Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1976-08-02 !IBOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA, 'INEW YORK, AUGUST 2, 1976 f (APPEAL NO. 1124: Appeal of Robert W. Baker for use variance under Section 30.25 Col. 2 at 412-414 N. Tioga Street in an R-3 use district. IMR. WILLIAMSON: Members of the Zoning Board, Mr. Chairman, my ?name is Robert Williamson, I am an attorney representing Dr. Baker .; and his wife this evening on the use variance that they have re- ;; quested, on the premises owned by them at 412-414 N. Tioga Street. E 1,1I feel that history here is in order and I go back to this same i ( Board and the Planning Board at a hearing in 1961. At that time s ' Dr. Baker was in the process together with his wife in building ' this building. It is an office building and was intended at that I i time to be an office building for the offices of the orthodonio ;; practice of Dr. Baker and his pErtners. The entire building, it i ] was intended at that time was to be for business purposes. And 11indeed, if you refer back to the building permit requested by 11Mr. Holley who was the contractor who built the building back i, 'jin 1961 you will note that on that building permit it was r-,A gaested '' that the entire building be for commercial purposes. So, Dr. Baker Wand his wife thought that all of these years that the entire ; building had been zoned, excuse me, that he had been granted a �1 use variance at that time way back in 1961 for the entire building Ito be used for office purposes. ,i MR. MARTIN: Excuse me, can I halt you with a question? You re- jferred to this Board having taken that action. Well, I don' t ii think that any of the membership is the same. So you will help jus if you will explain to us a bit more about that history. You ;; can take it that the file from that action will be part of the i record of this hearing, I have it riight here and members of the : Board will have opportunity to look at it when we go into executive] !! session. But I find that file having glanced at it myself, a bit 111puzzeling and I'm curious why a variance was needed in 1961 since it was proposed as you described it to have what amounts to a medical i ;fuse which is permitted in an R-3 zone. !3 !i MR. WILLIAMSON: I am not that familiar at this stage with a 1961 ordinance but we were required to get the use variance at that time. And we came before the Board so that the building could be constructed and we could get the necessary permits to go forward 3 2 f {with the construction of the building. Since that time, I might ' '• i ilsay that when the use variance was granted unanimously in 1961, Fthe Doctor has used the building in part, in its entirety for his r own offices, the offices of those of his partners and for Atlantic Dental Company. Atlantic Dental Company occupied the space on �Ithe second floor for some period of time and then as most of you I:know and I know Mr. Jones knows because he issued the permit, they built a new building for the Company, Atlantic Dental Company,) down on Cascadilla Street extended which is just east of the inlet, near the Townsend Gas Company, Oil Company. His mother did live there until some time ago when she moved out. And the Doctor 11felt as I previously stated that the building in its entirety had i been given a use variance for business purposes and so he rented i ;' the second floor to the Mary Tilley Real Estate Office which jipresently occupies the premises. We are going to show you slides { i � of the premises as it is now, as it was when it was constructed din 1961, there is absolutely no change in the exterior of the 1building, no change contemplated in the exterior of the building, Ino change in the interior. It' s exactly as it was in 1961. I fl� might say that the Doctor back in 1971, came before the Board of E Zoning Appeals not the same persons, but it was only 5 years ago I i� when he purchased the building at 408 N. Tioga Street, he and his I wife purchased that building and we have slides of that to show 11 you the manner in which he rejuvenated the area and the building itself. That building he came before this Board and was given a ; unanimous use variance to put in the building, offices for ; dentists, there presently Doctors Cardoza and Giannuzzi on the first floor and there is a Real Estate Office on the first floor and I believe a . . . . . . . I forget what' s on the second floor. The f Ithaca Board of Realtors is on the second floor of the building I at 408 N. Tioga Street. When you see the slides you will see what he did to the entire premises at 408 and also what the new building flat 412-414 resulted in when you look at the older buildings that were torn down to make place for the building at 412-414. In i addition and Mr. Jones' s records will bear this out, Dr. Baker li ii i� � I� 3 !and his wife purchased properties on Sears Street and they were 'land not all of them one or two of them were condemned. And he More those down and made available parking for the areas for the buildings at 408 and 412-414. So this entire area has been re- ,1juvenated by the Doctor and his wife and its the use variance for ithe Real Estate Office that we are seeking this evening. And I i '!might add that in 1971 the Board of Zoning Appeals in giving the �1Doctor a variance for the use at 408 N. Tioga Street found the l �1Ifollowing findings: Adequate parking would be furnished for the ,t y tenant and the clients, the rehabilation of the property which I'm { quite sure the slides that we show you tonight will bear out, bringls i; 1 pit to 100% improvement in the neighborhood and that the use would 11be of a character compatible for the neighborhood. So the Doctor iiin coming here tonight seeks to have what he thought was already granted, given to him a use for this premises to be used for the !' Mary Tilley Real Estate Offices. He has adequate parking, I believe, Mand he can correct me if I'm wrong, there are spaces for 75 cars _ I ion a paved parking area between 408 and between 412-414. Certainly 1 1the use requested is completely compatible with the neighborhood, I across the street is the offices of Weaver, Schempp and McNeill �1 '; Insurance Offices, Doctor Baldini' s is there and I see him here lin the audience this evening as well as Dr. Cappucci. The offices ] I E immediately occuppied to the south by the dentist Giannuzzi and i Cardoza and The Ithaca Board of Realtors and Patterson Real Estate ! I believe are all compatible with the use of the premises in this i area. And I'd like at this time, Dr. if you'd get the slides to 'I r' show the members of the Board we could show them the history of II� i lthe entire area beginning in 1961. At this point Mr. Williamson Band Dr. Baker showed slides. We feel and respectively request i� that this Board give to the Doctor and his wife a use variance ' for the Real Estate Office located there in accordance with our I Ijapplication and at this time the Doctor and I will answer any I 4j questions that any members of the Board may have. 1MR. MARTIN: I' ll repeat my question about what we are to make 11of the action in 1961. You've made something of it. You've said H ;1that the understanding was created in the Doctor at that point i 'I 'i ii 4 ;that a variance was being granted for business or office use 1 I! 1 !generally. Our current ordinance would not require a use variance l ; for a medical facility in a R-3 zone which is what that is. Now lit is quite likely that the 61 ordinance was different in some lrespect, can you enlighten us on why a variance was being requested! !'then. . . . . . . . . . . 10R. BAKER: Well, I thought that I was applying for a commercial !1i variance and apparently that wasn' t granted, innocence is no excuse but I thought at the time that we'd been granted a variance ifor commercial usage and I apparently hadn' t after the law was researched. MR. WILLIAMSON: I think that' s the answer as simple as that, he 4elt he had gotten a variance for the use of the building for i 11business purposes and. . . . . i IMR. MARTIN: Alright, now the application in 1961 quite clearly does refer to the intent to use the upper story for a residence. (And I gather it was designed for that purpose and has been occuppie i Il. Ijas a residence over the years. . � MR. WILLIAMSON: In part i I IDR. BAKER: It was really never-in practice it is a commercial !building I think that' s pretty obvious, it was used as a residence,; f !; it was expedient at the time to use it, and we used it as that, but fit was too big for a residence it was really not feasible to use i1 �jit as a residence over another office so we used it for awhile . . . . . I'MR. MARTIN: Well, I'm reading from the appeal which ended up I!with the Board and the action whatever we are to make of it in 61. j s !; And one of the grounds for the appeal was that the present building Is bare not adequate nor suited to house our offices nor a home for 4 Doctor Baker' s mother who is going to live in the proposed build- ing. So one of the arguments was that the building had to be built I�I ! ilinorder to house your mother? DR. BAKER: The first statement that you made buildings were not Jadequate to house anyone, that' s why we tore them down. SMR. MARTIN: Right. ! DR. BAKER: I don' t know how the other part got in there but that is true, the buildings were not able to be rehabilitated. IMR. MARTIN: But it was built with your mother' s occupancy in mind 11 1, 5 1 ,land she did live in it. I� JIDR. BAKER: She lived there for quite a few years. I I; jEMR. MARTIN: Right. And when did the residential use of the i IIsecond floor cease? DR. BAKER: Well, it was used off and on, now this is the other Ithing that I am again guilty of, we used the building for other purposes than my office, Atlantic Dental Company was founded there = and was housed there for awhile so I've been in fault for awhile. SMR. MARTIN: Are there other questions yes. IMR. VANMARTER. Bob, I' d like to agree that the building is designed land used, meets all the requirements of the Ordinance. 408 N. Tiogaf, no consequence to this case, no other deficiencies, no parking ii problems, nothing. Medical facilities permitted, the extension of ;) c lit permitted as long as the other requirements are met. Living fuse on the second floor ispermitted, now that is going to be converted. It would be used for medical facility, this is the doctors use, his associates use, Atlantic Dental Company and so on.� The Real Estate Office is not permitted. We need to know what iIcan be shown for hardship whereby this office could not be used j for any other purpose. MR. WILLIAMSON: Well, of course, the Doctor moved the Atlantic Dental Company out of this building, it was too big of an operation ; I to keep in this building so he' s gone to the extent of spending ! thousands of dollars to build a new building down on Cascadilla i j Street to house the Atlantic Dental Company. Thisfacility on the second floor is not economically feasible as really a rental unit for an individual and the two thousand or more sq. feet that the 1 I second floor consists of which is far larger than what any apart- meent needs to be. It is not feasible to be continued as a k e residential unit. You can' t demand the rent for that apartment at 2,000 or 2,500 feet of apartment space would demand. And it there- fore goes to the economics of the situation as far as obtaining enough rent of the second floor to make the use of the building I economically feasible as a commercial building to vhich it was , originally intended. E ;SMR. MARTIN: Have attempts been made to rent as a residence or t ; conversely to use it for a medical facility as would be permitted I . 6 i i in R-3? iMR. WILLIAMSON: Well, of course, he has ample space, I mean he I + i jhas ample space for his medical. . . . . . . j 1MR. MARTIN: Well, but one might rent it to some other doctor Hor dentist. "DR. BAKER: That isntt quite that easy. I'm a specialist, I don' t i Digo out and rent it to other dentist, that' s very nicely said but �1there is a little ethical problem for me doing this so. . . . . �I + jiMR. WILLIAMSON: His business depends on referrals and to put one j1dentist in there ahead of any other would in his profession perhap �6 �jlead some to be inclined to feel that he was favoring one over 4another. iMR. VANMARTER: Can you relate all the other medical uses to be permitted? IMR. WILLIAMSON: Can I relate them? j H!MR. VANMARTER: Yes, podiatrist, you've got clinics, you've got j �lphysicians, you've got surgeons none of which would encroach on Ithe doctors use. . . . . DR. BAKER: Second story walk up offices are not too applicable i to podiatrist, or obstetrics or other things, you know people like i ;! first floor offices and I don' t have an elevator in the building �fso it isn' t you know. . . . . . down to the North Side Pharmacy they 1intended it to be rented as a medical facility, but people don' t �ilike to walk up to offices for second story professional needs. � MR. WILLIAMSON: We feel that it is discrimination when you allow I ( Real Estate Offices and doctors in the same block on both sides � of the street and then want to discriminate against the doctor. I ! MR. GASTEIGER: On the other hand. . . . . i MR. VANMARTER: I think you've got it reversed on. . . IMR. WILLIAMSON: I don' t think so. . . itSMR. VANMARTER: A medical facility is permitted, is that agreed? MR. WILLIAMSON: Why certainly a medical facility is permitted. j' MR. MARTIN: So there is no discrimination in allowing it since the zoning ordinance does allow it. 1'IMR. WILLIAMSON: I'm not here for that, I'm here for a use variancet I • for a Real Estate Office. ;i i i 7 IMR. VANMARTER: If there is an inequity in the zoning ordinance we Ilare not here to deal with that, we are here to deal with the Doctor 11problem right? H I I�MR. WILLIAMSON: That' s what I'm here for. 1 ; DR. BAKER: Well, when I went for the variance in 71 or whenever Ajit was, I was heartly commended and confident that for - taking a . � I �Ihouse which was not built for a facility, I built this place as ia commercial building I utilized it as an apartment for my mother ; when it was available and other things. I was commended at the time we did 408 N. Tioga Street which we expended a terrific jamount of money on and that is a house converted to, you know there is two real estate offices, a professional office and Board of Realtors at the time, that' s why I have no inclination that I ( have a problem. . . . . e MR. GASTEIGER: Are those offices operated under variances as well? iMR. WILLIAMSON: Yes, they are. The offices at 408 by this board lunanimously not the same members, in 1971 the house next door was granted a unanimous use variance by this board for real estate, doctors, lawyers, dentists and it is currently occuppied as I've said before by Doctors Giannuzzi by Dr.Cardoza, the Ithaca Real 'j Estate Board, by Patterson Real Estate and I forget who else. Jim Gardner who is involved in Real Estate. Absolutely 100%. They commended the Doctor for the updating and the beautification of the area and the fine manner in which the building was rehabilitated. MR. MARTIN: Let' s outline the issues that are before the Board and see if there are any more questions . The doctors good record as a landowner, this Board inp rior cases have said who the particular appellant is and that persons record as a landowner, I really doesn' t have tight relevants to the question of whether or not a variance ought to be granted. So we will concede all f of that, the individual request has to be taken up on a case by !; case basis but if you will look at the actions taken by the Board _ 1 lover the last two three years, there have been any number of properties for which non-conforming uses in this R-3 district that 1 � we are talking about, have been denied. And so there would be I !! those who might argue discrimination the other way around, if one � !I 8 ;1were granted in this case. I mean discrimination in either event f� !1would not be true because the Board would be acting on a case by ,case basis to see whether or not the grounds for a variance have been made out. And those grounds are quite simply laid out in the !ordinance and they require us to find in this case that there was jl thardship. Now again can we have what the grounds for finding that i� it is infeasible, impracticle and a hardship to use this building 11for the uses that are permitted in a R-3 zone which include use ► as a medical facility. DR. BAKER: Well, I could answer that. The building was not designad basically for very frankly rental use upstairs. It' s too big, it' s 12,500 sq. feet and you don' t have too many people who want to rent � a 2,500 sq. foot downtown facility over a commercial office now, q Y , I' ll agree with you there is. . . . I understand the variance problemsi here. But this is not an old house. We' re not talking - the I Planning Board when we met before that I think their recommendation were pretty good I thought. They said you'.re not applying for an Hold house for a variance, you've built a building and this is ((1obviously this is not a house it is a commercial building that is !1what I built. I'm not asking for an old house to be reconsidered I' ` that could be used as a very frankly rental unit, I'm considering I a commercial building that should have been used commercially from , the beginning. And by my lack of knowledie that was used improperly f to be . . . . . . so I think that there is a big difference here, I think that there is a heck of a difference here. An old house �ithat was originally built as a residential unit and for apartments and for my place a commercial building and it is sort of unattractiie to live over a commercial office with cars running in and out and all this so that is the difference I think. I MR. WILLIAMSON: And it is economically not feasible to continue I this as a residential unit when you can never command the rent I �I that you would have to make it feasible. MR. MARTIN: Ok, another point on which the Board would have to i' make a finding to grant a variance would be that there would be no serious detrimental impact on the neighborhood, now going back 11to the 61 file I find Mr. Williamson stating the plans and usage i lof a variance was granted and stating unequivocally there would 9 I !Ibe no activity as far as professional use was concerned at night. Now, I wonder if there will be any change in the pattern of use 1 �Jwith this new commercial use upstairs. 1MR. WILLIAMSON: Alright, let me explain here and I think a little �I ;!history again is inorder. When that building was first built, I ? the dental office building, the Tioga Building in 1961, I' ll ; ask the Doctor, how many spaces were available for parking? l jDR. BAKER: Probably 15 or 20. w 11MR. WILLIAMSON: And how many are available now? ! ' DR. BAKER: 68-72 in that area. E; MR. WILLIAMSON: There is no on street parking whatsoever required. ! Absolutely none. As he has said 68-70 spaces available since the } statement I made in 1961. And I don' t know the activity of the ljoffice in question but I'd have to say that the activity would in 'ono way require any on street parking or additional traffic in the ; streets. There is already ample parking for the real estate ,i ;! offices at 408 N. Tioga the building immediately to the south. I '! might say that there is a real estate office across the street nand I don' t think there is any parking available for that except lfon street parking. We have all off street parking absolutely no ,! increase as you state the words material increase would be noticed ! I I elwhatsoever, in granting this use variance. " ii' DR. BAKER: I don' t believe they use it any more in the evening than we do we have emergency types and incidentially that office jif any of you have looked in it, I've heard the talks about lights,! is it is lighted all night long, the whole area with lights, it' s fort 11 the neighborhood, safer. ! '! MR. MARTIN: Are there other questions from members of the Board? MR. GASTEIGER: Well, I might ask we have lots of people who have ( been wanting to split things up and make them into apartments and j 11 get rich in this way, has this been part of your thinking? 14 MR. WILLIAMSON: No, he does not want to split the office in any 1 � way whatsoever. i; 't DR. BAKER: I don' t want to change it at all. "' I jMR. WILLIAMSON: Want no change whatsoever. When you look at it I! I today, it' s the same as it was a week ago or two years ago or four( I } 10 ,i years ago. The exterior is no change whatsoever. I '',SMR. GASTEIGER: Speaking of the interior. . . r ODR. BAKER: No I want to use it as it is. i Ii MR. WILLIAMSON: As it is we are not here in any way we would not want you to think in any way we are asking to make it for Real { Estate and divide it into two or three real estate offices, absolut 1} j� not. If that was in your mind, maybe it wasn' t I didn' t mean to. . . I EMR. GASTEIGER: Residential? I IMR. WILLIAMSON: We are not trying, oh no, we are not trying to ii !` break into apartments. Because it' s just not feasible to do that. Ill It couldn' t be done in that manner that you are speaking of without , really doing one big job on the interior of this building. He built the building with the intent that it be commercial and he � is not changing the interior to make one, two, three apattments or half apartments and have real estate offices or anything else. Really, I think the bottom line when you think about it is exactly �i as he said. He thought erroneously, that this whole building was i i jifor commercial purposes and that he had been granted a use variance to use the building for these business purposes. In no way does ii he want to break up the interior of the building to any other ; offices other than just use what he orginally constructed for this las the Planning Board said, this was a building, they recognized � in the Planning Board at the hearing we had a week ago, that this c intact was a building built for office purposes. They recognized i ! ; that in giving their unanimous recommendation. j i �IMR. GASTEIGER: I think that you have to face the fact that there I� was an apartment up there and it was used for residential purposes ' really distracts from your argument and I can' t ignore it that � 3 j there must be a bathroom, a kitchen and so forth. i CDR. BAKER: Yes, it is still 'there. !I MR. WILLIAMSON: Absolutely there is a bathroom there. They -- ji couldn' t come downstairs. DR. BAKER: It wasn' t rented though as a rental unit. I let a member of my family live there. i � MR. GASTEIGER: I thought I heard someone say that you let a I ri + !hl family. . . . . . . . i" 11 MR. WILLIAMSON: That is right. His mother. He said meaning his 'Ifamily not another family no, no. There was never more than one Hf Iperson. i I jMR. MARTIN: Are you going to have someone speak to the precise i nature of the use that will go on up there. The amount of traffic !i I .;that it will generate and the hours that it will keep. Or are you l,the person trat I should ask that question to? Usually to grant a variance we need some fair amount detail on that so that we I can decide whether or not it will have the kind of impact on the neighborhood that would prevent us from granting a variance. 9 p g g 1DR. BAKER: One unit rental facility for Real Estate Office is '�what I want for this. (MR. MARTIN: Ok � MR. WILLIAMMSON: The office hours are 9-5. j�MR. MARTIN: 9-5 ' MR. WILLIAMSON: How many cars does Miss Tilley have in the parking l! lot? 1� IDR. BAKER: I think I granted her 9 or 10 spaces. 9' � MR. WILLIAMSON: And that' s use for her and the patrons and it' s all off street parking, no on street parking required. li 'DR. BAKER: The houses that were on Sears Street that I demolished were condemned by the City that' s another sad story. The economic feasibility of those were absolutely nill. There was no way to I i take these over and make them economically feasible. Two of them r or three, I can' t remember all that were condemned and taken down. r f SMR. MARTIN: Further questions from members of the Board? j 1 i DR. GREENBERG: I just have a statement, I don' t know if it is pertinent but reference has been made continually about the 1 commercial nature of the building and I suppose it' s not - it' s f ` truly a point but I'd like to think that the granting was for a professional building rather than a commercial in that area. ; 1MR. WILLIAMSON: Yes, that is what he meant to say he used the { words - he is intending what he calls Real Estate, Law, Dr. , Dentist !.Office, he did not go to any idea of a factory type affair, doctor,i I ?land I did not mean to mislead you in that regard. I 12 1� ijMR. MARTIN: Are there further questions? Hearing none I' d assume '=not. Is that the conclusion of your presentation? i i JMR. WILLIAMSON: Yes. j MARTIN: Thank you. Are there any others here this evening, j 3 ., first any others who would like to speak on behalf of the requested i' ; variance? Please come forward. € J. N. PATTERSON; I know very little of the proceedings, but I live ;sat 112 Sears Street. My wife and I have owned that since 23 i and lived there since 23. I'm not interested or have no objections Tito Dr. Baker and what he does to his building except as it i '; effects traffic on Sears Street and it does affect it. And it i5 ; probably will effect it. If he puts Real Estate Offices in there i 1that we will have people coming and going and they use Sears Street !! ! I think more than they do Tioga. It is so narrow that if you meet ; you can' t pass, Sears Street is, when there is cars parked. . . . . . 1MR. MARTIN: The Real Estate Office is there, is it your impression that the traffic conditions have gotten worse on Sears? J. N. PATTERSON: Oh, yes since the building was built and put to use it has gotten a lot worse daytime not at night, but at daytime. ! The street is too narrow for the amount of traffic that is on ! it, if you meet, you come off Court or the other way around and ! if you meet a car and there are cars parked you can' t pass and ; somebody has got to give. And that happens right along. �I 11MR. MARTIN: So you are opposed to the grant of the variance for i i fa Real Estate Office, are you? J. N. PATTERSON: For that only reason. ii MR. MARTIN: For that reason. . t� J. N. PATTERSON: On account of parking. If the doctor would keep ! ;this traffic off Sears Street then it wouldn' t bother us a bit. Keep it on Tioga where it is suppose to be. 'SMR. MARTIN: Arm there questions from members of the Board? �iDR. GREENBERG: Is the parking lot traffic arrangement seem to I 11 you to indicate that this Sears Street driveway is used as an exits it or entrance? I� 1 !; J. N. PATTERSON: Both, they come and go on it and they drive into ' the doctors parking lot and they drive out of it on Sears Street. �i DR. GREENBERG: Why would you say this is the case when Sears is a E 13 �s `t, a difficult street to negotiate? � I J . N. PATTERSON: Pardon jjDR. GREENBERG: Why do motorist use Sears Street if it is such a 1Idifficult street to negotiate rather than the Tioga Street which Itis nice and wide? j IJ. N. PATTERSON: Then why do people do anything? ii �!MR. MARTIN: Thank you Mr. Patterson. Someone else who'd like to Ispeak first in favor of the requested variance? 1DR. McCAULEY: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board of Zoning Appeals 11� I'm Dr. McCauley I awn the property at 416 N. Tioga Street right i next to the professional building that Dr. Baker owns and is the jsubject of our discussion tonight. I might also add that since 11946, I purchased the property at 418 N. Tioga Street and for 25 years had my office and my residence in that building. I am very IImuch aware of the medical needs of the community and I am also Ivery favorable to the leniency that the Board has granted doctors l4n locating their offices and their homes downtown residential i areas as I was permitted to do for 25 years. We now after having 1had no new doctors come to Ithaca have had at least 10 come in this, Fast year. I think 6 or 8 within the last 2 months. I have gone , over their credentials and have approved their privileges and membership on the Medical Staff at the hospital. The solo practice of medicine is definately out! That is a gone thing. To practice as I did and as a single doctor in a single office is no longer idone. Of all these 10 doctors that have arrived, there is only none who has started a solo practice, that is Dr. Hersh in Trumansbu g. { All the rest have alined themselves with established groups at the present time and not a single one has an office on the second floor anywhere. Now I'm sure, I would be very much surprised if Dr. Bakes ( advertised in the paper and said that he had space on the second �I floor for any type of medical facility, if he got a single doctor to rent that space, I would be amazed. I really would. You can not ask cardiac patients to climb to the second floor or emphysema �IIpatients the same way. You can not ask orthepedic problems to hop 1falong on crutches up to the second floor this is just not J done. ' In large office buildings with elevators, that' s another thing. 14 yr ;!Now the building architectually as you know just to reiterate `what' s already been stated and I will be brief, is a professional i' ! building. -- In the years that it has been there, there has been a fInoticable improvement to me about the whole neighborhood. He Keeps his lawn, shrubbery, trees cut and it is a definite addition i ' to the area. You must realize that the buildings that occupy the space from Cascadilla Creek to down to Court Street in that section of N. Tioga Street at least 40 to 45% of that area is office space land office buildings. When I first subdivided 418 N. Tioga into � my office and my residence there was no question because I was I living there I have since sold that property and now I own the small property next door where my mother-in-law lives. I believe as a matter of history when I first came here in 1946, that there were rather strict residential rules about offices even doctors lioffices in the area where my office was. But there was never any 'i problem as long as the doctor like Dr. Wallace and myself having 1• l� the office and living in the same residence, there was no problem i; l� there at all and the Board always granted any situations such as j this. I speak in favor of Dr. Bakers request for this variance, I ii see in no way that it would be detrimental in any way at all. I see Mr. Patterson' s concern for Sears Street, I've made house call � on Sears Street up and down there for years. And I had trouble i back in 1946 and 47 driving down Sears Street, whenever I had r� r the chance I never did drive down Sears Street, I walked carrying m f y bag. I think if you would study the traffic problem of these i! I �! people going into the professional building at 412 and 414 N. 1 Tioga Street I'm sure you will find they would use the entrance to the parking lot on N. Tioga Street and not Sears Street. The traffic on Sears Street has been a problem every since I've been Iin Ithaca, some 30 years. If there are any questions that I could ` answer to the Board, I'd be very glad to do so. MR. MARTIN: Are there questions from members of the Board? ; Thank you. ! s DR. McCAULEY: Thank you very much. i' DR. BALDINI: I'm Doctor Ralph Baldini my address is 415 N. Tioga I Street. Since a little bit of history was given tonight I'd like to add some of my own. Dr. McCauley just stated that he lived at 15 i ��418 N. Tioga Street and had his prActice there, I was the first E e t, dentist to move in the neighborhood. I don' t remember the exact `6 ! ;date, I'm not good at figures but I had obtained a variance and my I ; office is at 415 N. Tioga Street directly across from Dr. McCauley' s ; former residence. I've been there for something like 22 years and 11� I what he said about single practices of medicine is also true of jisingle practices of dentist. We have a group practice in the 1�building now we've gone through two alterations and both variances lat both times and I might add that I'm responsible for talking Dr. i ,l Baker in coming down into our neighborhood because he mentioned to ? I dime about the idea of buying those two dilapated buildings that � he showed you slides of and it was a hassle there when Ithaca ! College used it as a temporary quarters for their students and you ! know what hi-fi sounds like 24 hours a day and we had it. What IDr. Baker and Mr. Williamson forgot to mention that this Atlantic ,! Dental Company was not just a sales corporation but they have a 11abbatory which consists of making a commercial appliances for jidentists and other people related to that oral health field and he Ii 1wisely did not attempt to come up and ask for a variance for that 11use because I think I'd have been the first to oppose him. Because !i I'd have been opposed to a commercial dental laboratory in that w �ineighborhood. So he prudently bought property down on Cascadilla E ( Street extension and built a building and Atlantic Mental Company I sI pis there and we do business with them by the way, which I would Snot have done had he gotten the variance to be across the street i 'i ? from the office. Now to get to the point of question, the only ! difference as far as I can determine with the use for Mary Tilley iReal Estate as against Bob Bakers mother living upstairs is on ' the front door there is a sign that says Mary Tilley Real Estate i and it' s unobtrusive, you have to look hard to find it and that is j the only difference externally as far as I can see, there is no itdifference as far as the traffic is concerned, she is not there jiat night time in fact, I'm in our office more at night than she �! is, across the street because of emergency calls. As far as th e j ( traffic as the gentleman mentioned on Sears Street, I've been in i flIthaca all my life, I'm a native Ithacan, and I'm familiar with ' (i i 16 !I Sears Street from the year 1. And it' s a problem and I don' t think 11that the opening up of the parking area because most of my observat c is the patients who pull into his practice pull in on Tioga Street ! 11side and they exit on the Tioga Street side for the very reasons iI ! ;; that he mentioned. It' s a terrible street to get caught on meeting ii jsomebody because somebody has to back up. And I know if I personally were to go into his parking lot I would come out on the Tioga Street side and I can see this quite often and people do come out more i ! frequently on the Tioga Street side. So, I'm highly in favor of I , your granting him this variance, I see no conflict at all, it is a 11 ;;professional building, I don' t like to use the word commercial. If 11 could put in a plug now for the Board of Zoning Appeals to try J to appeal to the Planning Board and Common Council having been on `both Common Council and the Board of Zoning Appeals myself, if l�they would change the classification from purely commercial which includes professional to have a seperate catagory of professional ,l buildings and by definition what a profession is. I think this = would eliminate some of this controversy that we are going through tonight. But I would strongly recommend that you give favorable consideration to Dr. Baker request for the use variance for the Mary Tilley Real Estate. Thank you. � IMR. MARTIN: Are there questions? Thank you Doctor. Are there others here this evening who would like to be heard in favor of ithe requested variance? ! ROBERT TRAPP: My name is Robert Trapp and I live at 123 Sears ! Street. I've been there since 1965 and I don' t think that you are goingto see an difference in Y traffic coming in and out of that ; parking lot because a great deal of our traffic problem is not the Elocal people it' s people from outside coming down there seeking to find a free parking spot on Sears Street. They come every morning and they leave every night about 4:30-5:00 o' clock. And then your street clears until the next morning and then the outsiders come lin and they plant themselves in the parking spaces making i p g t very !I ifficult for anybody to drive through there. I'm in and out there eve:ry day twice, three times a day with a truck. So I know the parking situation is tough but however. I can' t see where putting 1� f ! 17 lanything else in the building except what' s in there now with i �jthe Mary Tilley Realty Company is going to be any improvement. I think it would be a big improvement to leave the Realty Co. there. i HI've been watching them, I live almost in the Doctors backyard, f knot quite and there is no problem as far as I can see. What we jjare getting a little of people come down Sears Street and they ' duck into the parking lot because they work right there. There is quite a bit of that and in the same token they may go out that same way but most of them are going out the other way. MR. MARTIN: So your observation is that this use, the Real Estate loperation has not seriously affected traffic on Sears Street? IIMR. TRAPP: Most of the time you look in the Doctors parking lot Mand there is ample space that isn' t being used. There is alot of 10 11time you look in there and there is lots of spaces in there. Maybe, l� even I've chiseled on it myself once in a while at night when I I 1had to. But the idea of the whole thing, I think you would be j much better with the Real Estate Office in there then to ever hope I jto put any kind of living quarters in there and then you have any- thing come in. You can' t say no as long as they have the rent, and 1you will want to rent it. You can' t show partiality. So you can �l have all kinds of rackets all hours of the night. Don' t ask me i l!how I know because I live on Sears Street. But the idea is that I E` flin a commercial building 9-5 is going to be ideal in my way of ! I Il seeing and it should be granted. t OMR. MARTIN: Are there questions for Mr. Trapp? Thank you. I Anyone else who would like to be heard in favor of the requested j 4l ii variance? Is there anyone who would like to be heard in oppositional i � MARVIN CARLSON: My name is Marvin Carlson and I live at 407 N. j Aurora Street. I was present at the recent Planning Bard meeting. fI didn't speak at that meeting, I was taken a little off guard I Illlguess. I didn' t anticipate the reaction the Planning Brad made to d� f �ithis appeal nor did I really have some of the information that I lfelt I would like to have had at that time. I have some of it I i �inow and I would like to present it this evening. Dr. Baker or iDr. Baker' s lawyer has presented much the same case - most of the ; same slides this evening that he presented at that time and I j i? l l 18 I :,suppose the first thing that I really should say is that everyone !. in the i neighborhood I think does approve very strongly of the ;!restoration and maintenance of 408. It' s a real show piece and a livery fine building in the neighborhood. Mr. Williamson made much s ;,point of the restoration of this property I think rightly so. So `jmuch so that the Planning Board members asked if that were the 'I s1building that they were asking for the variance about. However, ijneither then nor tonight have Mr. Williamson mentioned that Mr. j jBaker owns at least five other properties in this block. I think that it is perhaps just as significant that these other properties I !lare not mentioned as it is that so much stress is laid on the Jibuilding right next door. Amond these are in fact some of the 1worst kept and maintained buildings in the block, if not in the i ;area. I have some photographs that I will distribute. Most of J' }these are located on Sears Street and I' ll work my way down Sears 'IStreet very rapidly here because I want to give a kind of general , impression that I will come back to in just a moment. The building f !on Sears Street owned by Dr. Baker are all on the same side of Sear of ; Street as the Sears Street Tioga Block. I' ll be passing around Ithe map to the Board in just a moment. The first address on this 11street is 107 Sears Street which is owned by Dr. Baker this is as I; I1you will see in the photograph is a building very poorly maintained �Jthe porch is deteriorating the stucco is falling off the building, 1 �Ithe building needs paint, you will see this in the photograph. IThe building which is not owned by Dr. Baker 109 Sears Street is f w � ! owner occupied, is surely the best maintained building on this side, w hof the street. It' s freshly painted and it' s in good repair. Afte that comes the entrance of a very large entrance to Dr. Baker' s 1 f 1175 car parking lot and then after we pass that entrance we come I 11to 117 Sears Street which is owned by Dr. Baker as you will see 11in the photograph this is another poorly maintained building, this jl • i ;lis just next to the parking lot. The refuse has not been removed Iifrom this building for week's perhaps months, there is old sofas I !,sitting on the front porch, bricks, trash out in the yard, wine rebottles scattered around even up on the roof you' ll see, it too j 1 Meeds painting. The next building at 119 Sears Street is not owned; !1 1 I 4j 19 i by Dr. Baker and once again a very well maintained building, recently painted. Then we have an alternating pattern which is quite clear as you walk down the street. At 121 Sears Street we ( come to another of Dr. Baker' s properties. Here again as you will ; see in the photograph the windows are out, the roof needs repair, I I ;, the shingles are loose, both roof and chimney are clearly badly ; deteriorated. The next number is 123 Sears Street this is the , residence of Mr. Trapp and we find the same pattern as before 1whenever we come to one of Dr. Baker' s residences is clearly better maintained. Mr. Trapp' s house is in good repair, covered with sound shingles, the woodwork the porch have been freshly painted Iyou' ll see this in the photograph and then the final building on that side of Sears Street is 125 Sears which is again owned by Dr. Baker it also needs paint you can see the side of it half the E1paint is gone, there is a good deal of refuse on the side of the �E house, but you will have to take my word for it because you can't lsee that in the photograph. As I said I' ll come back to this but I wanted to begin with this to indicate that there is to the extent ithat a large part of the argument has been on the esthetics of i neighborhood maintenance even though as the Board has pointed out ithat this is somewhat irrelevant concern. I felt that there is = another side to this which ought to be mentioned. I'd like to move on however, now to something about our concern about this f larea and the concern that we have frankly goes a long way beyond simple maintenance though we are concerned with that. What we are concerned about is certhin forces which are clearly working in � the neighborhood and I think that the Board of Zoning Appeals knows r that as well as anyone to undermine the neighborhood as a resident al area. The actions of this Board obviously can do much to encourage or discourage this kind of movement. Obviously we are hearten by recent rulings of the Board which have tended to prevent the l� ! further erosion of residential use and the Board' s insistence that it ureal hardship be demonstrated. Except when pressed by the Board 11it is quite clear that in this case hardship is not part of the E 11major argument. The two major arguments presented to the Board 1jtonight were essentially the same two arguments presented to the I ii 20 I' 1Planning Board. Argument 1 that there was a misunderstanding of �f I ,the original 1961 variance which suggested to Dr. Baker that in jfact that he was dealing with a commercial -building here and 2 thatil 1the present building looks like a commerclil building and ergo 1should be used for commercial purposes. Now let me speak very liquickly to each of these. first of all I consulted the 1961 livariance and its already been quoted tonight it clearly states that it is a variance "to erect office and apartment" the grounds ( which have already been read in that the present buildings are not adequate nor suited to house our offices nor a home for Dr. Baker' s mother who is going to live in the proposed building. Ther is no mention of commercial use no suggestion of commercial use on the contrary, the documents are quite clear that this is to be i professional offices and a apartment. The word commercial first lappears apparently in the demolition permit which in fact is lissued after the variance is granted. This is all in the file. At i the BZA meeting of June 1, 1961 the appellants for this variance were listed as Dr. Baker, Mrs. Baker, Dr. Baker' s mother who is i 1clearly involved in this problem and this question and Attorney Robert Williamson who I assumed at that was aware of the fact that I commercial was not in any place in any of these documents . Moving on to point 2 that was just a point of the misunderstanding. This is the point about the looks of the building. First of all I assume that the Board will not in any case decide the granting of a variance on esthetics grounds which seems to be a bottomless pit.j What looks commercial and what doesn' t look commercial. But even if we say this is a commercial building that seems to me that in j no way proves that it' s an inadequate or unsuitable building for t residential purposes. Many Ithaca citizens obviously live in I apartments in "commercial" buildings. Even the professional ibuilding on the Trumansburg Road which is a very large scale ! building but somewhat similar to Dr. Baker' s in type and use though( l�Iof course much bigger in fact has attractive apartments pa is on its ' upper floor. Now I' ll say something about those in just a moment. IlMoving then beyond those defenses and getting back to my particula l Ip it i l I 21 ,,concerns, what we are concerned about is not only the ruling in -'this case but as you can see from my examples the grounds on which lithe ruling is based, if the BZA like the Planning Board agrees to { jgrant a variance on the building because of it' s apparent commercial linature it looks like a commercial building therefore we will grant s sa variance what we fear is that this would encourage similar 11development of the area in the future. Other people who are willi 1 11to develop in order to anticipate that argument. Frankly we are `Imore worried about Dr. Baker than any other individual in this ; respect and here is where we come back to the particular ownings. p j= I'm passing around a map which shows the block bounded by Sears, i Court Street, Tioga Street and Cascadilla Creek. You' ll see on the map that Dr. Baker already owns a great percentage of this area. Not just the two buildings that he mentioned and the parking lot I `lbut in fact another five districts beyond the central district 1that we , are talking about tonight. Which in their totality I i1though the map is a somewhat rough on it gives you the general ide , , occupies considerally more than 50% of the space on this block. � ?i Last year when the landmarks preservation committee wished to I I include part of Sears Street in a historic district, they decided 11not to primarily because of Dr. Baker' s objections. The reason �Ithat he gave at that time was that he wanted to leave open the I i, possibility to I quote "redevelop the area" . Now this concerns us. If redevelopment precisely means more commercial use or more I ! commercial looking use. The historic district let me remind you I. would not interfere with continued residential use or even with i proper maintenance of the properties . The only thing that the �jhistoric zoning would have done would have prevented Dr. Baker a at some time in the future if he wished to from tearing down the buildings that he presently owns and erecting more commercial i buildings or extending his already rather large parking lot. He I� I ihas already torn down two residences on Tioga Street as we know on the grounds that they were too deteriorated to save. Then !I I� there are also two residences which have been demolished on Sears Street. , I don' t know what the grounds were but I assume the i i I I I i 22 ! `! same grounds, I don't know. What we know see is that Dr. Baker owns four more buildings on Sears Street and is apparently allowing ; them to deteriorate. Therefore naturally we suspect that perhaps i these too in a very short time will become too deteriorated to f ;; save. You are all familiar of course with the Cities recent study `ion possible rezoning of this area and this is my particular concern being a resident of that little triangular wedge of land that the city studied very specifically earlier this year. I ; , want to pass you a map of that area as well. This comes from the B-1 zoning study which you are familiar with, the only change that 1I made on the map is that I sketched in, in orange Dr. Baker' s ownings in this area. So in some ways it duplicates the map that I just passed around. The reason that I passed around this map i I; however, is to indicate to you how critical this particular block !; is for this particular district. It' s the center block in some ( ways the key block of this district. If this block is in fact redeveloped in a commercial nature then it seriously compromises everything that the City has said, it has tried to do in this zone. The report which was unanimously passed by Common Council and e strongly supported by people in the area. I will read three very short passages from the report to indicate to you, this is from ( the concluding section of the City's report to indicate toy ou I ( why I feel that the kind of development that we are talking about is precisely that to which this report is opposed. This is from page 15 of the report. According to the Ithaca Zoning i Ordinance a use variance is to be granted only if strict applicati n of the regulations creates practicle difficulties or imposes un- necessary hardship which does not appear to have been the case in i all instances and here is the sentence of particular importance I j ! think. The relatively uncritical granting of use variances which 1 has incurred in this area has undermined its residential nature i j( and if continued would have further negative effects on the neighborhood. On page 16 a passage says not only would the zoning change, now remember we are talking about not a single variance of course but what would happen if the whole area were to go to ' ( like business use. Not only would the zoning change act to reduce �3 i E ; housing units further tightening the housing market and destroy t t � the residential fabric of the neighborhood in question but it would ' tend to push a transition zone like the R-3 area under study out I into adjacent neighborhoods cutting even further into Ithaca' s Ihousing stock in short the same kind of errosion would in the opinion of the Planning Board immediately begin to effect the 1 Fall Creak area. A series of changes in regulations would also I come with the change in zoning status from R-3 to B-1. Potentially �Ithe most serious of these is that requirement for off street }i parking increase and would bring pressure for the destruction E i� l; of existing residences to provide the needed space, and unnecessa I loss in view of both the housing shortage and the City' s recent i I; construction of parking ramps within the business zone. And one a 1more short passage speaking again of negative effects of rezoning. Such relaxation of controls encourages the construction of new and ;. larger buildings that are often incongruent with existing structures. H Now I would suggest on all those grounds the development that Dr. e1Baker has already done in the neighborhood is precisely the kind of development that this report is attempting to discourage. The ,Efinal point that I would like to make are a little more germane !! to the actual concerns of the Board and I apologize for going ! around in some slightly peripheral matters, but I needed them to iprepare for what I'm getting to now which is what obviously is I where my case must rest and that is on the specific matter of the Ijzoning appeal itself. Some of the concerns that I've mentioned j1here have only indirect bearing on the legal functions of the BZA I' Il and I recognize that. I felt that it was necessary to say some- thing about the background of the area partly in order to counter- I act some of Dr. Baker' s assertions about the history and the gener 1 i development of this area but also it explains specifically why I �Ifeel, even if perhaps others might not, that the neighborhood itis threatened by this case. So let me now turn specifically to i Ithe legal grounds for granting the variance. As I understand it ,1the zoning code requires three conditions for granting use varianc jland I would argue that Dr. Baker has in fact not proven any of i " these conditions let alone all three of them. I'll begin with ' 24 lithe third, which is perhaps the vaguest and most complicated and € II imagine the most debatable. And that is the granting a variance should not be injurious I quote "to the neighborhood or otherwise i. ;'detrimental to the public welfare. " Now most of what I've talked 11about has in fact been directed to this. It does seem to me that Hthe granting of the variance which would further erode residential use and further encourage commercial use would in fact be detrimental I Ito the neighborhood. I'll burden you with one more quote that would Ilbe connected with this too partly just because the word detrimental !appears here. This is also in the report of the Planning Commission approved by Common Council. This is page 17, many of the detrimental effects of a zoning change cmi be seen just south of Court Street, I �Inow that' s not the area that wer are talking about, but this is ` giving a negative example, where old residential areas rezoned to llbusiness use in 1961 have been converted to low intensity business ,I use and it lists some of the detrimental effects asphalt parking lots, more and larger overhead wires, congested traffic, unslightl Iladditions to old houses and the absence of activity after business 1hours characterized this area. The total character of the neigh - lborhoodbhas been transformed and its residential fabric destroyed. `That's of course the negative example which this study is designed Ito prevent in this area and which I think is effected by this 11 ruling. I particularly call your attention to one thing in this liwhich I haven't mentioned, I mentioned the asphalt parking lot. � I did mention the "absence of activity after business hours" . I ! The universal statement of these people who have been defending I iiIthe variance has been that Mary Tilley does not in fact use the Il area after business hours. This seems to me not a positive thing 11but a negative one as living units disappear from a neighborhood : whether they are in "commercial buildings or not" the area becomes ' more deserted in the evenings and as any city dwellers knows as an i Iiarea becomes more deserted and more "commercial" and less residential sI lit' s less safe so we come precisely to the matter of public R welfare. Indeed many doctors prefer to maintain apartments above ,Itheir offices for security purposes precisely the question of thei i! ;sown welfare and not to speak of that of the neighborhood. That ii I r 25 i 1I understand is why the apartments are over the professional i ;! building on the Trumansburg Road. Clearly public welfare is ,E, I ' involved and whole sections of residential use disappear as they I now disa 'i! amdisappearing in Doctor Baker' s development between Tioga i ; and Sears Street. Now that is the matter of public welfare. The 1 other two conditions it seems to me are clearer and I could even �! I The quicker about them. First is this matter of yielding a reason- able return. Dr. Baker has stressed the commercial character j Ef ' of the building. He nor his lawyer have not really argued that E this character would prevent the building from yielding a 111'reasonable return without the variance. On the contrary the 1 11apartment has been used for some time by Dr. Baker's mother with �IDr. Baker suffering no financial hardship that we know of. At !! least he hasn't argued that. The on prodding by the Board Dr. E I �� Baker' s lawyer has suggested that there would be certain difficulties, 1 lIthere is no evidence however, that Dr. Baker has in fact explored ;' alternative uses nor indeed seriously considered what are the , particular financial implications of continuing to rent this as I ja residence. That is in fact the first of the three conditions i for granting a variance. I've spoken about the third already and E ( then the second is that the variance is necessary for the reasonable �Iuseof the land or building. On the contrary the building was ; erected according to the zoning records of which seem to be quite '! clear about this with residential use in mind. Therefore, it !' seems to me very strange to argue that a building that was zoned Ii 'land erected as a "office and apartment" should now be argued that �, it is unsuitable for that or it is unreasonable even more strongly ! 1 l,! to use this for an apartment. Dr. Baker' s mother did indeed make Ei ° the building her home for some time I don't know how long and no jlargument as yet has been presented to suggest that her use of it for anybody elses was an unreasonable use. In conclusion then I ;' urge that since neither practical difficulty nor unnecessary 11hardship has been proven in this case the request for the variance ! E Ibe denied. I'll answer questions if anyone wishes. j I !IMR. MARTIN: Are there questions? MR. VANMARTER: I'd like to make a comment regarding the Planning l 'i I� 26 I ; Boards comments in regards to asphalt parking. The ordinance requires a certain amount of parking for permitted use. It irequires that it be drained, it requires that it be surfaced and for them to ignore the fact that this is the kind of surface that i � it is going to be, I think that it is entirely not in keeping with any kind of common sense. They've done it here, they've �Idone it again in that report. I'd like to commend the Dr. for opposing any extension of the historical district and the preserva on (commission. I don't know if you are aware of it but some of the members of that commission reside in the City. That appear to you M to be a little wierd? The intent of it may have some merit but the administration of it is doing only one thing. And this is what the Doctor is objecting to and that is that depriving him of the use of his property and what he might be able to use for it. I commend him for opposing it and anybody else. I, I SMR. CARLSON: Is there anything in the historic preservation that i (.would prevent the doctor from using the buildings for any legitima fuse aside from. . . . . . i I�MR. VANMARTER: This puts the burden on him which it should not do and they have extended this to other activities and other owner- jP iships entirely outside the law, outside their purview outside of II the intent of that for which they were constituted. P � MR. MARTIN: Unless I'm missing something, though all of this is ; (� a bit beside the point of this particular variance. Although 11 it clearly was a point raised in your presentation. Are there other questions concerning the evidence presented by Mr. Carlson? Are there other persons who would like to speak in opposition to 1the requested variance? Are there others here this evening who ! would like to be heard? If not I will give the Doctor a brief ilopportunity to-reply to any of the new points made in Mr. Carlson' sl �1presentation. I! "DR. BAKER: I can't agree that I've eroded the neighborhood. I'll ' apologize for that if what we've done over the past few years has E ., eroded the neighborhood because I think that there is a couple �1 I ijpoints that are being missed here. The Sears Street properties , that you refer to are a excellent answer to your reply. 125 Sears I l 27 fI (l III ! Street you speak of was just purchased by me, it was in even j ! worse repair when I got it. I put plenty of money into the houses on Sears Street but you know there is an economic feasibility to you cannot use the houses for other than what we are using them e for. There is no way that I can possibily do this. As far as r Iredeveloping the area I never attending any of these I had some- one come in and talk to me once sort of casually about redeveloping the area. The general repair of the properties that we have ! purchased, two of them on Sears Street were condemned. That is th i reason that they were demolished, they were condemned because they I were not applicable to have repairs, so we didn't repair them. I'd like to feel that I haven't eroded the neighborhood we have attempted to upgrade the neighborhood. 408 N. Tioga Street that we did rehabilitate, it was in atrocious repair when we took it lover, it was a horrible property, we've cleaned it up, we've Itaken care of it. Now the same maintenance people take care li ! under contract that you can examine. We pay maintenance company to take care of all of our properties. They take care of the Sears Street properties, our properties, the lawns are mowed. Yea, I'll agree with you, 107 Sears Street there is some stucco Ioff the building however, the front porch was repaired last year. f! The front porch at 117 Sears Street was repaired. 121 Sears Street ihas had repairing. There is some paint missing, you are right. jj109 Sears Street was repainted within the last week or two there is no doubt about that. But it is a little difficult really to maintain property that is rented the way that it has to be. We (care continually moving truck loads of stuff in and out of the I�Iarea and things that we just can not maintain prope6ly. Also you mentioned the Tompkins County Professional Building , I don't 1Ibelieve that you find any second floor offices in any new medical Ifacilities that I know of if there is I'd like to know about it. 1I '! They don't have one there, their maintenance people happen to live ) there I believe and I thought that there was one apartment, I j Imay be mistaken in that. So, we are not trying to tear a neighbor j Ilhood down, I think that we have done pretty good in an urban way I ! to restore the neighborhood. You saw the slides of 408 N. Tioga I Ii i 28 a1,';Street, it was rented to transients and it was a horrible property.! iWe put a terrific expenditure of money into it to improve the ,neighborhood and we continue to do that. And we really do attempt Ito maintain the property to the best of our ability wilh the same ;;people hired with the same amount of time spent but in different r ;! circumstances. It is noisy in areas where people such as this i1goes so we hope to improve it, not tear it down also we. were !lencouraged to do this in the 601s. We were encouraged to do it 1 1 in the 70' s. All of a sudden now I come on as sort of a bad guy lafter we tried to think that we done something good for the City. I 4MR. MARTIN: As I tried to say a little bit earlier the record of i i I 1maintenance on other properties good or bad is not really the tissue before the Board. I i 11DR. BAKER: No but it was discussed here before. . . 1MR. MARTIN: It was discussed by both parties, now can I, since you back to speak after Mr. Carlson has, bring us to the question ; which in his presentation came towards the end and that is the llIgrounds for a variance and in particular whether or not it is 't jlfeasible to use the second floor for apartment or residential use t� as permitted. No his point about the professional building was j� that some find it desirable to have residence above medical If ; facilities. . . . . I !' DR. BAKER: Professional building isn't a rural atmosphere near i M ; the hospital. This is not economically feasible it was never iw 9 lrented as a apartment. �IMR. MARTIN: Have attempts been made to rent it? �1DR. BAKER: No, I didn't think about renting it as an apartment. II j! It was not constructed basically we constructed as a professional ljbuilding built that way and it' s built for use professionally. That' s what I always intended to do when I built it. Now it was �jutilized at the time as an apartment and it was very poor usage. � I ' I used it as my own - my family usage and that' s why I used it 11 i1that way. But the feasibility of renting it as an apartment is ! i {; just not there. It is second floor property too big for an };apartment I don't want to subdivide it, put students in or do ; something like that, I haven't asked for that. It is in a �j i I 29 '!professional building and I think that it should be used for this .j .!And again I would stress, I'm not taking an old building and tearing fit down or rebuilding it, I know the problems that you have had jin the block. I'm not asking this. I've got a building that I ?i sfeel was built originally as a professional building and I'd like to use it for the reason that it was built. - i 1: IMR. MARTIN: Questions from members of the Board? MR. GASTEIGER: I suppose there is a question of fact that whether SIMr. Williamson agrees that the term commercial is not used until I Ithe building permit was issued. SIMR. WILLIAMSON: I think that the bottom line in that is this. I �IThe Doctor understood and his wife at the time when this was �Sobtained back in 1961 that it was he is using the word commercial S!he should be using the word professional office building. That' s i what he thought it was but that is his own misunderstanding. He lishouldn't be using the word commercial he' s using the word I,icommercial as equivalent to professional office building and he �I ;shouldn't. Although he thought the whole building was given to Ihim with the use variance for professional offices. !MR. GASTEIGER: Well, it' s not clear to me why a variance was 11 Ineeded unless the zoning code read differently, that' s one thing secondly it seems to me that he requested a variance to build a I1building to house professional offices plus an apartment. Is this correct? EIMR. WILLIAMSON: I think that is the way the application shows but I think again his understanding was the whole building could jbe used for professional offices. it �1DR. BAKER: That' s what I thought professional offices in the Ci ! 1building if I used it for other things within reason I thought .I ( also - when I just recently went before the Board obviously in 111970 or 71, I had no problem whatsoever you know they said take "tan old house and build it over and fix it up. I think the house !!would have been condemned if we had left it, it was an atrocious i' jihouse really the economic feasibility that is very doubtful. It Ii ;cost too much to fix it up to make it worth while. SMR. WILLIAMSON: I certainly would like to respond - the variance �I 30 I ;;would not in any way be against the spirit of the ordinance or flchange the character of the district. I IIMR. GASTEIGER: May I ask why Dr. Baker did buy properties on j �iSears Street? Did you buy them as rental units? You implied that !,nothing more could be done with them in terms of repairs as far ,has income goes. . . . . . . I' JDR. BAKER: I bought them because people came to me and asked me ! if I'd like to buy them. They happened 'to be there I thought it ; would "be better if I owned them than somebody else did, so I bought them. That is an economic fact of life. The property was ++ offered to me I purchased it and I'm. . . . . 1. ! MR. GASTEIGER: But as rental units? �jDR. BAKER: Ian not asking for any variances there at all. �MR. WILLIAMSON: No variances at all on -those units. � MR. GASTEIGER: Because that is relevant in question whether it I�will be detrimental. MR. WILLIAMSON: We are not in any way requesting now or in the I;ifuture any change to these houses rental units on Sears Street. (!None whatsoever. But the character of the district' I think that the two doctors brought it out I'm positive. You as members of the Board know what the district consists of and again I don't want to be repetitious and repeat it so I won't but again the second floor of this building in no way experiences any change, interior remains exactly as it appeared before. So I feel that Ii iweP observed the spirit of the ordinance. f IMR. MARTIN: I think that that would conclude our hearing unless there are any points that have not been heard. Our hearing then on this case and that' s our only case this evening, is now ijconcluded. The Board will go into executive session to deliberate hand will reconvene for any of you who remain who want to hear the results. • !i i; �f f, f 31 ( BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, EXECUTIVE SESSION !` AUGUST 2, 1976 liAPPEAL NO. 1124 j ;s 1 Mr. Gasteiger moved that the appeal be denied. Mr. Martin seconded it. f lFINDINGS OF FACTS ii ill. There was no substantive data supporting the view that hard- ; !� ship was being experienced. 12. No information was provided that would indicate that the space upstairs could not be used as an apartment as originally jj requested in 1961 variance and as a permitted use under the i present ordinance. I! E3. There was little or no data presented concerning the proposed use as a real estate office i.e. the number of employees, ! 1i number of potential customers. Little or no evidence was presented about the nature of the proposed use or a real estate office i.e. number of employees ! ii or proposed customers so that on the basis of this record it i. !� would be difficult to find that the proposed use would not have a serious adverse impact on the neighborhood. �t 11 ;;VOTE: Yes - 5 No - 0 i I !� f �I I �I li ! i l � '' I 32 �I ii I� f' C E R T I F I C A T I O N i I, CHRISTINE SMITH, DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes of the i I� Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, in the matters of Appeal l �No. 1124 on August 2, 1976, at City Hall, City of Ithaca, New ! York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true i 1copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the Executive Session of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, I' Ion the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability.f Christine Smith I Recording Secretary i i Sworn to before me this f 7, �l day o � :>�,._�� , 1976. • �i JiNotary blic i; MMY 6 SENSON Na 55 52702W f�f Now Mfic,Us%d Now Yak pw/lil'a�d�i�TanPiies Counhy� �.VOiNN EXpltOf MiCM 30.ft�,J' ! I `I s f e I i I �k s I i; I �I