Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1985-04-01 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF /THACA NEW YORK APRIL 1 , 1985 , Page APPEAL NO, 1605 TUMPK<NS CO. HOUSING TASK FORCE ] 717-717'5 WEST COURT STREET APPEAL NO. 16U5 DELIBERATIONS 11 APPEAL NO. 16U5 DECISION lZ ' APPEAL NO. 161D RONALD E. PITT 14 904 G|LES STREET APPEAL NO. 16lO DECISION 17 APPEAL NO. 161D DISCUSSION 18 ' APPEAL NO. 1611 332 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET 19 Phyllis Maines APPEAL NO, 1611 DELIBERATIONS 24 APPEAL NO. 1611 DECISION 25 APPEAL NO. 1612 \VAR & JANET JDNSON 26 327. 329 & 331 WEST SENECA STREET APPEAL NO, 1612 DELIBERATIONS 39 APPEAL NO, 1612 DECISION 41 APPEAL NO. 1613 JOHN' T|L|TZ 43 121 CASCAD | LLA STREET - APPEAL NO. 1613 UE[ |5|ON 54 APPEAL NO. 1614 STEPHEN & LESLIE MENKE 55 327 SPENCER ROAD APPEAL NO. 1614 DELIBERATIONS 641- APPEAL NO. 1614 DECISION 72 APPEAL NO. 1614 MORE DISCUSSION 73 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING OF 4/l/85 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 2 APPEAL N0 l6l� W�NDY'S INTERNATIONAL` 75 326 [LM/KA ROAD APPEAL NO. 1615 DELIBERATIONS AD APPEAL NO. 1615 DECISION 86 CERTIFICATION OF RECORDING SECRETARY 87 ` ' BZA MINUTES 4/1/05 PAGE : 1 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK APRIL 1 , 1985 SECRETARY HOAPD I ' d like to call to order the April 1, 1905 meeting of the Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals . The first administrative business here is to elect a chairman . Shall we do a permanent chairman? MS . FARRELL : Might as well . MR , BOOTH, I would move that we elect Mr . Tomlan as our Chairman . He has served capably for several months as Acting Chairman . SECRETARY HOARD : Do I hear a second? ! MS . FARRELL : I ' ll second that . SECRETARY HOARD -. All in favor ? 5AYE _.c' . It is unanimous . � i CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. Moving right along . Good evening . As those Of you who have been here before know, the Board operates under the prcvisions of the Ithaca City Charter , the Ithaca Zoning Ordinance the Ithaca Sign Ordinance and the Board ' s own Rules and Regulations . The members of the Board who are present tonight include : MR . RICHARD BOOTH MS . TRACY FARRELL STEWART SCHWAB MS . HELEN JOHNSON MICHAEL TOMLAN , CHAIRMAN THOMAS D . HOARD , SECRETARY TO THE BOARD AND ZONING OFFICER AND CITY BUILDING COMMISSIONER riJr BARBARA RUANE, RECORDING SECRETARY The Board will hear each case in the order listed in the agendum . 1 BZA MINUTES 4/1 /85 PAGE : 2 First we will hear from the appellant and ask: that he or she pre- sent the arguments for the case as succinctly as possible and then be available to answer questions from the Board . We will then hear from those interested parties who are in support of the application, followed by these who are opposed to the applica- tion . I should note here that the Board considers- interested parties_: to be persons who own property within two hundred feet of the property in question or who live or work within two hundred feet of the property., again, in question . Thus the Board will not hear testimony from persons who do not meet the definition of an interested party . While we do not adhere to the strict rules of evidence., we do consider this a quasi-judicial proceeding and we base our decisions on the record . The record consists of the application materials filed with the Building Department, corres- pondence relating to the cases- received by the Building Depart- ment, the Planning and Development Board' s findings and recommen- dations, if any, and the record of tonight ' s hearing . Since a record is being made of this hearing, it is essential that anyone who wants to be heard come forward and speak directly into the microphones so that their comments can be picked up by the tape recorder and heard by everyone in the room . Extraneous comments from the audience will not be recorded and will,, therefore, not be considered by the Board in its deliberations on the case . We ask: that everyone limit their comments to the zoning issues of the ease: and not comment on aspects that are beyond the jurisdic- tion of this Board . After everyone has been heard on a given 2 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 3 case, the hearing on that case will be closed and the Board will deliberate and reach a decision . Once the hearing is closed, no further testimony will be taken and the audience is requested to i refrain from commenting during deliberations . It takes four votes to approve a motion to grant or deny a variance or a spe- cial permit . In the rare case where there is a tie vote, and . of course, tonight there wouldn ' t be , the variance for a special permit is automatically denied . Now those of you who are appel- lants this evening, in that there are only five members present: can, if you care to at this point , request a postponement of your case until more members , that is a full Board of six members , is present , Is there anyone out there who would like to do so? (no one) Are there any questions about our procedure from anyone out there? Then we will proceed to the first case . SECRETARY HOARDMr . Chairman., the first case is a carry-over from last month, which is appeal number 1605., the Tompkins County i Housing Task: Force., which was the appeal for the Emergency Shel- ter at 717-717 . 5 West Court Street . The public hearing on that ease was closed . The motion was made and seconded that the Board defer action until the next meeting; April 1 , 1985 so that the matter, of .joint right-of-way can be worked out with the neighbor- ing property owner . I have received a letter from Melvin and Linda Robinson of 719 West Court who are the abutting property owners , who share the driveway, and it says, "Gear Mr . &, Hoard , 8y Upon talking with Anne Jones we have worked out a suitable agree- ment in regards to the on-site parking situation at 717-717 . 5 3 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 4 West Court Street and have no further objections concerning the Emergency Housing Shelter . Sincerely, /s/ Melvin and Linda Rob- inson" CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Then the proper next step I would assume, to have a motion to take it off the table and bring it before us for further consideration? MR . BOOTH, Is there anybody here from . . . SECRETARY HOARD ' R4presenting the applicant, yes . MS . F,ARRELL ' I move that we consider this appeal . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. Do we have a second? MR , SCHWAB ; I ' ll second that . , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN , Shall we do it by voice vote? All in favor? 5 AYES . All right then, if the appellant would come forward? And again,, beginning with your name and address . MR. . JOHNS;TON; My name is James: Johnston, 2014 Delaware Avenue and I am the Treasurer of the Housing Task Force . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Perhaps it might be good - most of us are fami- liar I think:, in general, with the scenario, but it would be use- ful, I think , to inform the Board as to what the nature of the conver=sation between yourself" and the adjoining property owner -over the course of the last two weeks . MR . JOHNSTON: Well, unfortunately, I can ' t share that because I was riot a party to that , The conversation was carried on by Anne Jones: and staff members of the Emergency Shelter and other mem- ber=_, of the Board - other than myself . The end result is the letter that was sent by the Robinsons to Mr . Hoard . 4 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE ; 5 CHAIRMAN TQMLAN' Questions? MR . BOOTH ! ' the letter doesn' t have any detail on it though . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: That ' s precisely my question . MR . JOHNSTON' I am prepared to answer, questions . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well if we could be a little more precise - the nature. of the questions., as I remember them: Mrs . Jones was to work out some sort of agreement about the use of the driveway which ;wou share and further, guaranteeing access to the adjacent property owner and further , I think we were asking about some sort of clarification as to how the rear of the lot was to be made use. of - or, that is,, how proper parking was to be provided beyond the garage . MR , JOHNSTON: Well I cart tell you the substance of the conversa- tion with the Robinsons and why they found, I think , our position acceptable . There is a need for five parking spaces and there was some concern as 1 understar:d, about traffic in our area, backing onto their parking space . We have proposed to them that in the rear portion of the second building in the rear , which is a parking area - or a covered parking area - that we would take that and use that as two parking spaces . MS, FARRELL : Excuse me, you are planning to take down the garage now? MR . JOHN::TON' No . There is a rear apartment and we are going to attach them to that which - I will pass that on, that is the site play: - which - that could be used for two spaces . And, as the site plan would point out, with that space available., one. could 5 BZA MINUTES 4/1 /85 PAGE : 5 back: in to our parking lane without encroaching on the Robinson ' s property and come straight forward . The other thing that we worked out for this situation - is establishing three parking spaces at another site so that at max we would have only two ve- hicles on the property . The additional parking sites would be at Finger Lakes Fabricating, which is across the street - it is 426 I believe . We' ve contacted and we do have . . . MS . FARRELL * Three spaces there , you say': MR . JOHNSTON' Three spaces there which have been conveyed to us by - it ' s Louann Incorporated - via Neil Wallace who is the at- Corney in fact for Harold Wallace, President of Louann . We ' ve also discussed the use of the spaces with the proprietor of Fin- ger Lakes Fabricating and he has also indicated that he has no objections to this . So that , I think a combination of the demo- lition of the rear portion of the apartment in the back there, which will allow for two parking places and not affect the struc- ture itself, in terms of the use - in being able to back in or back: out and come down (unintelligible) plus the additional three spaces . MR . BOOTH. So you are not now proposing for these other three spaces on the site? MR . JOHNSTON: Those are potential expansion spaces . . . MR . BOOTH. But you are not proposing them now? MR . JOHNSTON, We intend to use only two spaces there . MS , FARRELL : I ' m a little confused - the way I understood it , the second building was a four- story - I mean a four car garage 6 BZA MINUTES 4/1 /$5 PAGE : 7 with a ( unintelligible) above it, what are you taking dawn? MR . JOHNSTON: It is a two-story structure . MS . FARRELL : Right . MR . JOHNSTON'. There are four parking bays . MS . FARRELL : Right . MR , JOHNSTON: The second story structure - ( unintelligible) space over the first two parking bays . Okay, to the rear of that there are two additional covered parking bays . We plan to take that down to use that as parking space . MR . BOOTH : So those are the only two you' d use? MR . JOHNSTON: Those are the only two at this point . MR . BOOTH : The most southerly of the four existing . . . MR . JOHNSTON: True . The site play: indicates that there is a potential for expansion there, in terms of the rear for parking . The intent is not to expand that to five spaces but to use the two spaces . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Richard would you be so goad as to share that? MS . FARRELL : (UNINTELLIGIBLE) MR . JOHNSTON: This is also a copy of ( unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Further questions from members of the Board? Just having been given that sk:etch,. I think it takes a minute or two for, them to absorb it , if you will be patient Jahn . MR . BOOTH: If you understand the language of Mr . Wallace ' s letter, tenancy at will , does that mean that . . MR . JOHNSTON' It certainly means that it is at their ( unintelligible) 7 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 8 MR , BOOTH Ther, they could revoke it? MR . JOHNSTON. They could revoke it, they could obviously sell the property and the future owners may not honor that gift . In terms- of the site plan, I think that ' s why we tried to indicate that there is potential for _expansion back: there , At the same time, even with the expansion, honoring the Robinsons concern about encroachment on their property . MS . FARRELL : When you discussed it with the Robinsons, did you discuss the ( unintelligible) cars ( unintelligible) MR . JOHNSTON" At this point we discussed the two cars . I assume we discussed the two cars - again., I was not part of the discus- sion . Their major concern, as I understand it, again, was en- croachment upon their property in terms of backing into their yard to turn around . And, that is why we tried - the site plan would indicate that we could still accomplish and protect their wishes . CHAIRMAN TC'MLAN: Further questions? MS . JOHNSON' Now that I have a picture in front of me , I do . The five czars across the plan - you said you are going to use only the two most southerly spots? MR . JOHNSTON' That ' s right . MS , JOHNSON: And the other three toward the rear of the house, wouldn ' t be occupied? MR . JOHNSTON: No, they won ' t . MS . JOHNSON' And this will just be open space MR , JOHNSTON. It will not be developed unless there is a need to 8 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 9 develop it . As long as we have optional off-site par-king we will use that : Our- intent is riot to use that space . MS . JOHNSON: Not to use - what space? MR . JOHNSTON` The additional three . MS , JOHNSON'. Added on to the southern . . . MR . JOHNSTON: On the other hand - in the event that in the future - the possibility may exist that we may have to ( unintelligible) MR . SCHWAB ' Why not, may I ask - why don ' t you want to use the three? MR . JOHNSTON: Expense . MR . SCHWAB : Of pavement., you mean? MR . JOHNSTON: Paving and development rx. ense I can the shelter is a community shelter ( unintelligible) and that is an additional expense . MR . SCHWAB ,. The point is., for instance, if Mr- . Wallace or- his successor r-evoked those - you could have additional . . . MR . JOHNSTON' We could develop additional spaces ther-e - and again what we hope ( unintelligible) point out that we could still honor the concerns of the Robinsons . The space is there, we would chose not to develop it at this time . MS . FARRELL ' You still need to take down part of the building to get two cars in there? MR . JOHNSTON: Well as you come around, the space is tight . ( unintelligible) would certainly give us . . MS . FARRELL : So you plan to do that whether you use five or two? 9 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 10 MR. . JOHNSTON: We will do that . We do plan to take that down . That is part of the agreement with the Robinsons . It is the only way it would really work . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of the granting of this variance? If riot, is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to this variance? ( no one) That being the case, we ' ll go into deliberations . 10 LZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 11 DELIBERATIONS OF THE BOARD - APPEAL NO , 1605 717-717 . 5 WEST COURT STREET MR . SCHWAB : As I recall there was some question last time whether they were required to have four or five parking spaces - ar-e they required to have five., i-6 that right? S-' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well the worksheet pretty well gives you the - I think: we finally decided there were five . MR . SCHWAB '. All right . It strikes me as reasonable - what they ar-e doing . They are providing five and, if it is revoked later, the three off-site spots - they could put five on-site, with some additional expense . Sounds like the Robinsons are no longer concerned about it . So it seems to me they have met the parking concerns . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Okay , then . if we could get closer to the practical difficulties, if we are really talking about an area variance? MR . HOC►TH : Let me make a motion . a 11 BZA MINUTES 411/85 PAGE : 12 DECISION ON APPEAL NO , 1605 717-717 . 5 WEST COURT STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of the Tompkins County Housing Task: Force for an area variance to permit the conversion of the front building at 717-717 . 5 West Court Street from a two-unit residence to a shelter, for up to nine persons . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTH , I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in Appeal Number 1605 with the following conditions : 1 ) Creation of two parking spaces on-site, as shown on the most recent plans . 2.1 Acquisition of three (3) off-street parking spaces on premises owned by the Louann Corporation . 3 ) The Board ' s determination that if the applicant or his successor at some point in the future should lose the right to utilize those three off-street parking spaces on the Louann property; that they develop three additional on-site parking spaces as indicated on the most recent plans . MS . FARRELL : I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood . 2) The deficiencies in area requirements are reasonably minor 12 8ZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PACE : 13 and satisfying those requirements would impose a great deal of difficulty on the applicant because it would require moving the existing building . VOTE : 5 YES,; U NO; 1 ABSENT GRANTED W/CONDITIONS 13 BZA MINUTES 4/l/85 PAGE : 14 SECRETARY HOARDi The next appeal is APPEAL NUMBER 1610 FOR 904 GILES STREET Appeal of Ronald E . Pitt for an area variance for deficient lot size and a deficient front yard setback: under Section 30 . 25, Columns 6 and 11 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the construction of a small addition to the rear of the single- family house at 904 Giles Street . The property is located in an Rlb ( residential; single-family dwelling) use district in which the existing use is permitted; however under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficien- cies before a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed addi- tion . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Please come forward . MR . PITT : I am Ronald Pitt, the owner of the single family house at 904 Giles Street, and as was just stated, I would like to re- quest an area variance to add this one room addition to the back of my house . The lot size is substandard because it is fifty- three hundred square feet and that should be six thousand square feet , The house is set back fifteen feet from Giles Street . That is too small, I guess it is supposed to be something like twenty . I can' t really move the house obviously and I can' t in- crease the lot size so I really can' t comply with those restric- tions . The room I would like to add goes directly on the back; it doesn' t encroach any closer to the side of the lot as the house is now . Eleven by eleven feet square and one story is the , idea for the room. The room will be for my own personal use as a pantry - the house is small and I would like to have additional storage for kitchen things and it will also be a rear entrance 14 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 15 and it will be a place to remove boots and that sort of thing, so it will be fairly for my own personal use . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions? I assume that the addition is - that is - inside the plan, as it is constructed on the sketch that you appended to your application - the kitchen is immediately inside of that? MR . PITT : That ' s right, yes . Well actually - well the dining room and kitchen ar-e both in the back: . The back door, which is there now, kind of comes right in the middle of the house and enters right into the dining room, but right next to the kitchen . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well the reason I ' m asking the question is because the next question, then, follows, is it po=ssible to have put your addition toward the center of the lot more? MR . PITT : Not really, because there is a chimney on the outside of the house , right there and so the addition can go right up to the chimney and stop and can' t go on either, side of the chimney . Also , this way it doesn ' t block any existing windows, other, than the window in the back door . Now there is a window on the other side at the back of the house . MR . BOOTH: That side of the house where you are proposing the addition: is now eleven feet from the property line? MR . PITT : That ' s what it says - it looks bigger to me, but it is . . . MR . BOOTH : The addition will be at least eleven feet, you can ' t make that any smaller? MR . PITT : No, definitely not . 15 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 16 MR . E10OTH : Anl; your diagram shows an open porch - that ' s already existing, you are not . . . . MR . PITT : On the front . MR . BOOTH : On the front - that is already existing? MR . PITT : Oh; yes , CHAIRMAN TOMIAN: Further questions? Thank: you Mr . Pitt . Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of the granting of this variance? ( no one) Is there anyone who would like to speak: in opposition to granting of this variance? (no one) That tieing the case., we ' ll move into deliberations . 16 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 17 DECISION ON APPEAL NO . 1610 - 904 GILES STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Ronald E . Pitt for an area variance to permit the construction of a small addition to the rear of the single-family house at 904 Giles Street . The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . FARRELL : I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in Appeal Number- 1610 . MS . JOHNSON: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The proposed change does not exacerbate the existing deficiencies in lot area or front yard setback . ) Practical difficulty in meeting the existing lot area deficiency which could only be met by enlarging the entire lot . 3) The proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood . VOTE : 5 YES; 0 NO.; 1 ABSENT GRANTED 17 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 18 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO . 1610 C:HAIR.MAN TOMLAN: Any discussion on this motion? Everyone is satisfied that the addition is a small enough addition? MR . f►OOTH; Well I think: that fact that it doesn ' t exacerbate any of the existing deficiencies and the large back yard would indicate that Mr . Pitts should be able to do this without any trouble . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Any further comments? On to the next appeal . 18 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 19 SECRETARY HOARD ' The next appeal is - APPEAL NO . 1611 - 332 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET Appeal of Phyllis_: Maines for an area variance for deficient lot size and width, excessive lot cover- age by buildings, and deficient setbacks for the front yard and one side yard , under Section 30 . 25., Columns 6, 7: 10, 11; and 12, of the Zoning Ordi- nance to permit the conversion of the house at 332 South Cayuga Street from a two-family dwelling to a multiple dwelling containing three dwelling units . The property is located in an R-3a ( resi- dential, multiple dwelling) use district, where the proposed use is permitted.; however under Sec- tions 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the conversion . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Again., please begin with identification . MS . MAINES : I ' m Phyllis Maine=_:, I live at 344 Cayuga Heights Road . I own the property at 322 S . Cayuga Street . When I bought the property the owner had one apartment upstairs arid had two rooms of their own apartment, upstairs . When we converted it - it was storage space - it didn' t make sense to have the two rooms of the lower apartment that were upstairs., included in that so with the apartment upstairs., there are now two bedrooms and we made it so that it was set off as two apartments, but we made it - converted it a few months ago so that it is one apartment upstairs . But the life-style of the two people - I mean the three people that live there is so that - it is sort of a con- flict . They handle it well , but I can see it could be terminal far me antt them, for instance , the couple, their life-style is so that their day - they are up at sir and to bed at ten thirty or 19 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 20 eleven . The other person - the other bedroom, they come in be- tween twelve and one and then leave at ten the next morning and - there has been no real conflict but I can see how it could be a problem. I don' t want to increase the occupancy., I just want to increase the privacy of the people living there ( unintelligible) MS . FARRELL : You said you had two apartment=_; there at one time on the second floor and then you made it into one apartment? MS . MAINES ' I was trying to make it into two apartments, just to separate - it ,just seemed logical and they said that I would have to go through the Zoning Board to do it . And it is now so that what - upstairs there is a kitchenette and a kitchen and a living room, two bedrooms and two baths . MS . FARRELL : Are those changes you ' ve recently made or are those changes that were there already? MS . MAINES ' They had been started like - one bathroom was just (unintelligible) sort of in a hall or a long closet, something like that . It just seemed to me it would be an easy way to avoid problems for the tenants (unintelligible) Downstairs there is a single parent with two children and then upstairs there is three people . MR . SCHWAB : Now when you bought the property, the upstairs still had the one apartment and two rooms were for- the lower apartment? MS . MAINES : Yes- , But I put in a lot of closets and it just didn' t make sense, I just made an entry for downstairs - I made the hallway into the entry for that lower apartment and put the - .just left those other two rooms upstairs, with the other 20 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 21 apartIII ent MS . FARRELL : So what was the kitchenette associated with - or what were the rooms that were upstairs_: that were associated with the downstairs apartment? MS . MAINES ' It was - I think: they used it as a bedroom and a little - well it reminded me of a child' s bedroom or a room ( unintelligible) it was a small room - front room . MF . BOOTH : When did you buy the property? MS . MAINES : 1979 Mk . BOOTH, Since 79 you have rented it as two apartments? MS , MAINES! Yes, except when we were working on it . And then I went to the Planning Board in order to make ( unintelligible) then I had to do the certification, I had split it all upstairs and they said I would have to go through the Planning Board . It has been converted - I split it up - made it one upstairs and it ' s all right but I could see where it could be a problem for those people living there . MS . FARRELL ' Well it seems though, if you were renting it as one apartment., you know, it is your responsibility to choose tenants that are renting it as one apartment and it doesn ' t seem to me like you rent an apartment and then you say, well I ' ve got to make it into two apartments because the tenants don ' t get along . MS . MAINES . No. they manage all right - what they' ve done is ' they have kind of barricaded themselves into two apartments, is what is amounts to . ( unintelligible) to live together peacefully, so I just thought well it would just be - a two unit 21 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 22 would be easier . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? MS . JOHNSON: So now upstairs there is one apartment that has a kit;.hen: a kitchenette, two bathrooms - what three bedrooms•? MS . MAINES . No two bedrooms and that large living room on the front of the house . MS . FAR',RELL . So you had gone ahead and made it into a separate apartment,, in other words, but then thought that it wasn ' t . . . MS . MAINES; : Yes - I would have to go through the - and - so then after I made it into two apartments - then I went back and made it into one apartment . I changed the doorways of the closets so that it was ( unintelligible) all the way through . MR , SCHWAB : So when was the kitchenette put in? MS . MAINES : Well they just had a little - kind of like a burner and I think when it was just one apartment, we just ffixed it because it was on the front with the balcony and it just seemed it would be nice to use it like that . MS . FARRELL : So you fixed up the second bathroom ( unintelligible) property too? MS . MAINE5 : Yes , None of the upstairs had been fixed , I guess., it had been rented to an older person but it hadn' t been fixed up in really a long time . We just took: one room after- another and modernized it and changed the tiles and the wall ( unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? MS . JOHNSON: So the new apartment upstairs_: would consist of the little kitchenette and a bath and a bedroom - a studio? 22 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 23 MS . MA.INES : No, I believe the kitchenette is - was the living room, which is large - and a dining area and a bedroom and a bathroom 'and then I have the larger kitchen which is in the back. with a bedroom and a living room and a bathroom. It has front and back: entrances upstairs . MS . FARRELL . How long have the present tenants been in the building? MS _ MAINES . Let ' s- see, downstairs - she has been there probably three years and upstairs,, the couple has been there about three years and then when I fixed the other bedroom up, the young man - he has been there since November - he is just a graduate student - he will be leaving - and that is why, mostly - in anticipation of his leaving, when the set up will be different , I just thought I would go ahead and see whether ( unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. More questions? No more questions . Thank you . Is there anyone else who would like to speak: in favor of the granting of this variance? lino one) Is there anyone who would like to speak: in opposition to the granting of this variance ,.' ( no one) That being the case we are back to deliberations . 4 23 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 24 (DELIBERATIONS ON APPEAL NO . 1611 332 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET MR , BOOTH; There is a Zoning Ordinance - the area requirements for apartments breaks quite sharply between two and three - going into a multiple dwelling classification and this would shift it over into that separate classification . MS . FARRELL : And that exacerbates a deficiency quite significantly raising it from one hundred feet - square foot deficiency - to twenty-one hundred square foot ( unintelligible) divide twenty-one hundred by seven thousand to get a percent deficiency? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: My only concern is that - thinking of finding one way or the other - pro or con - that we address: the question of practical difficulties and special conditions in this instance and that perhaps other buildings in the area or the neighborhood may not have - make compliance with regulations impossible . My question., in other words, is there anything here which by virtue of the area variance test., is specific to this particular instance? Have we seen evidence to that effect? MR . BOOTH: I ' m not sure what you are getting at? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well I am asking very simply , whether in fact the practical difficulties and special conditions have been proven in this particular instance" In other words . is there something here in this case where there are practical difficulties and special conditions, in this instance: that don ' t occur in other, buildings of the same size, shape, dimension and general use? BZA MINUTES 4/1/35 PAGE : 26 DECISION IPJ APPEAL NO . 1611 - 332 SOUTH CA.YUGA STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Phyllis Maines for an area variance to permit the conversion of the house at 3:32 South! Cayuga Street from a two-family dwelling to a multiple dwelling containing three dwelling units . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTH: I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1611 MR , SCHWAB : I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The proposal would increase an existing and somewhat minor deficiency to a very large deficiency because the proposed use would move from a two apartment house into a multiple dwelling classification . 2) The record indicates that the reasons for the request relate not to the nature of the property or its proposed use as much as they relate to potential personal relationships among the tenants . VOTE : 5 YES; 0 NO; 1 ABSENT DENIED 26 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 27 SECRETARY HOARD' The next appeal is APPEAL, NUMBER 1612 - 327 WEST SENECA STREET AND 329-31 WEST SENECA STREET Appeal of Janet Jonson for an area variance for a deficient side yard setback under Section 30 . 25, Column 13, and a deficient rear yard setback under Section 30 . 35, Paragraph C of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the conversion of the two-family dwelling at 329-31 West Seneca Street to a six-unit multiple dwelling . The appellant is proposing to ( 1 ) combine the 327 and 329-31 West Seneca Street parcels into a single parcel, ( 2 ) remove a rear wing of the build- ing at 327 West Seneca Street to create a parking area, and ( 3) reduce the number of dwelling units at 327 West Seneca Street from three units to one unit (the net increase in units for the entire project would be two units) , so that the entire project would be in compliance with the parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance . The properties are located in a B2a (business ) use district in which multiple dwellings are permitted; however under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appel- lants must first obtain an area variance for the proposed deficiencies before a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the pro- posed conversions . 27 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 28 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Come forward please . Again beginning with identification . MR. . JONSON: My name is Ivar Jonson , I really don ' t have much to say., you have the maps and ( unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Any questions from members of the Board? MR . SCHWAB� As: I understand it there is currently two parking places for the two buildings (unintelligible) that you are proposing to increase it to eight? MR . JONSON: 329 and 331 Seneca Street - it is an old victorian house and it is a beautiful house but it needs a lot of work - to be ( unintelligible) it is just not possible with only two apartments in it . If I take and - 327 Seneca Street and tear off one of the wings so that - added to the house - a long time ago - it would make ( unintelligible) and it would work: out because you are going to get parking off the street . MS . FARRELL : flight now this property has - the 327 has one I parking place/ 1, MR . JONSON: One parking place . MS . FARRELL . And the other house has two parking places? MR . JONSON: It has one . MS . FARRELL : Because on this map it says two . MR . JONSON: Well on the map it says two because - these are additional par-king places that we added . Right now you only have one because you cannot drive through this way (unintelligible) MS . FARRELL : Well I am looking right here (pointing to blue print ) 28 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 29 MR . JUNSUN: 'Yes, okay . There is two parking places . MS . FARRELL : Two here and one here . MP, . JUNSUN: Well, right now there is only one . Because if you park: the car' up front you can ' t come sack. out., do you see what I am saying? MS . FARRELL : But does that count as two parking places or one? MR . JUNSUN: It doesn ' t have - two parking places, one for each .side . MS . FARRELL : Okay, but why does this say two cars then? MR . JUNSUN: Well that is what you will have with the new plan, the proposed plan that you have there . MS . FARRELL : Because you are planning to drive through here? MR . JUNSUN: That ' s right and you can get out . MS . FARRELL : Okay., you plan to drive through here to go back and park: here - so you will have six cars here, two cars here - so you are talking about nine? MR . •JUNSUN: Yes, nine parking places . MS , FARRELL : So, we only have eight . MR . JUNSUN: That ' s a miscalculation . MS . FARRELL : Arid presently there is two, one for each . MR . JUNSUN: Actually you could - you know - if you could get - if two people - you know - two parking places probably could be i used at the present time, but you would have to arrange the night before ( unintelligible) MS , FARRELL , So you Cot11CI count those two but you can ' t park two in a row? 29 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 30 SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . MS . FARRELL . Okay . Now the only question I have, who owns this driveway over here - is there parking in there right now? MR . JONSON. I own that and right now there is like - you know - again., two parking places but the other person would have to get up fir-st in the morning to get out . MS . FARRELL : So there is two parking places here? MR , JONSON : Yes . MS . FARRELL ., Actually isn' t there enough room for two care: to go all the way in here? MR . JONSON.- There is room but it is very - you can ' t get back alit . MS , FARRELL . So you' ve got like two, four, five, parking places now? That would be increased to nine? MR . BOOTH: How many apartments are there in the house on the corner? MR . JONSON : At the present time? Two . MR . BOOTH : And you want to increase that to six? MR . JONSON: Six MR . BOOTH: And there are three in the other building and you want to reduce that to one? MR . JONSON: To two . MS . FARRELL : Two, with how marry bedrooms in each? MR . JONSON: Well right now the house at 317 has three . two-bedroom apartments , MS . FARRELL : So you are just going to take one apartment off, is 30 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 31 that it" MR . JONSON' Yes, that is in addition - again, this building also is a very nice old building - riot a lot of character but they added this wing - ( unintelligible) so that part of the building was just an addition that somebody put up, I don' t know when , I don' t know if you have everything clown there - I don' t know if you are familiar- with 329-331 Seneca Street but it is an old victorian house but it does need a lot of work . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: If 1 could be clear about one thing . You are proposing to reduce the number of dwelling units in 327 W . Seneca from three to how many units? MR . JONSON: Two . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Two . MR . JONSON: I am then adding six parking places . SECRETARY HOARD : That is not what was represented to Mr . Dieterich, he was: told that 327 would go from three to two - excuse me, three to one . MR . JONSON: Well there is three apartments in there now . SECRETARY HOARD ' Yes, but two would be removed . MR . JONSON: The wing will come off (unintelligible) yes, the house itself will have two apartments . That wouldn' t be feasible because you couldn' t tear down the house - you can tear off the wing - you still have more parking - makes the . . . MR . SCHWAB : And the other building - 319-331 - there are currently two., four-bedroom apartments? MR . JONSON: Yes . 31 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 32 MR , SCHWAB : And you want to go to six, one-bedroom? MR . JONSON: Yes., six orte-bedroom. There is five thousand square , . MS , FARRELL : Excuse me, I have six two-bedroom . . . . MR . JONSON: Well, six two-bedroom. . MR . SCHWABSix, two-bedroom? MR . JONSON: There is five thousand square feet in the building . MS . FARRELL : I didn ' t walk: back all the way back here, is this empty space or is this part of this . . . this is empty space back here right? MR . JONSON: Yes, that is empty space . MS . FARRELL ., So the cars would park in what configuration? How would the cars need to park hack here so they could get out? MR , JONSON: Yes . MS . FARRELL . Do you want to tell us about it? MR . JONSON: Well that is why you have six parking places on one side and you go back and get out . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: So you feel - they are all stacked, in other words, as we look at the diagram, all parallel to one another in a row . MR . JONSON. You come in at art angle and you can back: right out or you park: like this and you back: out and then you drive right out . MS , FARRELL : Wait a minute . You park: the cars like this and six of them will fit there? MR . JONSON: Well let me give you the dimension - you have forty 32 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 33 feet by forty feet . MS . FARRELL : In this area? Does that count, what is this corner thing here - that ' s a sidewalk now . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Tracy can you be. a little bit more specific ,just for the members here in general? MR . JONSON: Apparently, the parking - the way I understand it from Mr . Dieterich - that ' s okay but the problem is the setback from ( unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well it ' s also a matter of making sure that: in fact, the parking is reasonable and one can., in fact, make use of it . MR . JONSON: Well Mr . Dieterich and I went all over it - he came up with six parking places . Because, to be honest with you, I came up with twelve and he came up with six . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? MS . FARRELL ., So, in fact you ar-e turning all the back area into a parking lot? You also own this building? MR . JONSON: Yes . MS . JOHNSON: So are these par-king spaces in the back, the six in a row., dependent upon this driveway that goes out to North Plain Street open? MR . JONSON: You can come in from two directions . MS . JOHNSON: So removing this porch and the sidewalk will be . . . MR. JONSON: You can come in from Seneca Street or from Plain Street . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Do you now own 327 W. Seneca? 33 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 34 MR . .JONSON: Yes , No I don' t . I used to own it and 1 sold it to Orson Ledger , I did come in front of the Board to ask to remodel and make it feasible - at that time I didn ' t have parking . So I finally talked Orson Ledger into selling the building - with the contingency that I can get this toning appeal , And the sale is depending on whatever decision you make . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I see . Further questions? MS . FARRELL : How wide is the space that would be the driveway, the one connecting to Seneca Street? MR . JUNSON; The Seneca Street - roughly I would imagine about twelve feet Plus or minus, no less than ten . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: If you look. at the top of the diagram, right opposite "to remove this portion of the building" there is a fourteen point four-five feet distance between - where that line is contingent to the building line - over to the building line adjacent and you could probably subtract about a foot from that . Further questions? Richard? MR , BOOTH: We are talking about a total of eight apartments? MR , JONSON: We are talking about a total of . . . . MR . BOOTH : Eight - and you are proposing eight apartments compared to five now, is that correct? MR , JCNSON: Well we have - r-ight now we have five and we are talking about eight, yes . And we ar-e talking about a lot more parking for everybody . It is going to make the situation better . MR , BOOTH ,, You may have answered this . How long have you owned the building on the corner - 329-331? 34 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE ' 35 MR . JONSON: Eleven years , MR , BOOTH : Eleven years . MR , JONSON: And I sold the property ten years ago . . . MR . BOOTH . The adjoining property . . . MR . JONSON' And I tried - since that time - the last ten years I have been trying to buy it back, for this reason . And I feel it to be in the best interest of the City to grant the variance, only, also because of the building on the corner - 329-331 W. Seneca Street - it ' s a beautiful building and it needs to be preserved and I think. - my plans are to leave the outside architecturally the same way and to clean it up and make it - because it is one of those buildings that we can' t afford to lose . There is only one in Ithaca with that architecture design . MS . FARRELL ' Technically now there are five parking spaces and with the proposed changes there would be six , seven, eight, nine, nine spaces, right? MR . BOOTH : It says eight . MS . FARRELL : I know, but there is two here and six ( unintelligible) MR . JONSON' We' ll have twelve spaces , MS , FARRELL : Twelve? Where will you get twelve? MR . .JONSON: Well, we' ll have six over there, if you add everything, you will have twelve . MS , FARRELL : Wait a minute, show me the twelve because I don ' t follow that . You ' ve got two here . that makes three , and six - A MR , JONSON: And then you' ve got two there . 35 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 36 MS , FARRELL : Well , if you' ve got two there now, you could really have three here now? And can you get a car by here when it is parked? MR . JONSON; Yes . MS . FARRELL : So you really have three here now, so you have six spaces now . . . MR . JONSON: No I only have two there now, that is all that I can get in . MS . FARRELL ' Why? MR . JONSON: Because then the other person can ' t get out . MR . BOOTH: Well if you only have two there now, how are you going to get three . . . . MS . FARRELL : Well, no - but what is allowed in parking is to do two in a row and then one more, right Tom? SECRETARY HOARD: What is allowed is to have - you should be able to get any one car out without having to remove more than one other car . MS . JOHNSON: So you can have two in a row and one abreast of it? MS . FARRELL . Yes . So it is three now - two - one, so you' ve got six spaces now and you are going to get . . . . yes . So six spaces to twelve spaces . So, according to my calculations there is not a deficiency in par-king right now for these buildings, or is there? SECRETARY HOARD: Now there is , they are on separate . . . MS . FARRELL : Right, they are on separate properties so there is still deficiencies . . . . there is extra space there . 36 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 37 SECRETARY HOARD ' Well the problem now is that 327 - you can' t get to the rear yard and the other one only has this space here and this one . MS . FA.RRELL : Well it has got these three spaces up here and it ' s got — MR , BOOTH : By the lapndromat . MS , FARRELL ' Yeh . So this one has extra spaces, this doesn' t have . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. Further questions? MR . BOOTH: When you knock off the wing on 327, have you got to do any internal arrangements to just have the two apartments in P� 327? M MR , JONSGN: No . The wing was an addition . You can look at it, it is just like . . . MR . BOOTH: It is a separate unit now? MR , JONSUN: It is a separate unit and it is like somebody just picked the house up on the side of the building - this will make the architectural design ( unintelligible) back to the way it was intended to be a long time ago . So what you are ending up with is two good looking buildings instead of what is there now , It is the only way you can do it ( unintelligible) afford to do it, that is why all these years I couldn ' t afford to do it because we didn' t have the parking ( unintelligible) MR . BOOTH : Where are the - just so I am clear in my own mind - where are the existing deficiencies as far as setback, area requirements? 37 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 38 MR . JONSON: I think: probably Mr . Hoard would know that better than I . SECRETARY HOARD . Well the existing deficiencies are - the problem is you are taking the two individual spaces and so you end up with a deficient side yard on the 323-31 - so that would be this side yard and the rear yard . . . MR . BOOTH: Why is that deficient? SECRETARY HOARD : It is too close to the line according to what we had . MS . JOHNSON: On which side - the Plain Street side? SECRETARY HOARD' It would be right here . So when the two lots are combined then that disappears as a side yard . Then this rear yard at 327 - with this long ring going back is deficient . And, let ' s see, what else . . . MR . BOOTH: That ' s going to be removed? SECRETARY HOARD: Right . And the lot coverage of the one on the corner exceeds the maximum permitted . And that disappears when you take this wine off of 327 and combine these two properties - then it is less than fifty percent - lot coverage . MR . BOOTH : I guess the only thing I don ' t understand is in Column 13 the reference to two point seven seven three . SECRETARY HOARD : This side yard (unintelligible) MR . BOOTH: That ' s existing though . SECRETARY HOARD *, Right, it doesn' t change . MR . BOOTH: So shouldn ' t that have been - that should have been shown up above there - that ' s not a new circumstance, that is an 38 BZA MINUTES 4/1 /85 PAGE : 39 existing circumstance . SECRETARY HOARD: Well it does., it is over under twelve., it just shifted . MR . BOOTH : I see, okay, all right . SECRETARY HOARD: . 1 . put another front yard on here . The yards move around when you combine the properties, sort of . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? MR . SCHWAB : Let me Just ask. this., either for Tom or Mr . Jonson . There currently now is a deficiency in the parking on at least one of the lots - on 327 and not 329, is that right? SECRETARY HOARD: The way I figure it , on the parking now, 327 has zero - maybe just one spot in the front - so that is deficient because it needs three . The other one has two but the combination of the two is deficient by five, so what he is doing with this., is he is improving the parking situation . MR . SCHWAB : Okay . No other questions . CHAIRMAN TUMLAN: Tracy? Richard? MR . BOOTH: I find myself confused with this application but I think: we have it on the table now . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well we' ll see if we can' t clarify it some as it goes on . Thank you Mr . Jonson, I think. we exhausted you with our questions . Is there anyone else out there who would like to speak: in support of granting this variance? ( no one) Is there anyone out there who would like to speak: in opposition to granting the variance? ( no one) 39 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 40 DELIBERATIONS ON APPEAL NO . 1612 MR . BOOTH : I ' d like to hear from Tom whether he has any matters which we might have overlooked` I found myself confused by the numbers and I knew that the number' of apartments didn ' t agree with what was said and so on . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Perhaps it would be good to review the worksheet and essentially what the differences are between one and two units, particularly with respect to 127 and what the differences are on the worksheet . ( unintelligible) SECRETARY HOARD: Okay . In column 0 then - or column 1 ; the proposed use. changes from a total of seven apartments to eight apartments . It is written over in column 3 but it belongs in column t . The column 4 - the proposed condition or use - it looks like he is propo=sing twelve spaces instead of eight and he I is required then to have eight spaces in "E" instead of seven . MR . BOOTH: He is proposing twelve and he is required to have eight , SECRETARY HOARD: Now, historically, he has been before the Board to try to do something with this building and has been denied because of the - the problems with the existing yard problems and the parking . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: And if I could address that more specifically . It - the proposal before you, in a sense; is - it is actually a proposal of two property owners, even though only one is present tonight - the one who is proposing the move - one could question if there aren' t other ways to solve the parking problem for 40 BZA MINUTES 4/1!85 PAGE : 41 323-331 . And this is essentially the historical question we ' ve grappled with in the earlier appeals . MS . FAR.R.ELL , ( unintelligible) for 318-331 . Right now there is five spaces . MR . BOOTH : But there would have to be at least six . MS . FAR.RELL : Yes, so it would be deficient by one with the proposed change . SECRETARY HOARD : fart of the proposal is to combine the two properties . MR . BOOTH: I wonder if it is advantageous to have - I mean - since you can put six cars plus three cars in the back., if this proposal is granted, is it desireable, Tom, to have those parking spaces entering on to Seneca Street or does that not make any difference? SECRETARY HOARD: Well some of them are inevitably going to be using Seneca Street . I think the tendency for the others would be to come out on Plain Street - just because it would be so much easier . MR . BOOTH : Out past the laundromat . SECRETARY HOARD: I think: the fact here is that he has solved the parking question . It is a big house on the corner . It has a lot of space . 41 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE ; 42 DECISION ON APPEAL NO . 1612 327-29-31 WEST SENECA STREET The Board considered the request of Ivar and Janet Jonson for an area variance to permit the conversion of the two-family dwelling at 329-31 West Seneca Street to a six unit multiple dwelling and to remove a rear wing of the building at 327 West Seneca Street to create a parking area and reduce the number of units in that property to two . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTH: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in Appeal Number 1612 conditioned upon the appellant providing a total of twelve ( 12) parking spaces; the two parcels being combined and deeded together as one, that there be no more than eight apartments in all - two, two-bedroom apartments at what is now 327 West Seneca and six, two-bedroom apartments at what is now 329-31 West Seneca: and that the parking area be constructed to meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance . MR, SCHWARTZ : I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ] This is a B2a area and the use which the applicant proposes is compatible with the neighborhood and surrounding properties . 2) This proposal will alleviate a parking deficiency which exists for at least one of the properties . 3) The proposal will not increase any existing deficiencies vis a vis the Zoning Ordinance and will reduce or eliminate 42 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 43 several of those existing deficiencies . VOTE , 4 YES., 1 NO; 1 ABSENT GRANTED W/CONDITIONS i 43 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PACE : 44 SECRETARY HOARD ' The next appeal is APPEAL NO . 1613 - 121 CASCADILLA STREET Appeal of John Tilitz for an Accessory Apart- ment Temporary Permit under Section 30 . 27 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit conversion of the single family house at 121 Cascadilla Street to a single-family house with an acces- sory apartment . The property is located in an Ria ( residential., multiple dwelling) use dis- trict where two-family dwellings ar-e permitted; however since the property is deficient in min- imum lot size, has lot coverage in excess of the maximum permitted: and is deficient in min- imum setbacks for the front yard, one side yard, and the rear yard, under Section 30 . 25, Columns 6, 10, 11 , 12 and 14, the appellant must either obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies or obtain a special tempor- ary permit for an accessory apartment before a building permit can be issued for the conver- sion . A previous appeal for an area variance (Appeal Plumber 1594) was denied by the Board on February 4, 1985 . MR. COSTANZA: Mr . Tilitz is., I believe the first applicant under the Accessory Apartment Ordinance . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Will you begin by identifying yourself? MR . C:OSTANZA: My name is Peter Costanza and I am the attorney for Mr _ Tilitz . This is Mr . Tilitz at my side . He initially tried for an area variance which was denied . I then called his attention to ( unintelligible) It is my understanding, in looking at the Ordinance, that his house here fits squarely within the purposes which the Ordinance was prepared . This is an owner-occu- pancy proposal . He proposes to remain in occupancy at the house during the entire three year period for which the permit is being requested . He has in existence now the parking which will be required. The issue in terms of the variance that will be re- 44 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PACE : 45 quired here is the area variance . He. is (unintelligible) way off the area requir-ements - there is nothing that can be done about that . The house dates from a period of time and in an area of the city where our houses were pretty well filled up on the lots (unintelligible) I believe that each of you should have been provided with both the. front of the house sketch which was required by the Ordinance and a site plan which is a copy of an old survey of the area which has been substantially changed with respect to his house, since the time that that survey was made . And, in addition., a floor plan for both floors of the building . The only floor, however, to which arty changes are being proposed, is the first floor which includes the area where he wants to create art efficiency apartment . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Would you speak a little louder? MR . COSTANZA. The only area which contemplates a change is the first floor where tie proposes to change the existing living room into an efficiency apartment . I guess we would prefer to answer any questions that the Board has at this point rather than go further . I don' t know - looking at your papers, whether you have copies of the survey or not , I would be happy to pass that around if you don ' t have it . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: We have this . MR . COSTANZA: Yes, that ' s it . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: You have already been reviewed by the Design and Review Board? MR . COSTANZV No . We 've gone through the Planning Board . We 45 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE ; 46 were scheduled into here next . I recognize that that is a requirement of the Or-dinan<:,e . What I would simply propose to do is go through here and I assume that any action we take would be contingent upon any recommendations or requirements passed upon by the Design Review Boad . It would have made more sense to go through there first but ( unintelligible) scheduled . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Their next meeting is when? MR . COSTANZA : I don ' t know . MS . FA.RRELL : You are not propo=sing any changes in the exterior of the house? MR . COSTANZA: Yes there is a proposed exterior change - there is a new entrance to be added on the front which makes their approval mandatory . ( unintelligible) indicate that the area in the front of the house where the new entrance is proposed is on the presently screened in porch so it will not be particularly obvious from the street . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions? MR , BOOTH : The Ordinance says that new or addition of front entrances or- windows are to be discouraged . Is there any real alternative for not including a new door? MR . TILITZ : The only reason that I propose to put a new door in the front is that the back. - the room, as you can see from the diagram, that I propose to make into an efficiency, at the front of the house goes all the way to the back. of the hou=se - just the fact that there is limited yard area in the back: would require building another porch on the outside of the house in the back 46 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 47 and take up what little back: yard there is - to a greater degree - that is the reason that I felt that it would be easier to just add it on to the - it is going to come out on the same porch that the other door comes out . MR . BOOTH: There is no way for both units to use the existing front door? MR . TILITZ : Not really, no . Because as soon as you walk in the existing front door, you go right up the stairs . And the larger unit would remain having access to the upstairs and the downstairs, the right hand side - that would block off access to the right hand side as you walk in the front door . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions? MR . BOOTH : You asked, about the Design Commission amendment? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: There is MR . BOOTH : The Design Review Board? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: That ' s right - there is a requirement that any accessory apartment ( unintelligible) recommendations of the Design Review Board . MR . BOOTH : Right . Under subdivision six of whatever that section is . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: At this point, I was rather questioning proce- dure as to whether we were appropriately advised . I ' d like to refer back. to the Ordinance which members of the Board have be- fore you with regard to Accessory Apartments - the intent of the Section., specifically . Points one and three - that is the pur- pose of the intent to permitting accessory apartments is to one) 47 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 48 provide homeowners., especially those of low and moderate income, with a means of obtaining through rental income -companionship, security and services - etc. and number three) making housing units available to low and moderate income households who might other-wise have difficulty finding homes within the City . Would either one of the two of you care to address those two points? MR . TILITZ : Yes . I feel 'like my situation falls clearly within bounds of those two ideas . It is a house that is over two thou- sand square feet., it is exceedingly large in terms of a space to be heated in the wintertime - I don' t - I ' m a carpenter - I don ' t make a lot of money and - you know - the idea that I could gain some income from dividing the house up and using a portion of it that really isn' t in my interest to have available to me - ( unin- telligible) is plenty large enough. it seems that that question - that my situation applies; to that issue . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further- questions from members of the Board? MR , BOOTH : Looking at your diagram, MR . TILITZ : Which one? MR . BOOTH; Well I ' m looking - I guess page 1 - first floor . I don' t understand why it is not possible to use the existing door and then put another door in that wall to the immediate left to enter the proposed efficiency? MR . TILITZ : Because then you would be walking right into my house - in order to get into the apartment . SECRETARY HOARD: It would cause a problem with the Housing Code . MR . BOOTH : It would? 48 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 49 SECRETARY HOARD: Yes., because this person would be entering into -you see, his unit consists of the main unit is the second floor and this part of the first floor - the stairway - if you went in there - if' the tenant of the efficiency were to walk in there . . . MR . BOOTH: I understand that, but isn' t it possible to put two doors in to accommodate that? MR . TILITZ : No it is riot because the stairwell starts so close to the front door . . . . MR . BOOTH: Oh., I see, this is not drawn to scale . MR , TILITZ : Yes, it ' s to scale . MS . JOHNSON: But it is not accurately reflecting where the stairs . . . . MR . TILITZ : It is not accurately reflecting where the stairwell is . MR . BOOTH : There is riot this hand of space . . . MR . TILITZ : The stairwell begins right about where the door ends -the entrance to the living room ends . You see the entrance to the living room and the dining room are even - in terms of the distance from the front wall . MR . BOOTH ' Yes, I see . MR . TILITZ : The stair-well begins right there . MR . BOOTH: So the word "hall" is a big . . . optimistic . MR . TILITZ : Yes . MS , FARRELL : Also, if you went into the hall there you would go out of the house and into another- door into the house - I mean you would go out of the house - into the hall . . . 49 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 50 MR , SCHWAB ' Well you' d have to have locks on the stairwell and the dining room . . . MR . TILITZ : It would break: up the house, it would make it three units as opposed to two . MR . BOOTH : When you were here before there was concern about parking as I recall . MR . TILITZ : Right . I have talked with the neighbors who expres- sed concern about the issue and the people that came here and expressed concern and then there was also someone who wrote a letter - I have talked with both of those people - and they re- sponded more positively to this idea and I guess that fact -their main concern, as they told me., was the fact that I might -you know., it was fine and dandy, what I was going to do but °i might upF '��k� and sell the house at some point and who knows what the next per- son might do . Now that is where the accessory apartment ordi- nance sort of provides a safety valve for those people and you know, I don' t know that anybody is here to speak against it to- night, but I know specifically that those people aren' t here , MR , BOOTH: But putting an extra door in makes the accessory , apartment that much more permanent - kind of fixture - apparently that ' s what the ordinance was trying to discourage . MR . TILITZ : Well it has to have a kitchen put in and a bathroom put in and all of that - that is pretty substantial in terms of the building too . I think. the ordinance states, that if, at the time of sale, you don' t sell it to somebody else who applies for the same permit and becomes an owner-occupier, then you are re- 50 BZA MINUTES 4/1185 PAGE : 51 quired to change it back to the original form. SECRETARY HOARD; Maybe I can explain my understanding of the two door question . This ordinance was - part of it was lifted from ordinances that were drawn up in Westchester County and places like that where they were dealing with suburbs and . . . MR . BOOTH: You mean it was not written originally here in Ithaca? SECRETARY HOARD: No . Arid one of the objections that they ran into there was that people did not like houses in a single family home to suddenly look. like they were duplexes with two doors . So they wrote up that kind of ordinance . Now in this particular ease we are not in a single family neighborhood., we are in a multiple dwelling neighborhood so I don' t see that it is as big a problem . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. I would like to direct the attention of the members of the Board to the fact page - that is item six on ex- ter ior x-terior appearance . Back: page - third page actually - of what you have been giver: . It is essentially a four page unit . Under item six, exterior appearance - if an accessory apartment is located in the main building, the entry to a building and its design shall be in such a way that, the appearance of the building shall remain as a single family residence . New or additional front entrances or window are discouraged but in any event must be in keeping with the architectural style of the rest of the struc- ture . Exterior stairways may only be constructed in the rear, except where alternate locations ( changed tape here and missed 51 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 52 some of the dialogue) now at this point in the proceeding, it seems obvious_: we' ve riot gone through that . I note that in the March 26th Planning and Development Board meeting, you essential- ly had said that, and I am quoting here from the minutes, "the plans for the exter-ior change will be brought to the Design Re- view Board for their review . " At this point I would ask members of the Board if it wouldn' t be more appropriate to defer action on this par-ticular appeal until such time as we get that kind of input . MS . FARRELL : I would feel comfortable with granting contingent on the approval of the Design Review Board . I don' t particularly have any reason to wait . CHAIRMAN TCIMLAN: Any other, feeling? MR . SCHWAB . I don' t see the value of waiting . ( unintelligible) MS , JOHNSON: I agree with that too . I don' t know if this is the time to ask it or- not, but are you planning to - I didn' t read this whole accessory apartment thing but - are you planning to live in the studio or in the rest of the house? MR . TILITZ : No, in the rest of the house . MS . JOHNSON: So that is six bedrooms? MR . TILITZ : well, what it is - is four bedrooms on the second floor and the attic, at one: point - had been ( unintelligible) and the bedr000ms are not really bedrooms and I don ' t want it to be called a six bedroom house - I don ' t require that - for zoning . The bedrooms are riot in good shape (unintelligible) As far as my intentions for the space go, I never intend to use more than 52 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 53 three of them as bedrooms, if that many , so I would be perfectly willing to go with a three bedroom unit and a one bedroom unit, which it is presently . It has four bedrooms in it . MS . JOHNSON' So it seems ;�s though the parking situation isn ' t as much of ars issue as it was in the - I think. I remember the other configuration differently . MR . BOOTH' I think: this is buried in here somewhere but maybe You could just help me quickly . What will be the square footage of the efficiency? MR. TILITt ' Three hundred and forty or maybe three hundred and thirty feet . MR . BOOTH ' The whole house? MR . TILITZ ' Is something over two thousand so it meets the . . . MR . BOOTH, Well within - well under the requirements . The only thing that I would bring up to the Board' s attention, in terms of common comment, this is the first - I believe it is the first time this has been considered under- this ordinance . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' That ' s true and that ' s the exact reasoJJn�� why I am wondering about whether- we shouldn' t go according tooyle quite frankly . 666666 MR . COSTANZA' I appreciate your, concern and in fact I was kind of concerned about that scheduling sequence initially at the time that Mr . Tilitz came to me to start this process, he basically had reapplied using forms that are traditionally used for vari- ance application . Arid I think. that because this was the first time that somebody has followed through under this procedure, the 53 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 54 Design Review Board sort of got lost in terms of the scheduling, first to the Planning Board and then to here . My only concern is really that Mr . Tilitz riot be relagated to a second round and a lot of wasted time because of that , I certainly understand that the Design Review Board approval is a prerequisite and we are perfectly willing to go through any scheduling that you feel is appropriate, I just think: for his sake, since he is a first ap- plicant., that perhaps the contingent rule would be the most expe- ditious way to handle it . I don' t mean to by-pass the Design Review Board at all , in fact I believe that that is a perfectly legitimate consideration ( unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? Thank you . Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of granting the variance? (no one) Is there anyone out there who would like to speak: in opposition to granting the variance? (no one) 54 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 55 DECISION - APPEAL NO , 1613 111 CASCADILLA STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of John Tilitz for an Accessory Apartment Temporary Permit to permit conversion of the single family house at 111 Cascadilla Street to a single-family house with an accessory apartment . The decision of the Board was as follows : MS . FARRELL : I move that the Board grant the request for an Accessory Apartment Temporary Permit contingent upon approval from the Design Review Board . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The owner has said that the property would provide him, a low-moderate income homeowner ., with a source of income to make this house economically viable . 1) The owner will occupy the house . 3) Provision has been made for parking . 4) The property, as changed,, would seem to maintain the residen- tial character of the neighborhood and be compatible with other properties in the area . 5) The existing area deficiencies in the property would not be exacerbated by the proposed changes . 6) The applicant would face a hardship if required to correct the existing deficiencies . VOTE : 5 YES, 0 NO,; 1 ABSENT GRANTED 55 , i i BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 56 SECRETARY HOARD : THE NEXT APPEAL IS APPEAL NO . 1614 - 327 SPENCER ROAD : Appeal of Stephen and Leslie Menke for a special permit under Section 30 . 26 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the use of the premises at 327 Spencer Road for a home occupation (a stress counselling service) . The property is located in an R2a ( residential, one- and two-family dwellings) use district in which the appellant must obtain a special permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the proposed use of a home occupation . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Again, please begin with your name and address . MR . MENKE : My name is Stephen Menke and I live at 327 Spencer Road . We are presently in the process of selling our home at 327 Spencer Road and seeking a special permit for John Place to buy -so that he can use one room in the house for his counselling and stress reduction office . As you may know, we have had our home on the mar-ket for six months now - we are presently - our family life is disrupted since my employer has transferred me out of the area. It would be a great hardship for us, at this time, to not sell our house as planned . Our zoning, R2a, allows in-home busi- ness by special permit which provides the Board of Zoning Appeals a means to review the plans for in-home businesses . We have talked with Mr . Place and reviewed his plans and feel that they would have little or no impact on the neighborhood . Presently there are four- of us living in the house . John Place is single and would be the only individual living in the house . We pre- sently own two cars, John Place owns one . Mr . Place teaches and does consulting part time in area colleges and works individually with people to help them manage stress . His business is called 56 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 57 Halcyon Stress Reduction and because he sees people for one and one-half hour sessions it will not impact our area . He plans to expand our off-street parking to two spaces- and improve the two on-street par-king spaces in front of the house . Those of you who know our house and its location - it is a unique setting that isolates the parking entrances from adjoining properties . For these reasons coupled with Mr . Place' s desire to have a quiet setting to see his clients , we feel your favorable consideration will be appreciated. We have a purchase offer on our house that is contingent on a special permit being accepted by the Zoning Board of Approval (sic) at this meeting . I also have with me a letter from our closest neighbor , Sara Bloxsom and it says "Re- gar-ding a special permit for Stephen and Leslie Menke at 327 Spencer Road. My home is at 110 Morris Heights Road which is south of., and irk back of, the Menke residence . I do not object to the change in zoning., so Mr . Place, the prospective buyer of the Menke home, can conduct a business in his home . As Mr . Place only sees one client at a time, I don ' t see where this will make any difference in the traffic or parking in our area . As a mat- ter- of fact, I have offered one space, next to my garage, should he need it . /s/Sara K . Bloxsom, 110 Morris Hts , Rd . , Ithaca, N . Y . 14850" Goes anyone want to see this? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions;? Yes please . SECRETARY HOARD : We will need it for the file . MR . MENKE : I don' t have a copy of that but I guess you can have it . 57 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 58 MR . BOOTH ' It was raining yesterday and it was difficult for me to determine which one was your house . Is it the red one? MR . MENK•,E : Yes . It is the red and white one . MS . FARRELL : Are there arty numbers on it? MR . MENKE : Yes, it has numbers on the mailbox out front . MS . FARRELL : (unintelligible) MS . JOHNSON; Where is 110 Morris Heights? Is that - on this map -would it be down here? This is your house - this is Spencer Road . MR . MENKE : This is Spencer Road - this is it - the block in here . MS . JOHNSON: Oh, okay . MR. MENKE : This is Morris Heights up here - three or four parking spaces up here by their garage . MS . JOHNSON: And you use those now? MR . MENKE : Yes., I use one of them now, we also park in the driveway and there is two off-street parking spots that we have used for the last several years . If any of you are familiar with the property., we' ve c•ut our bushes back so there is adequate par-king there - you can park: there and it doesn' t affect the traffic - two cars can go in opposite directions: and not have any trouble . MS . FARRELL : So you have how many parking spaces now? MR . MENKE : Three . MS . FARRELL : Because on our sheet here it said that you had none . It says zero . Tom, why does it say zero spaces? 58 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 59 SECRETARY HOARD: The diagram that was submitted shows spaces that are partly in the right-of-way . MR . BOOTH : Which ones? MS . JOHNSON: The ones on this street? SECRETARY HOARD : ( unintelligible) MR . BOOTH ' The two that are along Spencer Road? SECRETARY HOARD . These two and these are just proposed, right? MR . MENKE ' Well we do park: there, there is a driveway there now . MR . BOOTH ' It is cut into the bank? MR . MENKE : It cuts right into the bank . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: But you are parking on the right-of-way of the roadway, I assume . MR . MENKE : Yes right along Spencer Road . I have my deed also here . I ' m not sure exactly what this says, but I think it says something that has to do with the parking on the road there . It says "together with all right title and interest of the grantors herein such parcel as lies between the northwest line of the above described premises and the center line of Spencer Road sub- ject to the rights of public therein . " And I don' t know if that means that it is available for public parking there -there are no signs that say "no parking" or- there is no "no parking" sign anywhere along there on Spencer Road . MR , BOOTH: As I understand your application, this says there will be a deficiency of two parking spaces . MR . MENKE : I don' t know if I understand you . MR . BOOTH : Well I ' m looking at this sheet here - it says that 59 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 60 i when - if' the Beard grants the variance there will be a deficiency of two parking spaces - I ' m looking at this sheet with all the . . . MS . FARRELL : Well according to this there is zero parking there . SECRETARY HOARD : He doesn' t have that sheet . MR . MENKE , No., I don ' t have that sheet . MS . JOHNSON: It says - yes, there is no parking now so there are two required with the proposed use therefore it is two deficient, r ight? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN : True . MS . JOHNSON.; But there is one parking space down by the street, isn ' t that considered one? MR . MENKE : Arid we do have the note there from Sara saying there is parking available at the top on the private road to her site . MS . FARRELL ' That space that you are talking about , is that this? MR . MENKE : Yes, that is up there . MS . FARRELL : Okay . So you are using one of these spaces now and she is saying that you can continue to use it? MR . MENKE : That is correct - that he could use it . MR. BOOTH : Can he use one or two? MR . MENKE : At the top, on the Bloxsom property, she said in her note that he could use one space . Now there is parking on Spen- cer Road and I may be wrong in listening to the people that sold me the property originally - that that was the available parking . Again, I may be wrong in assuming that but we have parked there 60 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 61 and never had a problem there, never had any problems from the Police Force . Any of you that are familiar with Spencer Road, there is parking all along Spencer- Road., whether that is right or wrong , MR . BOOTH: Well, but that is not off-street par-king - whatever it is . MR . MENKE . It is off the street . It is not on the street - you know we are not parking on the road . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: It is off the black top . MR . MENKE : It is off the black top . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Okay . That ' s what we mean by - in this instance - off street parking . MS . FARRELL : How far does the right-of-way go - the right-of-way covers the first steps too? SECRETARY HOARD . According to this, the right-of-way is back. here . MS . JOHNSON: Where it says long street line? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: There are apparently what, six point five feet (6 . 5 ' ) between that corner of the house and the street line? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . MR . BOOTH : (unintelligible) MR . MENKE : That would be difficult . MS . FARRELL : So the cur-r-ent little driveway is how much in the right-of-way and how much on the property, do you know that? MR . MENKE : That could be expanded back further . MS , FARRELL : That could be pushed back, couldn ' t it? 61 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 62 MR . MENKE : Yes it could . MS . JOHNSON: Further into the lot? MR . MENKE : Further into the lot . MS . JOHNSON: It would have to - it looks like about eight feet - no more than that . MR . MENKE ' Because of Mr . Place' s unique counselling service, he has told us that there would riot be more than his car and one person at a time and we presently have two cars and I don' t see it being any different than that . MR . SCHWAB : Is he here tonight? MR . MENKE : I don ' t see him . MR . BOOTH: You indicate on this diagram possible parking spaces that a lease or buy arrangement could be made, could you explore that a little? I guess southerly from your, house . MR . MENKE : No, I have not explored that . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? If not, thank. you . We ' ll move along . Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of granting the variance? Come forward please . MS . RUMSEY : I ' m Margie Rumsey, Rumsey Real Estate . On November 7, 1984 an ordinance amending Chapter 60, entitled "Traffic and Vehicles in the City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be ordained and enacted by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca New York: as 1 follows : That a new section to be known and designated as 6048 of Article 4 entitled "Parking., Standing & Stopping" to follow ' Section 60 . 47 is hereby added ( unintelligible) as follows under 62 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 63 curb line parking : no person shall stop, stand or park. a vehicle between the curb line or edge of the pavement and the sidewalk or adjacent property line of any street or highway except the fol- lowing =streets and highway . There are several noted and then on Spencer Road, southside in front of numbers 335 and on quite a few more . This is 327 just east of 335, a short ways and finding that I went before the Board of Public Works last week., showing pictures of cars parked on the parking spaces parallel to the highway, off the pavement, in front of 327, showing one where there ar-e two cars going by and then also showing the already accepted 335 with a car parked and cars going by . And they sent - Charlotte Stone, who is the Chairman of Parking and a group of the Board of Public Works - the man that went down - the man that put these together on Spencer Road and he just hadn ' t realized anyone had parked in front of 317 and that ' s why he hadn' t done that before. But they gave me this which says, Parking Meter Orrdinance amendment . Resolved that the Board request that Common Council to approve the following changes to the Traffic Ordinance as follows . In Section 60 , 48, Cur-b line parking, no person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle between the curb line ( unintelligi- ble) sidewalk: or adjacent property on arty street or highway ex- cept the following streets or highways , Spencer Road, insert - soErthside in front of number 327 parallel par-king -and I can give you this copy that they gave me and also the original 1984 copy . I think: you have this - this is ,just as is without arty additions . And they said that that would be a matter of -because they have 63 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 64 their- recommendation ( unintelligible) Common Council and it fol- lows along with the same - just adding that one line . MS . FARRELL : When will this be coming up before Common Council? MS , RUMSEY : Within the month., as soon as they can - it ' s - they met last week . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Further questions? Thank you, that was very helpful . Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of granting this variance? ( no ane) Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to granting the variance? (no one) It is ours again to deliberate . 64 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 65 DELIBERATIONS - APPEAL NO . 1614 MR . BOOTH : The way this was written originally, as I read it, I take it that it means those two perpendicular parking spaces are now specific ally not legal . Is that how you read this? SECRETARY HOARD: I haven' t read it yet , but that is how it sounded . MS . FARRELL : ( unintelligible) two spaces? MR . BOOTH : Along the road . i MS . FARRELL : Two spaces is all we need . Well if this is granted, ( unintelligible) then, those are legal spaces . SECRETARY HOARD : Well those become public parking spaces . MS . FARRELL : Oh . They are not associated with the property? SECRETARY HOARD : They are not off-street parking spaces . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well can we say anything about the practical difficulty and special conditions? MR . BOOTH : This is both a variance and a special permit . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Special permit ( unintelligible) MR , BOOTH: They also need a variance., isn ' t that correct Tom? MS . JOHNSON: They need a use variance to have a business in the home, no? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Area variance . SECRETARY HOARD : Just a special permit , MR , BOOTH : But there are deficiencies . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: There are always: deficiencies . MR . BOOTH: I ' m more asking . . . the way I read it was that it is an application for- a variance and for a special permit . 65 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 66 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well it is a home occupation, right - by virtue of a permit? MS . JOHNSON: And then the deficiency in parking is . . . . MR . SCHWAB : (UNINTELLIGIBLE) MR . BOOTH: Front yard and rear yard deficiencies . SECRETARY HOARD: Well it ' s an accessory use so I don ' t think that the fact that there are front yard setbacks and that kind of thing mould apply . The fact - the parking question does apply because a home occupation requires parking space but, since it is listed under Accessory Use, then it doesn' t need the other - in fact the building is non-conforming . MS . FARRELL : So you don' t pay attention to the area deficiencies (unintelligible) SECRETARY HOARD: That ' s: my reading of it and I have struggled with this over the years - how to handle a home occupation, do you only allow it in a building that meets all the yard requirements - I don' t think: so in the case of an accessory use . MR . BOOTH: I guess my sense would be that you would require a variance if it required a special permit . I think either - the results would be the same - I don' t think it makes any difference . SECRETARY HOARD: Well., things that are listed as accessory uses; generally don' t require all the other things to be in order, for instance, if you have a sign, you could make sure the permitted use because they have a sign, then you could have - come to the Board for setback variances and that sort of thing - except for 66 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : E7 the sign itself . MS . FARRELL . So the only thing that changes here is the parking requirement? SECRETARY HOARD: Right . If it were listed over in Column 2, then I would say, yes, if somebody asks for a use that is in Column 2,, then I would say, yes., they have to meet all the r-equir-ements of the Ordinance., but not for- Column 3 . The Board can interpret that differently . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I ' m rioting the reference here to Section 30 . 26 on standards for special permits and when going to home occupation, I ' m wondering, do you have a quick and easy reference for that? SECRETARY HOARD : The home occupation under definitions . MR . BOOTH : Definition 48 . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: PAGE _ MR . BOOTH : 30 . 8A SECRETARY HOARD: But it starts on 30 . 8 . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; Well what I was getting at, Richard, was if that satisfies your question about whether, in fact, a permit is the only thing that is required, as opposed to a variance . Is the definition sufficient? MR . BOOTH' It looms to me like they would still need off-street parking variance, in any case . Isn' t that right as you interpret it? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes, if they can' t meet it . MR . BOOTH: What you are telling us, if these are in the State 67 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 68 right-of-way I don' t see how they could meet it, without a variance . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: That ' s true . MS . FA.RRELL : So if there is provision to use one of the neighbor ' s parking spaces, which the letter indicates, we are still looking for . . . SECRETARY HOARD: That takes care of one . MS . FARRELL ' Yes, they are still looking for one place . It would seem that this (unintelligible) could be cut in further to make two more spaces there, it would be . . . MR . BOOTH: Have you looked at that Tom? Is that possible to cut that bank: back farther? Did your people look at that? SECRETARY HOARD: Well there is an encroachment right next to it which I think is a pipe line encroachment - excavation next to it . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I don' t think: based on the diagram itself, that one could go ahead and say there is space there necessarily . You never know what you are going to encounter - it is rock, after all . MR . BOOTH , To me.; it would look: difficult to do that . I guess my sense is that we ought to grant the home occupation approval and condition it on this one neighbor ' s parking site and require another one. I found it difficult parking along there and I can imagine that with people coming who are unfamiliar- that you could have problems . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I would rather see, rather than granting the 68 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 69 variance., I ' d like to see it essentially deferred and come back in if its possible . Because in the past when we have had cases come before us and they have been contingent upon parking, it has been always with the statement in hand - in writing at least - to that degree ( unintelligible- .1 conditioned to granting the variance . MR . BOOTH: I would concur . Why don' t you ask: the applicant . CHAIRMAN TUMLAN. Would the applicant come forward please? As you have probably heard, we are having a good deal of difficulty nailing down the parking spot . What we' d like to do is defer any action until such time as you can come back: to us, assumedly within the context of the next month, with, in hand, a document which says that you have access to and control over, two addi- tional parking spaces, excluding those which are in the right-of- way just outside of the boundaries of the property . A total of two . You have one in hand, more or less, but we are still look- ing for the other . It has been, generally speaking, the policy of the Board that before granting a variance that has parking as part of its major sticky point., as we say, that we have that in hand - does that seem a reasonable course from your point of view? MR . MENKE ' I think: it would provide a hardship on my ease because my purchase offer is contingent on approval at tonight ' s meeting . If we do not get approval at tonight ' s meeting the purchase offer will not be any good and I don ' t have a sale of my house . 69 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 70 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN : I see . MR . BOOTH: What if we issued a variance - the approval contingent upon your getting . . . MR . MENKE : Okay . As it says in the request for the special permit, it says Mr . Place plans to expand our off-street parking to two places . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: That ' s all fine and dandy but basically we are granting the variance to the property, not necessarily to Mr . Place and at this point in time., so while that is very nice an intention, we are more concerned, I suppose, with seeing it up front . SECRETARY HOARD ' You can make it contingent on parking . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; Well that is what I ' m asking . Are you - beginning to reiterate Richard' s point - are you willing to accept it contingent upon providing those two parking spaces? MR . MENKE ; And the two parking spots - one that is acceptable is the one that is provided by the Bloxsoms? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: That ' s right . MR . MENKE : That ' s the one? The other would be to expand the off-street parking that I have now, further back . . . MS . FARRELL : Or it might be - I mean - there is - things that would be possible - leasing of these spaces - could be a lease for one of those spaces . MR . MENKE : Okay . MR . SCHWAB , Or possibly another, one from the Bloxsoms . MS , FARRELL : Yes, it doesn' t really matter . . . 70 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 71 MR . BOOTH : As long as you are out of that State right-of-way . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: We can ' t give you a variance for essentially parking, which isn' t yours to give in a sense, is what we are saying . MR . MENKE : Yes, I understand that . CHAIRMAN TUMLAN: Further questions? MR . BOOTH: Will that be satisfactory? MR . MENKE : If I could get a contingency on improving the parking , how long would I have to do this, would I have to come back: to another meeting or would I just have to show proof of improving that parking or finding an alternative such as leasing that other piece of property? SECRETARY HOARD: Check with the. Building Department . MR . MENKE : And I ' d have what.. thirty days or so to do this? SECRETARY HOARD ' That would be up to the Board . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: We could extend that - whichever is convenient to you but we. are concerned, basically, on those . . . MR . MENKE : I would accept that rather than having this deferred because of the hardship it would create on me . At least I do have the permit approved pending improving the parking facility . I think: that is my understanding . MR . BOOTH: My concern is., that someone, 1 mean, you have lived there - you know how to drive in to this place - someone driving into - up to that property, I think, would have difficulties, I had difficulty . MR . MENKE : That may be true . We' ve had a lot of 71 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 72 Cuninte11iqible) MR , BOOTH: I ' m sure, but it is different when there is a business there . MR , MENKE : It may be true, I think: because of Mr . Place ' s business - you know - it is a repetitive type business with the same type of patients - that they would become very familiar with it quickly . The initial visit.. yes, I guess, I could agree that it would be difficult . SECRETARY HOARD' Then Mr . Place would be able to help them with their anxieties . MR . BOOTH. ( unintelligible) bring Mr . Place into some of our meetings . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Mr . Place has been at some of our meetings . Do I have a motion? 72 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 73 DECISION - APPEAL NO . 1614 327 SPENCER ROAD The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request for a special permit to permit the use of the premise=_ at 327 Spencer Road for a home occupation to stress counselling service) . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTH: I move that the Board approve the request for a special permit contingent upon the applicant making a satisfactory showing to the Building Commissioner ' s office that they have control over and will be able to transfer control over two off-street parking spaces, meaning thereby, spaces that are completely outside the right-of-way of Spencer Road and 21 that they must meet this condition prior to the beginning of the proposed business at this address . / CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The proposed accessory use is compatible with the property and the neighborhood . 2.1 The property, as currently arranged, does not appear to contain adequate off-street parking . VOTE : 5 YES; G NO; 1 ABSENT GRANTED W/CONDITION 73 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 74 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO . 1614 WHICH TOOK PLACE AFTER THE MOTION WAS PRESENTED AND BEFORE THE VOTE TOOK PLACE CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I ' ll second the motion but I would still like to think about something which dealt with practical difficulty and special conditions of the site, perhaps . MR . BOOTH: Why would you ( unintelligible) practical difficulty? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I ,just feel as though one finding of fact isn' t sufficient . MS . FARR.ELL : ( unintelligible) we don ' t consider the area deficiencies . . . . MR . BOOTH: Well, I ' m certainly - I certainly can see the need for writing the finding of fact that deals about why we are concerned about the parking, but I ' m not sure what you mean by practical difficulties . I understand Tom' s interpretation would seem reasonable in this case . There is not a need for a variance except with respect to parking which we are now removing . Is that correct? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Okay., I ' ll drop that question . Let me raise another one_ Is there any time by which this - I mean shall we set a time on this - is it thirty days - sixty days - how long, essentially, do we use? MR . BOOTH: How about prior to the sale of the property? MS . FARRELL : Prior to setting up business? SECRETARY HOARD: Or prior to starting the business . MR . BOOTH: All right - a condition should be expanded - the time frame for the condition would be prior to the beginning of the 74 BZA MINUTES 4/1/$5 PAGE : 75 proposed business . And add a second finding of fact - that the property as currently arranged does not appear to contain ade- quate off-street parking . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: The second will accept that . Any further discussion? We' ll have the vote . 75 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 76 SECRETARY HOARD : The last appeal is APPEAL NO . 1615 - 326 ELMIRA ROAD Appeal of Wendy ' s International for an area var- iance for a deficient frontyard setback under Section 30 . 15, Column 11 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the construction of an addition to the front of the existing restaurant at 326 Elmira Road (Wendy ' s Restaurant) . The property is lo- cated in a 85 (Business ) use district in which the proposed use is permitted: however under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant must obtain an area variance for the deficient front yard before a building per- mit or Certificate of Compliance can be issued for the addition . MR . WOODS : My name is Carl Woods from Wendy ' s International . I ' d like to open by passing around a couple of photos - one is basically . . . SECRETARY HOARD. Could you spell your last name please . MR . WOODS : W 0 0 D S . SECRETARY HOARD : That ' s a tough one . MR . WOODS: One is a before and the other is an after - that pho- to was taken this afternoon at that location . Basically we are involved,, presently, on a national program to update some of the older Wendy' s around the country, of which this follows in that category . This is a well established business - it is in dire need of some changes - and we think, basically, to keep that res- taurant competitive in the area that it is in . This location, when Wendy ' s: was built, no variance was granted at that time and this variance, if granted., would be the first variance ever re- quested on that site . Arid I did take the time today to research a little bit., I came in and talked with the City Engineer, Chuck 76 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 77 Barber and I talked to Peter DietFrich, Building Inspector, re- gar-ding this site and neither gentleman had any objection at all to this development . I know last week. at Planning Commission, there were a couple of concerns brought up by the Planning Com- mission, one was the fact that the projection to the front may cause some traffic obstruction and the other- concern was the fact that that roadway, in the near future, would be widened . After talking with Mr- , Barber ., if., and when., that road is widened, it will be at least ten or fifteen years and when it is done it will only be ten feet on either side so that would still leave it for- ty or- forty-five feet from ( unintelligible) greenhouse from any new road widening . MS . FARRELL ' Then why do you want to add on to the front? MR . WOODS : There would be more of an impact if you build ( unintelligible) and it is a proven fact that around the country sales do increase with a green house and an interior remodel at Wendy' s Restaurants . I know it is tough in this case to prove hardship, which I know I must do . MS . FARRELL : No., just practical difficulty . MR . WOODS ' Practical difficulty in this case would be the fact that we do need to encroach on that ten foot setback to do this project . (unintelligible) difficulty would be sometime in the future., four or five years that store made out even better without a greenhouse . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. Is there any other design - greenhouse design, other than the one you propose, which could be projected? 77 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 78 MR . WOODS : Yes sir there is . I have almost - the one proposed is ten feet - it would be the full ten foot . I can go - I have the design for eight . Ten feet - eight feet would be the next one . I can go eight feet . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: And six feet , and four feet and two feet? MR . WOODS : Well I have., we can design anything - we just have certain standards . The plans were drawn at the home office and if you get it under eight feet., really, there is just no need to do it . It would just kill the seating . MS . FARRELL : How much does this increase your seating? MR . WOODS : Ten feet increases it twenty-eight seats . Eight feet increases it twenty seats . MS . FARRELL : Twenty-eight and twenty? MR . WOODS : Yes . MS . FARRELL ' I have a questions about the parking . Forty-three parking spaces? MR . WOODS : Yes on that site . MS . FARRELL : And you only need nineteen? MR . WOODS : Right , MS , FARRELL : Why is it forty-seven for proposed use? On the worksheet that we have . . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: What you are looking at is 4e? MS . FARRELL : Yes . MR , BOOTH: I think: that is a misprinting, Tom? 4e? I take it 4d should be 47? Are you going to increase the number of parking spaces? 78 i BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 79 MR . WOODS : No sir . MR . BOOTH : Or, are you going to leave it the same? MR . WOODS : Yes sir . SECRETARY HOARD : Twenty-three spaces required so 4e should be twenty-three . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Is there any other configuration which you can add a green house onto the existing building or has been done to your knowledge., in any of the other Wendy ' s operations anywhere else" MR . WOODS : You can go five feet with one and at that point in time you add ten seats . MR . BOOTH : Is the purpose of the green house to increase or is it to increase visibility . MR . WOODS : Visibility - definitely - the impact - further impact new design - in other words, whey► we are finished with this restaur-ant, if we get a variance., it will look brand new . MR . BOOTH: So why not just do it on the existing front is? MR . WOODS : I don ' t understand . MR . BOOTH : Why move the building toward the street at all: why not just renovate the front of it , and make it look like a green house'} MR . WOODS : Well you need to go five feet to make it look like a green house. There is no way - you need the projection . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor, of granting the variance? (noone) = 4► Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to granting 79 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 81 DELIBERATIONS ON APPEAL NUMBER 1615 MR . BOOTH: We had a somewhat similar, situation about a year ago out on Route 13 . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: It was with the Burger King . MR . BOOTH: It was a much smaller variance . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: And that ' s because the site, in that particular instance, the building was at a skewed angle to the right-of-way of the roadway and there was much more minor impact . It was only a matter of a half a foot or- so . It was much, much smaller , The deficiency here is essentially that of the front yard, right? Between four feet to ten feet and across the entire front of the building as I understand it . SECRETARY HOARD: Part of the question - the problem here is that this property line meanders all over, the place . It isn' t - the night-of-way should have been so that some of these buildings which may be in a row, we find that some have front yard deficiencies and others don' t . The City is licensing - the Board of Public: Works is licensing - you will notice the parking area extends out into the City right-of-way . We have been licensing par-king and other things to property owners along there . The signage on the property is already in the right-of-way . MR . BOOTH: Signs and parking spots can be really filled easily because they are accessory uses . SECRETARY HOARD : I don' t know it took: us a long time to get those signs down . MR . BOOTH: a different problem . 81 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 82 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Wasn ' t the foundation, let me tell you . MS . FARRELL : What is the purpose of the right-of-way . . . ( unintelligible) . . . widened? That property is available? SECRETARY HOARD: Weil, I don' t know how all of this was divided up years ago., but the Elmira Road was straightened and widened and ten years ago, or eight years ago, it was not as . . . the road wasn' t as straight compared with the property line - the road tended to . . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: What are the practical difficulties and special conditions,, if I could tie so bold as to ask? Are there practical difficulties with this site, special conditions with this site? MS . FARRELL : Is this a typical right-of-way? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . MR . BOOTH: For a State highway? This is a State highway isn ' t it? SECRETARY HOARD: It is a State highway . It certainly narrows down as you go . . . MR . BOOTH: Well I understand that . My impression is that there are a number of State highways ( unintelligible) that width, right-of-ways . MR . SCHWAB ' Would the practical difficulties be to get a green house on the front, which is, as he spoke , needed for the image - he ' d have to move the entire building backwards . SECRETARY HOARD: There are certainly a lot of buildings that are closer, Godfathers,, and right on . MS . FARRELL : So the right-of-way goes wider and thinner and some 82 t BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 83 are closer to the street than others . . SECRETARY HOARD : Carvels . . . MR . BOOTH, My impression was the buildings on either side are not closer . . . MS . JOHNSON: They look: like they are about the same . MR . SCHWAB : There is a pup tent on one side isn ' t there? MS . JOHNSON: Well yes, that is true . MR . SCHWAB : And PUT PUT is not building, but he is close to it . MR . BOOTH : What is that, the golf . . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Minature golf . MR . SCHWAB : And the Indian Restaurant is far, back. . . or similar . MS . JOHNSON: Similar, yes . MR . BOOTH: That ' s what, further toward the City? MR . SCHWAB : It is south . . . MS . JOHNSON: It is further out . MR . BOOTH: You mean the restaurant is further out . MR . SCHWAB : Further out . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: So you would say, Stewart, there is some prac- tical difficulties, what about special conditions, which make compliance with regulations impossible? MR . SCHWAB : I guess I ' m not yet aware how that differs from practical difficulties . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well., is .this,, in a sense., an unusual case? Is the property, in this instance, somehow . . . . MR . SCHWAB : If they had for-seen it - if they had forseen it, 83 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 84 there is plenty of room on this property to have a green house . MS . JOHNSON: But the special conditions mean that this property in relation to similar properties - it has to have special conditions - I don' t see where it does, in this instance . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I don' t either, but I ' m asking . SECRETARY HOARD : Except that the right-of-way does bulge out there . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Unlike any other- place on the turnpike? SECRETARY HOARD: It may not be unlike any other but unlike many . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Unlike many - but we don' t know how many . MR . BOOTH: How old is this building? MR . SCHWAB : Looks like including the restaurant next door . SECRETARY HOARD : This was built in about 77 - 78 somewhere in there . MR . BOOTH : And who built it? SECRETARY HOARD : Wendy ' s , MR . BOOTH : Wendy ' s built this structure? SECRETARY HOARD : It was built for them . . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Are we getting closer to a motion? Is it at all useful to reflect on what the Planning and Development Board has said? MR . SCHWAB : I think they are fairly wrong about the traffic - visibility - if I understand, as you pull out from Wendy' s it is a little harder- to see what is going on - I think that is clearly wrong - even with ten feet closer . It is not the visibility problems that existing rather than - it is not right up on the 84 ------------ BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 85 road . MS . FARRELL : Stewart, are you getting close to a motion? MR . SCHWAB : Goes anyone care about ten feet versus five feet? or eight feet? MR . BOOTH: I guess my problem is is that we have a number of businesses that are asking,, as this one is, not just for a vari- ance but to completely remove the requirement . This is a build- ing that was built recently by a sophisticated corporation, ex- pansion was something ( unintelligible) recently for-seeable future and that is the problem I am having - they are not just asking for a variance, they are asking to do away completely with the front yard. I realize there is a bigger yard., in essence, out to the street but that is because the public has a right-of-way . MS . FARRELL : (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to be up to the line to have visibility for- the (unintelligible) green house . . . I agree, it is kind of strange to take away the whole required front yard . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Are we coming any closer ? We seem to be coming closer, inch by inch . MR . SCHWAB : Would you be happy - not happy but satisfied with five feet which does not entirely eliminate the front yard? Half the front yard? MR . BOOTH : What do you think? MR . SCHWAB : I tend to agree with everything that has been said . MR . BOOTH ' You are no help at all . MR . SCHWAB : You know, I can see every business on Elmira Road asking to come up to the line . 85 t y BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 86 MR . BOOTH: They built at the line - up to the property line . MS . FARRELL : If five feet isn ' t the issue (unintelligible) . . MR . BOOTH : Well the testimony is that its increased visiblity that they want, not . . . . MS . JOHNSON: Maybe I ' m wrong but I heard the testimony to say that - was it anything less then eight feet is not worth it? Or no, or was it, maybe we should ask? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: What was that? MS . JOHNSON. Is it true that the testimony said anything less than eight feet wasn' t worth - or was it five feet - I don ' t know, I can ' t remember . MR . SCHWAB : I think it was - he did say that, but then he did say later he had a five foot plan also - I think both statements were made . I continue to agree with everything that has been said . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Do I hear a motion? MR . SCHWAB : This is the hardest one tonight, I don' t want to make a motion on this . 86 BZA MINUTES 4/1/85 PAGE : 87 DECISION ON APPEAL NO. 1615 326 ELMIRA ROAD The Hoard of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of Wendy ' s International for an area variance to permit the construction of an addition to the front of the existing restaurant at 326 Elmira Road . The decision of the Board was as follows : CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I move that the Board deny the request for an area variance in appeal number 1615 . MS . JOHNSON: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The proposed addition would create a deficiency as big as the required front yard . 2) The practical difficulties and special conditions are self imposed and could have been anticipated . VOTE : 4 YES; 1 NO; 1 ABSENT DENIED 87 _ 87 _ I , BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY THAT I took the minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York, in the matters of Appeals numbered 1605, on April 1 , 1985 1610, 1611 , 1612, 1613, 1614, and 1615/in the Common Council Chambers, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the action taken of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability. Barbara C. Ruane Recording Secretary Sworn to before me this /7 day of 1985 —� Notary Public JEAN J. HANKINSON NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF NEW YORK No. 55-16,50800 QUALIFIED IN TOMPKINS COUNTY MY COC1.'!SS10N EXPIRES MARCH 30,19.-Ll