is why he is doing this . . CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Now I know you are having trouble, we are quite ' ^ noisy here - this Board - it is your torn, if you can think of something that you want , ^ , , ` MR, CALBRAITH� I really have nothing further that I wish to present to the Board by way of direct testimony^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Could one of you address the parking situation now and what you propose? . MR^ CALBRAITH� Okay, My understanding was that Mr . Lower was BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE� 18 required to provide one on-site parking space. That the property is presently in compliance - you can see from Mr , Lorenzini ' s diagram, he has space available to do that. SECRETARY HOARD� That ' s not quite righty Dirk~ Right now the property has no parking . MR, CALBRAITH� Correct^ SECRETARY HOARD� And it is grandfathered under zoning. MR. CALBRAITH� I see~ SECRETARY HDARD� And so he has planned to - the additional unit would require a space and he has proposed providing a space for that additional unit and he is not able to provide any others , MR ^ BOOTH� That would still leave him deficient by five? SECRETARY HOARD� It would still remain the same deficiency as before and that deficiency will not change . I hope I didn ' t confuse you. MR. GALBRAITH++ No I didn ' t - I appreciate the help with that because frankly I wasn ' t prepared to address the issue of parking � because I thought that had been taken care of ^ ` CHAIRMAN WEAVER'* Well the Chair wished to illuminate that so that we do have a ( unintelligible) Other questions from the Board? MR, BOOTH� Why couldn ' t this large room be rented as part of the . downstairs unit? ` MR. GALBRAITH'+ Maybe Mr , Lorenzini can speak on that more intelligently than I, but I believe that, with the layout of the ' ' building as it is, there is no way to physically connect it. ^ ^ ^ BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE: 19 MR. LORENZINI: I ' ll be honest with your I don ' t know. I really don ' t know why. They only (unintelligible) MR. BOOTHt Is there stair casing between the first and , ^ ~ SECRETARY HOARD: There isn ' t. MR. BOOTH: There is not. CHAIRMAN WEAVER: From a zoning and neighborhood impact, it would seem to me that it might be advantageous that this be a separate unit and (unintelligible) on a parking reqoirement. If, in fact , they made any interior alteration to occupy that basement, (unin- telligible) difficulty bringing on an additional parking require- ment would seem to me - it is merely existing interior space that is designed for living purposes so it would seem to me that who- ever we represent - the neighborhood, if you will - would be bet- ter off with an efficiency apartment down there with a one-car parking requirement than it would be with an additional bedroom, without the requirement. My reasoning may be faulty as far as exactly what could be the enforcement of zoning but certainly if that has been used for residential purposes, it is not being cre- ated as new space~ MR^ BOOTH: Nell , but the use is being changed, this is a new ose^ CHAIRMAN NEAVERt Residential is residential where I come from. ' It is a multiple dwelling already . MR. BOOTH : It was listed as a dormitory - is that a multiple dwelling? CHAIRMAN WEAVER: Sore ^ Multiple dwelling whether it is a BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 20 rooming hoose or an apartment house. So - we can settle this argument and (unintelligible) a parking space. Assuming approval versos non-approval and forcing the owner into some (unintelligible) adaptation that might not require one, MR. LORENZINI� Could I ask you what your concern would be and why would you be concerned (unintelligible) that it would be all one space as opposed to , ^ ^ MR. BOOTH� Well I happen to walk by this building every day and I have long been impressed by the crowded nature of this street along there. Generally crowded condition around that hoose so that was why the question. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Further questions? Thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? Come right oP^ MR, SNEEDLER� Hello* My name is Moss Sweedler and I own the hoose right next door , 308 Bryant Avenue, and I live at that hoose and I ' ve lived there for twelve years and I think that Mr , ' Lower has been a very good - I don ' t want to say influence on the neighborhood - I think he has really improved the neighborhood considerably (onintelligible) ^ Talk about one of the other hooses say two sixteen Delaware, for example, he owns quite a few properties it seems in the neighborhood and I think that he fixed that op so it looks a lot better than it was and also done such things - well , first of all , he has sort of a pattern, it seems like most summers he is working on some hoose in the neighborhood or another and so anybody can bottonhole him - he seems to take a BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3 , 1984 PAGE** 21 fair amount of pride in what he does - he will show any of the neighbors what he is doing to the hoose - to the interiors and so forth. So, for example, I know that he has included a bike room in that house. That seems to me to be very good for the neigh- borhood - it would be great if everybody ' s hoose did that -there would be lot fewer thefts and people bothering to come to the neighborhood. The stairs that were in front of that hoose that ` we were discussing a few moments ago, they have long been an eye sore and I was sore glad to see him take them down. They looked to me a lot like fire escape stairs and I wouldn ' t be surprised if they had been put op by a previous owner sort of under the 8oise, or something, as a fire escape, but then they really Sot used regularly as the entrance/exit. They weren ' t really just used as fire escape stairs. They were pretty bad looking and pretty unsafe looking as well . I think that one of the things that he is doing - the 310 property is situated and my hoose is situated - probably something like twenty feet or something (un- intelligible) on their lot - really squeezed together . And I � ' think that one of the things that he had in mind from what he said, was that he ' d like to not have it open the way it had - the way the stairs had come down. Before they came down sort of di- ' ` rectly towards my hoose and it will be nicer for me, obviously if . they didn ' t and it is not then coming down directly toward ^ another hoose on the other side because then there is plenty of space toward the other side. I think that is an example of his concern for the neighborhood . One of the things he said about BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE� 22 renting - the way the hoose is presently rented, it is not rented as one big unit but the two floors are rented separately. I ' ve gathered that he has the impression - maybe correct - that this keeps each of the housing units quieter , less rowdy - by having smaller 8roops. That might be part of the answer as to why he wants to make that - somebody asked the question why did he want to make the unit a separate one rather than just adding it to the existing first floor ^ That would be part of the answer - I cer- tainly think that it is better to do it that way. I think in general he is responsive to the nei8hbors . He consults the neighbors about things I mean, I know he has with me and he seems to be over to talk with people - I think he is a good neighbor and I certainly support this, CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Thank you* Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? MR. RIDER� My name is Jim Rider and I have a building right around the corner from him - around three hundred feet - three hundred yards - whatever - and I have watched him all these years - I ' ve been op there quite a few years - and when he does take a place - I ' ve got some pictures here - there were some crummy old places - in Collegetown a lot of them are - and here is one he fixed over right around the corner - I ' ll show you these pictures here. 216 Delaware is right around the corner and it shows right there where that other building is from there and he is not finished yet ^ Here is the before and the after and he improves them one hundred percent - makes them like a brand new building - BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 23 new siding and everything on them~ He just completely changes the whole neighborhood and very few ( unintelligible) and usually he has less people in there after he - like the students there - less people there than there was before when they started, okay? CHAIRMAN HEAVER� 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? (no one) BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 24 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO, 1593� MR. BOOTH� Tom, I have a question on the sheet. Column 6 - it says it is six thousand square feet is the minimum for what is existing there now, Am I reading that correctly? SECRETARY HOARD� Well we Set in this funny situation with this - is this an enlargement or not. The chart says six thousand for new construction - well it is not new construction. So seven thousand for conversion - that is already a multiple dwelling but it just doesn ' t seem to fall into either category - it is one of the - so. ^ ~ MR. BOOTH� It is either six or seven is what you are saying. SECRETARY HOARD� Yes* MR. BOOTH� What that should be. CHAIRMAN NEAVER*+ Dick it seems to me the three deficiencies will not be exacerbated by that unless you consider the increased occopancy ^ MR, TOMLAN� Charles, can I have those plans? CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Oh, yes, sore , MR^ BOOTH++ It seems to be the better argument is the current use applies - seven thousand feet (unintelligible) the proposed ose ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� I would agree that the conversion of the basement would not change it from a multiple (unintelligible) MR, TOMLAN� I ' d like to bring a point to the Board ' s attention, having watched Mr ^ Lower do 216 - again approach here - as well as the properties he owns in between. He seems to follow a pat- tern and that is he is taking an older hoose and he is putting ^ ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 25 siding on it, (unintelligible) the exterior so it would seem, but I ' ve noticed as well that the driveways soddenly widen. This is an attempt in most cases to increase the on-site parking and al- low every car immediate access to the street^ This is a case in point where the driveway does not in fact, in any way come close to the parking that he is providing, The residents literally have to drive over the curb to get into the parking spot, Okay? And this is a procedure which he has followed in other instances in the neighborhood, I ' ve noticed as well . That is, there will be a driveway cot and in such a way as to accommodate additional on-site parkin8^ Many times he simply plows out a part of the front yard. I know we are not really supposed to consider , I suppose, the driveway access question but I do think it comes to bear by virtue of the fact that many of the cases in the past where Mr ^ Lower ' s tenants park across the sidewalk and I notice it as I personally have occasion to walk past. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� I don ' t walk through there but I ' m surprised that you can tell which one is which because - which car did you mean? Jost driving through there it is so common that I , ^ ^ , Do I hear a motion? SECRETARY HOARD� By the way Michael , the City is working on legislation so that we can control that better . It is not unique to his properties . He has, in fact, some of his properties that ' at our request, pot pipes in for just people who are hopping the curbs and the DPN comes along and polls the pipes out . ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 26 APPEAL NO* 1593 310 BRYANT AVENUE The Board considered the appeal of William Lower for an area variance to permit the enlargement of the front porch and creation of a one-bedroom apartment in the basement of the multiple dwelling at 310 Bryant Avenue. The decision of the Board was as follows'. MS. COOKINCHAM� I move that the Board grant, the area variance requested in appeal number 1593 with the con- dition that the appellant provide one parking space to be made available on the property^ MS, BACNARDI� I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT� 1 ) The existing parking deficiency will not be exacerbated^ 2) The proposal is consistent with the character of the neighborhood in which the hoose is located^ 3) The occupancy of the building as rehabilitated will be less than when the property was used exclusively as a rooming hoose. VOTE� 5 YES; 1 NO GRANTED ` ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 39 1984 PAGE� 27 CHAIRMAN WEAVER'* May we have the next case please, SECRETARY HOARD** THE NEXT APPEAL IS NUMBER 1594 - 121 CASCADILLA STREET Appeal of John Tilitz for an area variance ' for deficient lot size, excessive lot cov- erage by buildings, and deficient setbacks for the front yard, one side yard, and the rear yard under Section 30 ^25, Columns 69 10, 11 , 12, and 14 of the Zoning Ordi- nance, to permit the conversion of the single-family house at 121 Cascadilla ' Street to a two-family dwelling. The ' property is located in an R-3a (multiple dwelling) use district, where the proposed ' use is permitted; however under Sections 30.49 and 30^57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant most obtain an area variancE for the listed deficiencies before a boil- ' ding permit nr Certificate of Occupancy . can be issued for the conversion. CHAIRMAN WEAVER' Is Mr . Tilitz here? Is the applicant here? He ' ll 8o on to the next case, VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE� The neighbors are here. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Well welcome but we don ' t have an appellant and we don ' t accept these by mail . He either shows op or he doesn ' t . I ' m sorry that you ' ve been inconvenienced. . VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE� If he shows op will you hear his appeal / later or if ^ ^ . CHAIRMAN NEAVER� If he shows op tonight we will - we would like to - you ' ll just have to stay in here - there would be some risk that we would hear the case if he shows op during this meetin8. I can say, yoo know, the other thing would be to say, So on home and we won ' t hear him . The problem with that is that this Board gets burdened with a pretty good agenda every month and it BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 39 1984 PACE� 28 wouldn ' t serve you or os to miss out on an opportunity, assuming that there will be one. SECRETARY HOARD� The next case is appeal number 1595 - 228 RIDCEDALE ROAD� ' Appeal of Carol H . McFadden for an area vari- ance for a deficient side yard setback under , Section 30 ^25 , Column 13 of the Zoning Ordi- nance to permit the construction of a two- ' story addition to the west end of the exist- . inS single family hoose at 228 Rid8edale Road, The property is located in an R-1b ' (residential , single-family) use district ' where the existing use is permitted; however under Sections 30,49 and 30,57 of the Zoning ' Ordinance the appellant most obtain an area variance for the existing sideyard deficiency before a building permit can be issued for the proposed addition, ' MS, MC FADDEN� I ' m Carol McFadden, the owner of the hoose at 228 ` Ridgedale Road and with me is Jack Jensen who is the contractor . who will be doing the building, should I get the building permit . ' The problem is that the hoose, when it was built in the mid ` 1930 ' s was built six feet from the property line on the east ` side. It was, I assume, that it was built before zoning was pot ` ` in op in our region - so that the hoose, as it exists, is not in ` � conformity and the only way it could be in conformity is if I ' ripped off some pieces of the hoose^ My proposed addition is to . the west side of the hoose where I own an extra half of a lot so ` that I want to extend the hoose out eleven feet, which would give ' me more garage room, which I desperately need and enlarge the bedroom area. And it would still leave me eighteen feet from the property line on the west side, so it seems to me this is sort of BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 29 a technicality. The deficiency is on the east side? I want to add on the west side. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Any questions? There are no questions, so thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? Do you want to add something? MR. JENSON� I soppose^ , ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� The details of the construction, I assume are not important to the Board, if it is in conformance with the Building Code ^ We need your name^ , MR ^ JENSON� My name is Jack Jenson, from Equity Boilders^ I visited the site - there is sort of a vast expanse to the west between Carol ' s hoose and her neighbors, although all the houses in that area are quite crowded together , All of them - I don ' t see how - visually - the neighbors could be concerned - I don ' t think this project would be any problem at all ^ CHAIRMAN HEAVER� Thank yoo^ Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this application? (no one) Now do I hear a motion? _ ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 37 1984 PACE� 30 APPEAL NO. 1595 - 228 RIDCEDALE ROAD ' The Board considered the appeal of Carol H. McFadden for an area variance to permit the construction of a two-story addition to the west end of the existing single family hoose at 228 Ridgedale ` Road. The decision of the Board was as follows� MS, FARRELL� I move that the Board grant the area variance ' requested in appeal number 1595^ MR. TOMLAN� I second the motion^ FINDINGS OF FACT . 1 ) Practical difficulties have been shown by the appellant in meeting the requirement of the Ordinance which can only be' ` solved by moving the boilding ^ 2) The proposed change does not exacerbate the present side ` yard deficiency of the property. ` 3) The proposed use is consistent with the character of the . neighborhood. � VOTE� 6 YES; 0 NO GRANTED \ ` ` ` ^ ` � BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 31 CHAIRMAN NEAVER� May we hear the next case please? SECRETARY HOARD� APPEAL NO. 1596 - 422 FIRST STREET Appeal of Project Growing Hope, Incorporated for a use variance under Section 30^25, Column 2, to permit the use of the property at 422 First Street for a neighborhood garden pro- gram. The property is located in an R-3b (residential - multiple dwelling) use district in which agriculture is not a permitted use; therefore under Section 30,57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant most obtain a use var- iance before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed use. CHAIRMAN WEAVER'* One of you is op first^ � ` | MR. GOLDHYN� My name is Glenn Goldwyn, I ' m the administrator of the Community Development program for the City of Ithaca^ In 19809 the City (unintelligible) Community Development application made its original commitment to the Community Gardeners. Since that time they are no longer under the auspices of E^O ,C^ , their . sponsor at that time. What they ' ve incorporated is a non-for- � profit group and they have continued to administer the community gardens (unintelligible) In our Community Development Grant in 1980, we made a successful application for fonds to purchase a single block behind the P 8 C - a block bordered by First and Franklin and Lake, I believe. The property was essentially sold out from underneath os, shortly after our grant was awarded. For the next growing season, the gardeners leased half of that prop- erty , in subsequent years that lease was not available. We have . been looking for alternative sites straight on throo8h. Since 1983 they have been leasing on the NYSE8G property, at Third Street and Meadow - they are on a year to year lease there ^ The —` --' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 32- property 2property is for sale and as a result the Urban Renewal Agency considers that site somewhat tentative for them although there are complexities over the rightful right-of-way, which would (unintelligible) . He have no - we are concerned that a later property owner wouldn ' t continue to lease the property to the 8ardeners. Essentially what we are attempting to do (unintelli- gible) in 1980 to help secure a permanent site for the Community Gardens . We asked the Building Commissioner and the regular gar- deners asked this group for a determination on the zoning status for community gardens and the interpretation was to the effect that the c-ommunity gardens are industrial and as such are not permitted by right in the nei8hborhoods4 There appear to be the possibility which we are here this evening to pursue, that in individual instances, in residential areas, (unintelligible) doe to the scale of the community gardens, it would be permissible. Gardens as such are acceptable accessory use for residential property, and at the scale that we are proposing, we feel that essentially this is rather a large accessory use and under the method of operating the gardens, we feel that the City will con- tinue, to exercise more than a fair amount of control over the quality of the end product. At 422 First Street, the method of control would be for the Urban Renewal Agency to lease the prop- � ` perty from the owner and sob-lease it to Project Crowing Hope ^ ' ` On 1597 - which is coming op next - it ' s a bit more complicated than this - but a8ain44 ^ ^ , , BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 33 CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Let me interrupt you, if I may ^ I certainly wish to^ In the case of 422 Second Street, the Urban Renewal Agency is considering owning? or leasing? MR. COLDNYN� It would be a lease between the current owner and the Urban Renewal Agency^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Thank yoo ^ MR ^ COLDNYN� The reason for that, in this particular instance, is that there are certain development costs to this site to bring it op to a well drained garden site, which will be born by the Community Development grant and under the lease we would be in a position to recoup that investment of the public ' s fonds should the lease be terminated by the owner , for whatever reason - under - given the owners disposition (unintelligible ) sell the property at this time and it offers certain advantages and it is diagonal- ly across the street from the original garden site - it would continue to serve the neighbors in that immediate vicinity and I guess that is what I have to say about that particular site. CHAIRMAN WEAVER! Question. If the Urban Renewal Agency is going to be a player in this garden - speaking only about the first one listed - 422 First Street - and that Agency has the right to own land, what is the - and the owner claims that he has had it for sale and can ' t sell it? Nell , maybe I ' m getting my information mixed, but what is the objection of the Municipality owning the site? MR^ GOLDNYN� The owner has indicated that he would prefer to lease it to os - that was the conversations that we had - he ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 39 1984 PACE� 34 indicated (unintelligible) as far as the talking price - well beyond what we would be in a position to pay, CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Questions? MR, BOOTH� Do you have any information that suggests that this lot cannot be used in conformance with the zoning ordinance? ' MR~ GOLDWYN'* None ^ ' MR. BOOTH� Do you have any arguments to present that would cause the Board to conclude that this use would not require a use ' variance? Do you see any way of interpreting the Zoning . Ordinance in such a way that we could conclude that this does . not require a use variance? MR, GOLDNYN*+ It would be somewhat presumptuous of me~ The City Attorney cooldn ' t, nor could the Building Commissioner . ' CHAIRMAN WEAVER'* Is the owner here? ^ MR , PEREZ� No he isn ' t . ` CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Is the appellant aware of the requirements for � a use variance in the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance - that the . hardship most be demonstrated? . \ MR^ COLDNYN� Yes, generally . ` CHAIRMAN WEAVER� Does either of you have any information that ` would indicate the fact that this property has been listed for sale? MR, PEREZ� No the property hasn ' t been listed for sale. From my ` conversations with the owner , he owns this property and the adjacent lot and he actually has no interest in selling, hoping � that the property value will 8o op and eventually he will sell BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 35 both lots . As it stands now, nobody is interested in his lot. That is what he said - except for os and then he will not sell for what we would consider a fair price because we have had appraisers look at the lot before we went out and discussed the price of it. SECRETARY HOARD� Would you identify yourself for the record? MR. PEREZ� My name is Armando Perez, I ' m a member of the Board of the ( unintelligible) Project Crowing Hope. CHAIRMAN HEAVER� Mr ~ Booth is after the same - this Board isn't one with unlimited powers - in fact they are severely restricted both by the local ordinance, by the fact that we are reviewed quite frequently beyond that. We are not in a position to grant a use variance, which this is, clearly - not just be the decision of the Building Commissioner but also by the interpretation of the City Attorney, so if the owner of this property can ' t demon- strate a hardship, it makes no difference what unauthorized use is proposed for the land - whether it is socially or economically or by any other measurement, might be desirable -the Ordinance is blind to who the appellant is and whatever and the owner of the land and the land is the problem - not your project. ' MR . PEREZ� Presently the land has been in flood - there has been several constructions around there - the P K C - there is the Third Street Shortstop, the shopping area there where the Motor Vehicle Bureau is, and in front of there is a large structure - and this land has been left on a concave area and all the water runs down there - that is one of the reasons, maybe, why the land ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 36 is not at-tractive . Whoever goes in there will have to fill it in and grade it so that the water drains appropriately and doesn ' t stand in the middle of the lot. Actually the water stands on the middle of - it takes his property - the empty lot which is also his property - his proposal of leasing would be too expensive, also because we would level the land in order to use it for 8ar- dens^ (unintelligible) the end of the lease which is probably ten years, he would get his land back in a better condition. MR. BOOTH� This question may seem odd, but there is a quirky provision in the Zoning Ordinance that deals with flood (unintelligible) and since you mentioned floodings, do you happen to know whether this is in a flood zone - flood hazard zone? MR^ PEREZ" It is a five hundred year flood zone, MR. BOOTH� Five hundred year flood zone - not designated onder the Federal Insurance map, Gardening is permitted by right in a flood hazard zone . They have taken certain State regulations and incorporated them in the local ordinance, apparently you are not part of that^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Are there any further questions from the Board? Do you have anything further to add? I would just like to make a remark before we get into the issue here, to Mr . Goldwyn, It seems to me that if the Urban Renewal Agency is a player in this act they don ' t need os. Maybe they need someone to negotiate for purchase but they have the ultimate right to do as they see fit with the property once they own it. And the fact that this would remain under individual ownership seems to me makes no difference ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 37 what site you might come in with, were it going to go on and on and on, The other thing is that if you have the ear of the Plan- ning and Development Board or the City Planners or anyone of that sort - this has been going on for a period of time and there is opportunity in the special permit section of the Ordinance to address this or an activity similar to it that otherwise would require a use variance . MR. TOMLAN� Charles, to follow that op, if one were to take op a special scenario of that sort, I ' m just looking ahead at possible parking - obviously this isn ' t a building and we don ' t have a sheet that tells os about deficiencies - as a result - but it obviously would have impact in that sense. I was just wondering if yoo^ ^ ^ CHAIRMAN HEAVER� Well it just seems to me - I ' m not trying to take the place of Planners - I ' m just trying to suggest that the mechanics of a zoning ordinance and this one in particular - does provide for special requirements and special permits that get past the hardship measurement and allow otherwise unauthorized uses in a residential area^ And how to do that is not something I am proposing, I ' m just saying that there is an opportunity under the local ordinances to provide for some sort of a solu- tion. Do we have further questions? Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? (no one) Is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? (no one) SECRETARY HOARD� We do have a letter on this one, Mr . Chairman . This is from Nancy Mintorn, "I live across the street from the ` ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 38 area that you are considering for the ' Growing Hope Community ' Gardens ' . I want you to know that I have no objection to its , . being there . Mr . Giordano owns that property, and he has always ' been a good neighbor . If he chooses to use it that way, it ' s fine with me, Sorry I ' m late with this, I ' ve had vacation time ' and it didn ' t get my attention until now. Thank you. /s/ Nancy Mintorn, 414 Adams Street" ^ ^ ` ^ ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 31 1984 PACE� 39 APPEAL NO* 1.596 - 422 FIRST STREET The Board considered the appeal of Project Growing Hope, Incor- porated ncor- t d f i t it the f the t pora e or a use variance o perm e use o e proper y t a 422 First Street for a neighborhood garden program, MR, BOOTH� Let me preface the motion by saying that this is a use that I have a great deal of sympathy for ^ But I think our hands are tied, I think in order for this Board to issue a use variance we have to have a showing of unnecessary hardship if the property cannot be used for any use allowed by the Zoning Ordinance and I don ' t think that has been sustained in this case, The decision of the Board was as follows*. MR. BOOTH*. I move that the Board deny the request for a use variance in appeal number 1596^ MR. TOMLAN� I second the motion. FINDINGS OF FACT� 1 ) There has been no showing sufficient to sustain the ' conclusion that none of the allowed uses onder the Ordinance are feasible on this particular piece of property , 2) The proposed use is not allowed in this particular zone onder the Zoning Ordinance, VOTE** 6 YES; O NO DENIED ^ ' ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE� 40 CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Now the matter of 1597 ^ SECRETARY HOARD� APPEAL NO, 1597 - 610 NEST COURT STREET Appeal of Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency for a use variance under Section 30^25, Column 2, to permit . the use of the property at 610 Nest Court Street for a neighborhood garden program. The property ` is located in an R-2b (residential one- and -two family) use district in which agriculture is not a permitted use; therefore under Section 30^57 of ' the Zoning Ordinance the appellant most obtain a use variance before a Certificate of Occupancy . can be issued for the proposed use. MR^ COLDNYN� Undaunted. The principle distinction between this ^ application and the other , is that the property is owned by some ' folks who live in Brooklyn (unintelligible) contact by any means ^ certified mail , what have your over a period of years and the . Urban Renewal Agency is proposing to condemn the property, My ^ guess is that (unintelligible) would somehow establish contact for negotiating for the purchase of the property ~ But that agen- cy did not want to start that process until we had some sense of the availability under the Zoning Ordinance^ There was an active discussion at the Planning and Development Board meeting invol- ving neighborhood residents, additional pros and cons at that meeting and Joel Fredell , who is the president of the Project ` Growing Hope Board, and I think I would - that being the essence of the distinction of the Urban Renewal Agency standpoint, we would be purchasing it and leasing it again* I would prefer to have Joel talk about the details of the project* CHAIRMAN WEAVER'* Before we get into the project, then in this case, you represent the purchaser? ` ` _ BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 37 1984 PACE� 41 MR. COLDNYN� As close as we can be, yes ^ CHAIRMAN WEAVER** And in the event that your client, Urban Renewal Agency, were to purchase this land, you want to know whether this Board would approve the use? MR, COLDNYN� Yes. MR , FREDELL� My name is Joel Fredell , I live at 312 Farm Street, . I ' m president of the Board of Directors of the Project Crowing Hope, Let me preface what I have to say about this simply by ' saying that our process of looking for sites in the City of . Ithaca has been a long one as Glenn has indicated and we have ' ' located a few sites that are available to us. He are hoping at . the end of this process that we would be able to 8o ahead with ' the gardens and we are hoping that we can accomplish that to- night, a little more than we have in the last case. The garden that we are talking about is 610 W. Court Street, is a very small ' piece of property - it has been a vacant lot for some time - it . has not been kept op^ The owner has been delinquent on the tax ` roll - the City has been required to 8o in and mow down large ` amounts of grass to keep the bug population down^ What we pro- . pose is to go in and pot a very small number of gardens, nine or ' ' ten in number , for use by residents of the immediate neighbor- . hood^ We have a rough plan that is being distriboted. We intend ' , to improve on that plan and concentrate with the neighbors -should this So through and should we be allowed to 8o ahead with ' the plans. Our purpose is not to impose any kind of an ideal ' regarding the neighbors but to give them what they want^ We BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 42 know, in fact , that there are gardeners within the neighborhood who would like to garden in that spot, within immediate walking distance and that we would like to accommodate both them and the residents who have voiced some concern about things like activity ' and parking. One of the disadvantages, of coorse, with our sito- ation is that we are not in a position to boy much property be- ' caose it is hard to come by but it has a silver lining in that we have a fair amount of development fonds available to os to im- prove the lot and to do the kinds of landscaping that all the neighbors would be happy with and we would be glad to go ahead with that . We have a lot of money to spend and we don ' t have too many places to spend it so we would be glad to make a small park- ' ' like area out of this small garden and we think that we can do a fairly good landscaping job with that in mind^ In our talks with the neighbors, we ' ve gone around door to door , one of the major concerns that has been voiced has been parking because the neigh- ' bors receive on the one block area - which it is, that there are a fair amount of parking problems. In fact one of the residents who lives right next door - did an observation of street parking to see whether there was, in fact, a problem, and the results are . right here . I could pass those around. The results of the ob- servation suggests that there are not as much of a problem with parking as the individuals might have preceived to be the case, . particularly because the times of oseaSe for gardening would be during the day when there is a very low utilization of the park- . in8 spaces there^ Let me just add, in relationship to this park- ' ` ^ � BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 43 in8 problem, that in my observation of the garden site, at the NYSE8C site where there are over one hundred families gardening there, I ' ve seen rarely more than a maximum of three at even a - three cars at a high use time - very rarely during the week do you see more than one gardener or so at a time there, and a se- cond factor that one of the plans vital to this design is the ' neighbors will be using the gardens - people within easy walking . distance and so there will be very little parking involved be- cause people will be walking to the sites. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Does your agency define neighbors by any ^ , ^ ' MR. FREDELL� Right now we are talking about the two block radios ' ^ of the site , We might extend that to three blocks, but even in . our initial explorations around the neighborhood we discovered several people who are interested in gardens within two blocks, in fact, at least one of them within twenty-five or so feet, who ` is not here tonight to speak I believe, So, we think there is a ' very good possibility that neighbors from the immediate vicinity . will be interested in the sites - part of the plan will be to require that people using that particular garden space will be ' from the immediate neighborhood. This is part of our new plan of ' action which is scattered sites. Since we are not able to set op - ^ sites with large numbers of gardens we are going to make a number of very small gardens, highly andscaped, highly designed in a ' relatively park-like - as much as we can make it - so that they . will be integrated in the neighborhood as green spaces and a kind of park , since we have both the money and the inclination and ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 44 hopefully the cooperation of the neighbors and design something that they will like and we have the fonds to spend on it. That ' s mainly what I have to say. Are there any questions? MR . TOMLAN� Not to anticipate too much (unintelligible) I notice by virtue of the Planning and Development Board and by virtue of the petition that (unintelligible) that most people are merely concerned about parking? � MR. FREDELL� To reflect the issue of parking specifically? MR. TOMLAN� Righty I mean, is this essentially your evidence to that effect? MR, FREDELL� That is one piece of evidence gathered by an imme- diate neighbor . The other piece of evidence as I said - in our experience there is very little car osea8e in our gardeners -they tend to walk to the sites* They tend to visit at very odd and . ` different times and the one time they do not visit is over night , so they don ' t park their cars over night and disrupt those park- . in8 spaces from those residents who would like to leave their ` � cars over night. I might note here that eleven of fourteen hooses on the block we are discussing have their own driveway so ` there is some - there are a few hooses who do not have their own ^ driveway to park in but there is a significant amount of parking , provided already for most of the residents on that specific ` block^ I could also point out that within a blocks distance there is a lot of open parking~ If anyone is willing to walk half a block to Washington Square park - there is parking all around that park - so there is no problem with parking. ^ ` ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 39 1984 PACE� 45 MR, BOOTH� Do you have any additional evidence about a hardship suffered by this current owner? Or the anticipated owner? In terms of not being able to use the property as the Zoning Ordi- nance now reqoires ^ MR. FREDELL� I ' m not sore that I am prepared to speak to that adequately but let me just say that it woold be an extreme hardship were the gardens to be in a position to only use the land without being able to pot gardens on it, I don ' t know if that suits your definition of hardship? I doubt that it does, but that is about all that I can offer in that regard^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Well I ' ll ask the general question of anyone who would like to answer . Is the lot suitable for a construction site for a single family dwelling? MR. GOLDNYN� Yes~ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� In your investigation of the neighborhood, did you encounter anyone who voiced a desire to boy this property? MR, FREDELL� Yes there are a couple of residents who are interested in buying it but my understanding is they are interested in buying it for the purpose of expanding their side yards, not for the purposes of construction, CHAIRMAN NEAVER� So getting this on the tax roll might happen without federal assistance? It might even happen if we just let it alone. . MR, COLDNYN� What was the first part of your question? ' CHAIRMAN NEAVER� One of the arguments that I read was that this ' would pot the property on the tax roll or take it off the tax � BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 46 roll? I ' m confosed^ , . If you people boy it, it will 8o off^ MR, COLDNYN� It would be off, yes. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Well we ' ve already given you a dissertation on ` ^ the Zoning Ordinance that requires os to have a finding of hardship on the part of the owner of the lot. The only added . thing is that the Urban Renewal Agency doesn ' t need any help from ' os^ If they feel that we have tender sensibilities or something . like that, they are in error . We only bat about 500 here so if , in their wisdom they want to purchase this property, what they do with it is strictly a matter op to the Urban Renewal Agency . I . can ' t see why they want to go through the exercise of approval ` ` by this Board, they don ' t need it, The King can do no wrong here ^ If this Agency can condemn property in order to preserve ' it for gardens, they certainly can ignore the Zoning Ordinance as well . They don ' t have to comply with the Zoning Ordinance. . MR . COLDNYN� They chose not too^ ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Well I appreciate that but I ' d avoid the heat , too if I could but I ' m not in the right position^ ` ^ MR^ FREDELL� Can I just ask you for clarification? What you are saying here is that because the IURA would be the - if it were ` the owner of the land, it would be in a position where ` essentially ignore compliance with the zoning ordinance~ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� The City doesn ' t come to the Building ' ` Commissioner for building permits. MR. BOOTH� As a member of this Board, Charlie, I don ' t read ' the Ordinance to say that . I may be wrong but I don ' t ^ BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE*+ 47 CHAIRMAN NEAVER4+ Nell , we might disagree. I ' m not - first of all , fundamental argument of whether there is any showing of hardship that would support a use variance is quite obviously lacking so we don ' t need to argue about the rest of this. I do want to suggest however that there are two solutions, one that the Urban Renewal Agency do as it pleases and I don ' t know who is going to sue them, and the second thing is that there could be a change in the Zoning Ordinance as we have already discussed. MR . FREDELL'* Could I ask another question while we are at it? Is there a possibility that the Board would reconsider the ques- tion of whether small gardens of, say, under twenty in number , would, in fact, be agriculture and industrial per se. We came to � the Board once before and were told to come back on a case by case basis but if the Board were willing to reconsider that issue . - should we think about that or is that out of the question? ' i CHAIRMAN WEAVER** We have an obligation to interpret the Ordinance but not tonight. ' MR. FREDELL'+ But could we ask again for an interpretation? � CHAIRMAN NEAVER*+ Any further questions of these two gentlemen? MR ^ BOOTH'+ This is (unintelligible) interpretation, the Board is ` not unanimous in a conclusion that because a City Agency owns . property it does not have to abide by the Zoning roles, � Seriously I think that is one of the major land use questions ^ that confronts os, whether government is subject to the . Ordinances it imposes on other people. I haven ' t reached a ' conclusive determination on that, there is nothing that I have _ BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 48 seen yet that exempts the City from its Ordinances. MR. FREDELL*+ I ' m not sore which argument we are ar8oin8 against at this point * CHAIRMAN NEAVER� We are not involved in that case at all toni8ht^ Let os proceed. Thank you* Anyone who wishes to speak in support of this application? Yes^ Come right op, MR. CRANGER� My name is George Granger , I live at 614 W. Court Street, I ' m still trying to figure out, from what I have been hearing, in the case before this and this case, I don ' t know - so I am only going to speak to the immediate situation with regard to the lot. As the young man said, who was op here, it ' s over- grown with weeds and it is that, I ' ve been in there hunting for Judge Crater on occasion but if it can grow that kind of weeds, I think it would be very fertile for a garden. And,' in regard to the parking, I agree with him, I don ' t think there is a problem with parking* People do live in the neighborhood - they will be using the place if indeed it is granted, for those purposes and I would hope that it would be and that is about all that I have to say^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this application? Come ahead^ Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in support of this applcation? MS^ SHEARER� My name is Jody Shearer , I live at 411 Esty Street, which backs op against the property ^ I am also, like Mr ^ Granger somewhat confused about what the issue is, so I ' ll iost talk about my feelings about that space being a garden, It seems to ` BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PAGE� 49 me ludicrous to leave it the way it is. It has been for years just an ugly overgrown piece of property and even if its only a temporary use to make it gardens, it seems to me to be a wonder- fol user not only of the land but as a way to bring the neighbor- hood together and have people working cooperatively and I think it would be beaotifol ^ CHAIRMAN NEAVER++ Thank you* Is there anyone who wishes^ , , MS^ SOSA� My name is Margo Sosa, I live at 612-1/2 Nest Court which also borders on that land. I rent my apartment. I am also the person who took that little observational study of the park- ing. Simply because I am interested in seeing that this be used for garden space^ I can only reiterate what everyone else has said about people working together in the community and that a green space there would be really beautiful rather than having the weeds. For that matter , rather than it just being closed off to everyone else - I think it would be very nice that everybody would get to use that. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Thank you. Anyone else who wishes to speak in support? Anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? MR. ROMANDNSKI� My name is Bob Romanowski , First Ward Alderman, 612 W. Buffalo Street, I took it on myself, right after New Years, after I Sot a notice of what was going to happen to both properties, and as part of my obligation as an Alderman" I inter- viewed all the people in the immediate vicinity. You should have a copy of what their remarks were, their comments, I also tried to indicate whether or not they owned or rented and a few people ' � ^ -- - ~ ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 37 1984 PACE� 50 were not home over that weekend that I wasn ' t able to get to, but for the most part I think you ' ll find everyone who is within ap- proximately two hundred feet of the area. Nine home owners - these are home owners - are against the project and I ' ll read the reasons on the synopsis . Two home owners on Esty Street were for , Kirby Edmonds and Jody Shearer were not home at the time but Ms* Shearer ' s mother said that she would be, probably, one that would be in favor of it. Mr * Milton at 413 Esty Street, who is on the back side, indicated that he was buying the hoose and he thought it was a good idea - I listed them as two home owners for . There was one renter at 617 N. Court - he didn ' t care either way^ One renter at 612 H^ Court, Mr . Cahill , he was ' against it and at the Planning and Development Board, one of the renters at 612-1/2 N, Court was in favor of it, and I believe she spoke again tonight, The main reasons that the home owners in this area - by the way - they ' ve been there from about thirty to sixty-five years - in the case of Mrs. Niemi , she has been there ' for sixty-five years, in this neighborhood. The increased traf- . fic and parking problems, and believe it or not" there might be a driveway in every person ' s hoose - for the most part across the ' street, but there is more than one car at each household. In- crease of strangers in the neighborhood at all times of the day or night and some people start gardening very early in the morn- ing and late at ni8ht. They also think there is a better use for the land and in support of this, Mr , Domonic Ciotti , 616 N, Court Street, who owns his own place, has been trying for the last year ' BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 51 or so to boy the place to build a hoose on it for his daoghter ^ He indicated this to me a couple of times in our conversation, The people that own the hoose at 612 Nest Court Street, I believe they are the Rosicas, I ' m not positive of the ownership, but a Mr . Cahill , who rents there, indicated to me also that these peo- ple were trying to purchase the lot, pot in some driveways for their tenants and have a little bit of a side yard, Now I have to admit, everybody down there indicated that they would like to see the property cleaned op and the owners haven ' t been around to do the cleaning. That was pretty much the only thing that they thought that this garden would do - maybe clean it up a little bit, but as far as the gardens themselves, everybody that I have talked to, just indicated that they didn ' t want the increased activity^ Also, I had a little bit of a legal problem - as I was going to indicate but I guess you goys have covered it better than I could have. I just thought and everybody else had thought there was a better use for the land and as long as there is a couple of people who want to boy it, and keep it on the tax roll , not take it off , even though Community Gardens is a worthwhile activity, I think paying taxes is a little bit better for the City of Ithaca, too. So I ' m not going to take any more of your time or suggest that I can speak anymore than some of the people in back, but we have three or four additional home owners who wish to speak tonight on it, if you want any corraboration^ I _ also have an additional letter from a Sharon and Andrew Consalvi in my possession, and I would like to torn this in - it is dated BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 52 for tonight. They were not - either one of them - able to show op tonight. CHAIRMAN WEAVER** We have a copy of a letter . MR . ROMANOHSKI� This is an additional one. CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Oh, fine, thank you. Is there anyone else who ' wishes to speak in opposition? Come right up. MR. BRZOSTONSKI� I ' m John Brzostowski and I ' ve been a resident at 611 N^ Court Street for the last forty years~ My wife has ' been a resident there for fifty-five years and I am speaking for . the long time residents that live on the street - that ' s for Mrs. Battisti , over thirty-five years, Joe Longo, thirty-five years, Mrs, Nemis, way over sixty years and we just don ' t feel that we like to have that pot right in the middle of the block - we ' d like to see the lot cleared op, a home built or something, but not this particular project. And as far as talking about park- ing, I counted out - at the most there could be nine cars -if they are bumper to bumper - every inch otilized^ There is no parking on Meadow Street, they come over to our part and take our parking spaces on the opposite side of the street - there is no alternate parking - just on one side and I think parking is a big concern for all of os^ When my grandchildren come, sometimes ' they have to park on Washington Street and walk way over with . their little children - and so - that is all I have to say^ VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE� May I make one brief comment? ' CHAIRMAN WEAVER** You ' ll have to make it op here or it will just be a waste of time. ^ BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 39 1984 PACE� 53 MR^ DENNIS� I' m David Dennis from 612-1/2 Nest Coort^ My wife did the parking survey, People keep talking about parking - we observed that place day and night for a week, there are nine to ten parking spaces* We rarely saw - we never saw more than four - we rarely saw more than two cars on the block^ We did it hour after hour during the weekend and the day - I ' m tired of hearing people talking about parking problems there^ Just look at the graph, the average was one and one-half cars there, we averaged that over time - with nine parking spaces in the block - I don ' t see how people can feel that we have parking problems^ ' CHAIRMAN NEAVER� Thank yoo^ Anyone else who wishes to speak in opposition? If there are a number of people who still intend to speak , I wish you would come forward and get op here in the front pew so we don ' t have to wait for the long walk, MR. LONGO� My name is Joe Longo, I live at 607 Nest Court Street, Parking is a problem. In all the years that I ' ve lived there, many times we have had to play musical cars ^ Maybe in the past week, or whatever , it has been light but overall it is a ' problem, Since it is one sided. My other objection is that this is right now taxed land^ People want to purchase it, people want to make use of it in the neighborhood, either to build or to add to their lots . This is where I think it should stay - as a resi- dential - that ' s about it^ CHAIRMAN WEAVER** Thank yoo^ Anyone else who wishes to speak in ' opposition? Do I have a motion? BZA MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 PACE� 54 APPEAL NO. 1597 - 610 NEST COURT STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of the Ithaca Urban Renewal/Community Development Agency for a use variance to permit the use of the property located at 610 Nest Court Street for a neighborhood garden pro8ram^ The decision of the Board was . as follows� MR, TOMLAN� I move that the Board deny the use variance ` requested in appeal number 1597. MS. COOKINCHAM� I second the motion, FINDINGS OF FACT'. ` 1 } Financial hardship was not demonstrated to any degree. 2) It was not demonstrated that the allowable uses under ' present zoning weren ' t sofficient^ . 3) There was considerable neighborhood opposition. VOTE'* 6 YES; O NO DENIED - 55 - 5 , 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 12-1-84, 1593, 1594, 1595, 1596, and 15.97, on December 3, 1984 in the Common Council Chambers, City of Ithaca, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, New York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the •"� minutes of the meeting and the action taken of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability. Barbara C. Ruane Recording Secretary Sworn to before me this day of Ax,,te r 1984 Notary Public JEAN J. HANKINSON NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF NEW YORK No. 55.1660800 QUALIFIED IN TOMPKINS COUN MY CC11"MISSION EXPIRES MARCH 30,19