Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1985-05-06 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK May 6, 1985 Page APPEAL NO. 1616 DAVID GARDNER 3 318-20 PLEASANT STREET APPEAL NO. 1616 DISCUSSION 7 APPEAL NO. 1616 DECISION 8 APPEAL NO. 1617 WILLIAM LOWER 9 114 HIGHLAND PLACE APPEAL NO. 1617 DECISION 17 APPEAL NO. 1618 DAISY KIRKPATRICK 19 106 WASHINGTON STREET APPEAL NO. 1618 DISCUSSION 22 APPEAL NO. 1618 DECISION 23 APPEAL NO. 1619 JASON FANE 24 115-21 DRYDEN ROAD APPEAL NO. 1619 DISCUSSION 37 APPEAL NO. 1619 DECISION 42 APPEAL NO. 1620 LOUIS & CAROLYN A. FABI 43 106 SHORT STREET APPEAL NO. 1620 DISCUSSION 51 APPEAL NO. 1620 DECISION 54 E APPEAL NO. 1621 MARK WALDO HAAG (POSTPONED) 520 EAST BUFFALO STREET APPEAL NO. 1622 JAMES IACOVELLI 56 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET APPEAL NO. 1622 MOTION & DISCUSSION 61 VOTE 1622a 65 " VOTE 1622b 67 BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE� 1 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEN YORK MAY 6, 1985 CHAIRMAN TOMLAM: I ' d like to call to order the May 69 1985 meeting of the City of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals^ The Board operates under the provisions of the Ithaca City Charter " the Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and the Ithaca Sign Ordinance and the Board ' s own Roles and Re8olations^ Members of the Board who are present tonight include*# MR* CHARLES WEAVER MS* TRACY FARRELL MR* RICHARD BOOTH MR, STEWART SCHWAB MS, HELEN JOHNSON MR* MICHAEL TOMLAN, CHAIRMAN MR. THOMAS HOARD" SECRETARY TO THE BOARD AND BUILDING COMMISSIONER | MS. BARBARA RUANE, RECORDING SECRETARY The Board will hear each case in the order listed in the agendom^ / First we will hear from the appellant and ask that he or she pre- . sent the argument 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 ap- ' ` plication, followed by those who are opposed to the application^ ' . I should note here that the Board considers interested parties to be persons who own property within two hundred feet of the prop- erty in question or who live or work within two hundred feet of that property. Thos the Board will not hear testimony from per- sons who do not meet the definition of an interested party, ` While we do not adhere to the strict roles of evidence, we do ^ / BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE4. 2 consider this a quasi-judicial proceeding and we base our deci- sions on the record^ The record consists of the application ma- terials filed with the Building Department, correspondence relat- ing to the cases as received by the Building Department, the . Planning and Development Board ' s findings and recommendations, where there are any, and the record of tonight' s hearing. Since a record is being made of this hearing, it is essential that any- one who wants to be heard come forward and speak directly into the microphones, on the other side from me here, into the micro- phones, so that the tape recorder can pick it op and everyone in the room, likewise, can hear . Extraneous comments from the audi- ence 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 case and not comment on aspects that are beyond the jurisdiction of this Board. After everyone has been heard on a given case, the hear- ing on that case will be closed and the Board will deliberate and reach a decision, Once the hearing is closed, no further testi- ' mouy will be taken and the audience is requested to refrain from commenting during the deliberations~ It takes four votes to ap- prove a motion to grant or deny a variance or a special permit~ ^ In rare cases where there is a tie vote the variance or special . permit is automatically denied, Are there any questions out there about our procedure? If not then we can proceed to our first case, ` ___ '' '- ----------- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 3 SECRETARY HOARD� The first case tonight is APPEAL NO. 1616 318-20 PLEASANT STREET Appeal of David Gardner for an area variance for deficient front yard and side yard setbacks under Section 30.25, Columns 11 and 13 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the addition of a deck to the rear of the two-family dwelling at 318-320 Pleasant Street, The property is located in an R3a (residential , multiple dwelling) Use District ' in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Sections 30^49 and 30^57 the appellant most first obtain an area variance for the listed de- ficiencies before a building permit or Certifi- cate of Occupancy can be issued for construction of the proposed deck. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'* Please begin with identification and where you - live, for the record again* MR. GARQNER'+ My name is David Gardner , I live at 318-320 Pleasant Street~ I would like to try to clean op 318-320 Pleasant, the inside and oot^ I ' d like to add a deck on the back to get a better view of Cayuga Lake, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN4+ Well let me try to just move things along here ' a little bit^ You ' ve contacted the neighbors? MR . GARDNER'4 Yes I have^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN++ Did you Set any feedback? MR. CARDNER*# No I haven ' t^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN++ Everyone was quiet? MR~ GARDNER'# Nobody said anythin8^ I came to the Planning and Development meeting a couple of weeks ago (unintelligible) CHAIRMAN TOMLAN** Questions from other people on the Board? MR^ NEAVER*+ I have a question if Z may^ The little addition to the rear of the main building framer will that remain? ' ~ - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*. 4 MR, CARDNER'+ Not I' m going to rip it off. It ' s a shed that was just thrown op and tacked on to the back of the house, MR. HEAVER'# So the dimensions of the proposed structure will be against the building - extend only the ten feet from the - was it not ten feet ^ ^ ^? MR~ GARDNER'+ I think actually I had intimated that it would be about six by thirty going along the entire rear of the building~ That however has recently been renegotiated a little bit, I have Ken Vinebor8 as an architect and he suggested another possibility so I' m only going to 8o half way across the back and perhaps ' ^ eight foot or something like that, MR, WEAVER*+ But regardless, the addition will be removed? MR. GARDNER*+ Yes it will ^ - CHAIRMAN TOMLAN+* Perhaps you might say a word or two about what , Ken has suggested so that we know exactly what we are dealing with. I mean" on the drawing that you have indicated here is different than what you are so88estinS° MR* CARDNER+* Right^ It was just tonight that I went to see him as he is drawing me some plans for the interior and he is trying ' to improve both sides of the split duplex and just make them ' nicer apartments on both sides, They are pretty ratty on the ' inside and incorporate two apartments that were shot down (unin- telligible) at least on one side anyway. So with the deck it ' would be - the deck would probably come out fifteen feet across ' the back right where the shed is now and it would no longer - the ` shed is about five feet off the back of the hoose, I propose to BZA MINUTES 5/8/85 PACE.* 5 make the deck about eight feet off the back of the hoose, so it ' - would be about eight by fifteen, MR, BOOTH** Your diagram shows a shed near the back of the property - you are talking about a different shed? MR* CARDNER** I am* That also actually I would like to Set rid of but yes, this is the one tacked on to the back of the house, it is just ^ ^ , catches water . MR, BQOTH*# How many units, two units in that hoose? MR* GARDNER++ There are two units - there were four years ago. MR, BOOTH� I take it from what you submitted that while the hoose has some existing deficiencies in terms of setbacks, this will not aggravate any of them? MR^ CARDNER*+ The deck? MR^ BOOTH'+ The deck will not aggravate any of them? - - - MR, GARDNER*# No . Its basically just ripping off what is there and replacing it with a nicer deck - pretty much the same size , MR~ WEAVER** I ' d like to clarify that if I may. Will the deck extend to the eastern edge of the hoose? MR. GARDNER** To the eastern edge of the hoose - as does the . shed, yes, ^ MR* NEAVER'# Richard I read that to mean that it will extend to a very minor degree the eastern boundary of the nonconforming east end of the hoose, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN+4 In other words you are creating a little bit, ^ , MR, WEAVER** A little bit but he is saying now an estimated eight feet instead of six but it will continue the dimensions plus BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 6 more^ MR, BOOTH** But it won ' t extend any closer to the property line will it? MS* FARRELL� On the property line. , , ^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*4 Closer , but it is already deficient. , , MR~ BOOTH� No, I understand that, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN� Any further questions? Stewart? Helen? MS, JOHNSQN� No. MR~ SCHWAB'* No~ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'* Thank you David. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in support of this application? (no one) Is there anyone then who would like to speak in opposition to this , variance? (no one) ` BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 P#GE� 7 - DISCUSSION - APPEAL NO. 1616 318-320 PLEASANT STREET CHAIRMAN TQMLAN*4 I would assume that the variance is - as we have shown it as being six by thirty has now been changed to � eight by fifteen? For those of you to whom it would make a difference. MR, BOOTH** Is that right Tum? SECRETARY HOARD44 That' s what was presented here tonight. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*# That being adifference of sixty square feet* MS^ FARRELL� Smaller , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Smaller , right. As opposed to the original one hundred eighty, which would be the six by thirty, so it is a bit smaller than what was originally suggested, ` _ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE4* 8 DECISION - APPEAL NO* 1616 318-20 PLEASANT STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of David ^ Gardner for an area variance for deficient front yard and side yard setbacks under Section 30^25" Columns 11 and 13 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the addition of a deck to the rear of the two-family dwelling at 318-320 Pleasant Street. MS~ FARRELL** I move that the board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1616^ MR. WEAVER*. I second the motion ,, FINDINGS OF FACT** 1 ) The proposed changes would only exacerbate the present side yard deficiency by approximately two (2 ' ) feet° which is relatively minor ~ ` 2) Practical difficulties have been shown by the applicant in meeting the requirements of the present front and side yard deficiencies which could only be solved by moving the boildinS^ 3) The proposed changes would appear to maintain the character of the neighborhood* VOTE** 6 YES; 0 NO GRANTED � � | , � ` ` _ � BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*. 9 SECRETARY HDARD'+ The next appeal is APPEAL NO, 1617 - 114 HIGHLAND PLACE Appeal of William Lower for an area variance for deficient lot width and deficient side - yard setback under Section 30,251, Columns 7 and 13 of the Zoning Ordinancer to permit a ' one-story addition to the rear of the multi- ple dwelling at 114 Highland Place* The property is located in an R-3a (residential, multiple dwelling) Use District, in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Sec- tions 30.49 and 30^57 the appellant most first obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or Cer- tificate of Occupancy can be issued for the addition. MR. GALBRAITH*+ Good evening ladies and gentlemen, my name is Dirk Calbraithr I ' m an attorney, I have professional offices at 308 N. Tioga Street in Ithaca, and I represent the applicant on this appeal , Mr ~ William Lower ° The property in question, 114 Highland Place, is presently a multiple residence in a zone that � permits multiple residence use* Mr ^ Lower seeks to rehabilitate ' the basement apartment to provide a somewhat larger living space � for the tenants with the same number of bedrooms that presently exist. There are two bedrooms in the downstairs apartment, Mr , Lower described those as being rather small and dinSy^ The apartment itself is rather unattractive and a hardship which Mr . Lower faces is that in the rental market in ColleSetown" with a number of large new apartment buildings going op, offering first class apartment life for tenants - in order to stay competitive | in that market, Mr . Lower most keep his properties op and keep ' the apartments which he has in first class, attractive° condi- . ` ` __ . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*+ 10 tion, We have submitted a set of - a survey map showing the lo- cation of the proposed addition* Actually we have described that as being fourteen by thirty-six feet - in actuality it would be ` approximately thirteen by thirty-three feet and it woold° in ef- fectr move the bedrooms back out into the proposed addition and at the same time enable Mr , Lower to enlarge the living room and enlarge the kitchen, The deficiencies which require a variance are two - one of them, and most noticable I think, is the street fronta3e^ Although this is - I think - a rather large lott be- cause of its peculiar shape, it only has approximately twenty- four feet of frontage on Highland Place. Howevery there is ade- quate access to the property and adequate on-site parking which does not need to be varianced. The second deficiency arises be- cause one corner of the building is approximately three feet from the property line and a five foot setback is reqwired. Neither of these deficiencies would be increased by the grant of the pro- posed variance. What Mr ^ Lower is attempting to do is upgrade this property° we would not be increasing the density in terms of � the number of bedrooms or the number of occupants and we would like to request your consideration for this variance application^ � ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*+ Questions? ' ' . MR. WEAVER++ I have a question about your statement about not . increasing the occupancy^ If you were to have this addition, is ' it not so that you could legally occupy those spaces with more people? . MR, LONER** My feeling is that this Board has the power to - I ' ' , _ ___ _ _ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 11 may be wrong - to issue this variance with a restriction, Now with the size of the bedrooms - with what we have now we can rent this to three people. I have no intentions of renting it to any more than three people and I ' m perfectly agreeable to you restricting it to that use - it won ' t be rented to any more than that and probably won ' t be rented to that many. MR^ AEAVER'# In other words you are inviting a variance with a conditional? MR. LOHER'# Absolutely. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN** Further questions? MR^ BOOTH'* How old is this building? MR, LOAER*+ Well it is probably - 1930' s - probably fifty years old. Fifty to sixty. MR° BOOTH++ Are you doing other renovations in it to upgrade this property? MR, LOAER'o Well we have done other renovations and I intend to do an excessive - of the addition here - you can see where I am going to enlarge the bathroom and we are going to upgrade tremen- dously - we are going to paint the outside of the building this year too^ It is rather ondesireable looking on the outside, ' to answer your question, we have done a lot of work on this prop- erty* It is very difficult to rent basement apartments and if ' they aren ' t really good basement apartments - first of all when someone calls and you tell them you have a basement . ' apartment - eighty percent of them don ' t even want to look at it. _ And then if you can convince them to look at it, it better not be _ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE: 12 a dingy apartment like we have here because you are really ` handicapped. MR. BOOTH*+ Is the apartment rented now for this academic year? MR. L0NER*+ I think it has been, I think we sacrificed it - that ` was part of the reason for my motivation here to do something about it - I am usually not in the habit of having to give my apartments away . MR * BOOTH*+ What is the rent? MR^ LOWER'+ How much is the rent? I couldn ' t tell you that - as a matter of fact, I couldn ' t tell you for sure but I think it was rented at a sacrifice^ He do have a couple of apartments that way^ MS^ FARRELL'+ What would be the non-sacrifice rent on the apartment? Like if you had rented it at what you wanted to, what would it be? MR. LOWER++ When it is done, what would I get, you mean? MS^ FARRELL** No, I mean, now - the way it is~ MR* LONER** Well for a two-bedroom apartment we would normally get about four seventy-five a month, A sacrifice price, in my opinion, would be about two seventy-fiver three hundred, That would include all of the utilities, by the way. That would be on � � a ten mouth leaser not a twelve^ � MR^ SCHWA8*# If the variance is granted without the restriction ' .that you are suggesting, would there have to be more parking? ' / MR. LOWER44. I don ' t know, I would have to ask Tom. ^ MR^ SCHNAB++ Because right now, six is required and you have six i � � - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*' 13 SECRETARY HOARD'* There would be no change in the requirement because he is trading two bedrooms for two bedrooms. MR* LONER'* But if we pot more People in it than what we are permitted now, would there have to be an extra parking place? . SECRETARY HOARD*# No it would be based on the number of bedrooms, MR~ LONER'+ He could provide more parking anyhow, there^ I won ' t be doing thatp and I have no desire to increase the number of people in there and that is why I ' m more than glad to have you pot restrictions on the variance^ MR^ NEAVER'+ Clarifying question with the Commissioner , if I may, please* Using the maximum capability of the Housing Code, would the proposed addition increase the potential occupancy by more than one? Or shall I assume that the living room could legally ' � be used - the proposed living room - could legally be used for a bedroom and that we could have two - four - six» legally? I ' m � trying to compare the present situation with the proposed, with- � ^ oot a limited variance ^ ' SECRETARY HOARD'* The two new bedrooms would be - they are just ! ` shy of being large enough for three each so they would not - the maximum they could have in that is two each. The existing . situation - it is a pretty big - the existing living room, if ' that were used for a bedroom - it is pretty big, so - I would see a net increase if you are allowed to have two per new bedroom, MR. NEAVER+# Part of my question was - not to be mischievous ^ but was intended to also take a look at the bedroom that is next . . to the boiler room, south - aren ' t we down to - is it one hundred ` ' __ BZA MINUTES 5/6185 PAGE*' 14 and twenty feet for a SECRETARY HOARD'* One hundred and twenty for two People and eighty for one. MR. WEAVER*' Eightyr so we have a single: if they sleep in the study. MR. LOWER'* Could I add one thing? This study really is an illegal room. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'* No exterior ventilation. MR. WEAVER** Nice to hear you say information of that sort. MR. LOWER** Well thank. your Tom might verify that. SECRETARY HOARD** It has a variance from the Housing Board of Review but once he changes this apartment then - when you change apartmentsy Housing Board variances are lost. He will be giving up that room as a bedroom. MR. LOWER** The reason I said that is the window is very high and it would be very difficult to get out. MR. BOOTH: What is the total number of beds in this house? MR. LOWER** The whole house? Ohr I couldn ' t tell you that - there is four apartments there. MR. BOOTH** You can ' t tell us that? MR. LOWER*' No I. . . SECRETARY HOARD** He owns a lot of property. MR. GALBRAITH** Your best estimate? MR. LOWER** Let ' s see - three and four is seven - eleven - I would say thirteen or fourteen. I am going by the number of bed- rooms and rarely do we ever have two people in a bedroom. I BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE#' 15 might add that this additionr in my opinion, adds to the fire safety factor somewhat, in that it provides a pretty easily ac- cessible drop to the ground here from the back end of the hoose which is pretty high, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ On the other side of the question, though Bill , ' wouldn ' t you agree that it would be more difficult for any apparatus to make use of that back yard - when the back yard wasn ' t there and, in fact, ^ ^ MR, LONER*+ It is impossible to use that back yard anyhowr for any apparatus which would have to go on wheels or anything like that - not for fireman with a hose - no because you have plenty of space in back of the addition, after the addition is on^ It ` is just that this roof will be - not flat or close to flat and on the second and third floor in the back of this house, there is no access to get out as far as fire is concerned* It is not re- quired because there is a fire escape in the front and this will | have a cinder block wall between the addition and the house � which means that if the hoose caught fire underneath, it wouldn ' t � � born this roof off^ Am I right Tom? | | SECRETARY HOARD** Right. ` MR. LOWER+# And I think this does provide somewhat an additional . means of getting oot^ ^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN+f Further questions? SECRETARYHOARD** Your worksheetsr by the way, should show that ' Column 13 - I got carried away with writing O^K^ , I Suess - Column 13 is the second one that should be deficient^ The one ' __ - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAQE� 16 ' with zero, MR, SCHWAB** As I understand it, you said, Dirk, that this side yard is within - this corner is within three feet of the lot line and it requires five? MR^ GALBRAITH*# That is correct. MR, SCHNAB'+ What we have on our charts is zero^ ^ SECRETARY HOARD** That is what our map showed bot~ ^ ^ MR~ LOWER++ Thirty-eight inches to be exact, MR, CALBRAITH*# This is a fairly recent survey and I think it scales off at about three feet^ MR, HEAVER� Simply - it is deficient. MR^ BOOTH� Tom, neither of those deficiencies are going to be ' . increased by this? SECRETARY HOARD'* That ' s right, / CHAIRMAN TOMLAN� Further thoughts - questions? Thank you Dirk, . ' | Bill ^ Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of ' the granting of this variance? (no one) Is there anyone out � / there who would like to speak in opposition to the granting of ' this variance? (no one) ' ' BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*, 17 DECISION ON APPEAL NO* 1617 114 HIGHLAND PLACE The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of William Lower for an area variance for deficient lot width and deficient side yard setback to permit a one-story addition to the rear of the multiple dwelling at 114 Highland Place~ The decision of the Board was as follows'* MR* WEAVER*. I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1617 with the ' following conditions*. ' 1 ) that the granting of this variance is limited and the apartment not be occupied by more than three (3) persons; and 2) that the 9 ' 8" x 8 ' 6" bedroom be discontinued permanently as a bedroom~ MS, FARRELL*+ I second the motion, FINDINGS OF FACT** 1 ) There are practical difficulties in complying with the Ordinance that would require either demolition and ' reconstruction or moving the building in order to conform with setback requirements, ' 2) The proposed addition will improve the living accommodations ` ` for the occupants of the subject apartment, 3) The addition will not in fact detract from the aesthetics of the neighborhood~ 4) The proposed addition does not exacerbate the existing side ' yard deficiencies. -'~- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE: 18 VOTE: b YES; q NO GRANTED N/CONDITIONS BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 19 SECRETARY HOARD'* The next case is APPEAL NO, 1618 106 WASHINGTON STREET Appeal of Daisy Kirkpatrick for a Special Permit under Section 30.26 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the accessory use of the property at 106 Washington Street for a home occupation* The property is located in an R2b (residential , one- and two-family dwellings) Use District, in which the proposed use of handweavin8 of items for sale requires a special permit from the Board of Zoning . Appeals. ' MS, KIRKPATRICK** My name is Daisy Kirkpatrick and I live at 106 Washington Street, I am here to ask the Board to grant me a special permit so that I may pursue my (unintelligible) in my home^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAM++ You have assumedly circulated some sort of / notice or contacted the neighbors? � MS. KIRKPATRICK*# Yes I contacted the neighbors* ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*# And there is , ^ ^ MS* KIRKPATRICK** I received two phone calls the gist ofwhich . was essentially, what on earth do you have to go through this for ' in order to be a weaver , As a matter of fact, one lady wanted me to teach her daughter - there was no negative feedback. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN! Questions from members of the Board? MR~ BOOTH'* Where do you do your weaving now? MS, KIRKPATRICK*# I have a loom in my home - I ' m not really geared up to be full production, yet, I have been remodelling and doing some work in the hoose and I wanted to - I bought the ' house because there was room for a studio - it wasn' t until after the Building Inspector started coming around that he let me know - ^^ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 20 ' that I needed a permit to be a weaver in the area* So, I just ` want to make sore that this is O^K^ - otherwise I will have to rent studio space somewhere else, MS^ FARRELL'# Will you be selling things from that location? ^ MS, NIRKPATRICK++ Not primarily, If you are a retail store you ' can ' t weave, you are a store keeper , If you are a weaver you ' have to not do a lot of selling from your home^ But I do commis- . sion pieces and those I would have people come to my home and I ' would be teaching - again, not a lot - teaching, again is minor . but once in a while I would take a student. ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN+0 Further questions? i MR. SCHWAB: Do you have parking in your driveway - one car . garage? � MS. KIRKPATRICK++ Yes, right. There is room for a car or two � behind my car in the driveway, � � MR" 8OOTH'# Is parking allowed on your side of the street? MS+ KIRKPATRICK'* Yes there is parking on both sides of Washington Street* MR, BOOTH** On both sides, CHAIRMAN T8MLAN** Any further questions? Thank you* Is there ' anyone else who would like to speak for granting the permit? (no ' one) Is there anyone out there who would like to speak in opposition to granting the permit? (no one) SECRETARY H0ARD'+ We do have a letter to the City. Building De- partment from Alice G. Dorn of 110 Washington Street, *Gentle- men'* As the owner of property adjoining that of Daisy Kirkpat- _ _ ` BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*# 21 ^ rick this is to advise you that I have no objection whatever to the issuance to her of a special permit to engage in the home ' occupation described above and in the Notice of Appeal received by me on April 18th, We are pleased to have her in the neighbor- hood and hope the Board of Planning and Development and the Board of Zoning Appeals will approve her request for a special permit^ ' Very truly yours, /s/ Alice G. Dorn" ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'* Thank you~ In that regard, of course, the Planning and Development Board minutes show that they were in ' favor - there was a vote 6 - O on April 23rd - you all received ^ copies. Do I hear a motion? . . ` ` ` � / � ` - ` BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*+ 22 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO* 1618 106 WASHINGTON STREET MR. BOOTH*+ Did you ask for opponents? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*+ Yes a long time ago, . MR. BOOTH'* Tom, I have a question. Notice that you read says that this is just for a special permit. SECRETARY HOARD** Right. MR* BOOTH** There is no variance at all even though there is a - . deficiency? . SECRETARY HQARD*+ No, it is an accessory use^ . MS° FARRELL� (unintelligible) . SECRETARY HQARD++ Yes a special permit goes with that person and ` � that ose, not with the property^ ` / \ | -- - — BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 23 ' DECISION ON APPEAL NO, 1618 106 WASHINGTON STREET ' The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Daisy ' Kirkpatrick for a Special Permit under Section 30~26 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the accessory use of the property at 106 Washington Street for a home occupation. The decision of the Board was as follows'* MR* BOOTH** I move that the Board grant the request for a . Special Permit in appeal number 1618^ MR. SCHWAB** I second the motion. ' FINDINGS OF FACT** ' 1 ) The proposed use is consistent with the character of the present structure and the character of the neighborhood* . 2) The proposed use will not adversely impact any development on ' any adjacent or nearby lands per Section 30,26^ � VOTE*+ 6 YES; 0 NO GRANTED ' ` � ` ` ` ` ` ' , ` ^ ^ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE4* 24 SECRETARY HOARD*# The next appeal is APPEAL NO. 1619 - 115-121 DRYDEN ROAD ' Appeal of Jason Fane for an area variance for deficient off-street parking and for lot coverage exceeding the maximum permitted, under Section ' 30^25r Columns 4 and 10 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the issuance of a Certificate of Occu- pancy for the one story building containing a restaurant and retail stores at 115-21 Dryden Road~ The property is located in a B2a (busi- ness) Use District in which the proposed and ex- isting uses are permitted; however under Sections 30.49 and 30,57 the appellant most first obtain ' an area variance for the listed deficiencies be- fore a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the property~ MR. FANE*# My name is Jason Fane, I ' m the appellant in this case - and I ' m the owner of the building and I also built the building~ � The history is that after I acquired the lot I came before the Board of Zoning Appeals and applied for a variance to build the retail building that is now there. That variance was approved and based on that variance I had my architect design the building - it was one hundred percent in compliance with what was approved to build, The architect designed the building and a building permit was issued to build the building and then work was con- tracted out and the contractors built the building in accordance ' with the plans for which the permit was issued* Following con- struction - during construction the work was inspected and all . the work was done in accordance with the plans for which the building permit was issued and also in accordance with the code ` ' and the construction was approved as such by the Building Depart- ment^ We then proceeded o d d t rent most of the stores in the build- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 25 ing and some of the stores took occupancy directly and some of ' the stores wanted to do work on their spaces before opening for business - particularly the eastern two stores of the building were erected by and established - were called the Greek Hoose which is a restaurant and they filed a plan and a building permit was issued for them to construct their restaurant which I under- stand - I can ' t guarantee - but I think they spent about one hun- dred and twenty thousand dollars to open that establishment, And . ' their work was inspected and their work was approved and their ' restaurant was also inspected and approved by the Health Depart- ' ~ . ` ment^ Following this I was told I could not get a Certificate of ' Occupancy on the building because I had a restaurant - because � there was a restaurant in the building there was a different par- . king requirement. Now this pot me in a situation where I did ' ` everything that - I thought I was one hundred percent in compli- ance with all of the roles and codes and ordinances, and was - I ` � rented only to people for legal uses -tenants were advised for / building permits - were given a permit -this tenant I really have no control over - then I am told that I am not in compliance. This has been a situation that without a Certificate of Occupancy it is difficult to lease other vacancies as they may occur and ' there is a risk that additional tenants may not be able to get a ' building permit for work they might seek to do to properly pursue ' their businesses - it makes it difficult to mortgage the property and it can make it difficult to sell the property because some attorneys who represent purchasers feel that a building should ^ _ 0ZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE4+ 26 ' have a C,O^ and there is the question of whether I produce the proper assessed value of the property if the building can ' t be . legally used* A few weeks ago I went to see Mr * Hoard in his ' office about a situation that I had and he recommended that I file this appeal which I make now and, in fact, he filled out the ' chart form - he filled that out in his handwriting, I would like ' to point out that in the location of this building - this build- ing is right in the very heart of CoIle8etown. It is directly opposite the location where I understand the City is about to build a major parking ramp - I think it is going to be in the ' vicinity of about one hundred fifty, two hundred car spaces, ' ` They changed the size so I am not sore exactly what it is, but . this, I think is a matter of public record - it is a major pro- ` ` ject^ It ' s directly across the street from where Cornell Univer- sity, I think, is about to spend seventeen million dollars build- ing the Performing Arts Center and about where the City has ^ changed 62b for Mr . Travis where I understand he is going to , build additional retail stores and I think sixty or eighty apart- ` , ments^ Much of the area surrounding my parcel has the B2b zone . and in the B2b zone there is no parking requirement whatsoever ' and this is a isolated pocket of 62a which has a more stringent requirement which I don ' t really understand why it is different ` from the surrounding area° It is my understanding that the ' City ' s plan is that following - when they build this parking ramp � that they intend to assess the nearby property owners, including me, for the cost of constructing this ramp and I feel that it is ��� BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 27 a gross injustice on the one hand to be required to pay for this ramp and on the other hand not to be able to use it for parking ' for property that is directly across the street^ I think that ` is my appeal ^ . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ Any questions from the members of the Board?' MS. FARRELL'# Do you have any parking associated with the property right now? MR, FANE'+ Yes I have the ten spaces which were required in the application that I made for the Building Department and I . continue to have those spaces. ' MR. HEAVER'# Where are they located? � MR. FANE't Two of them are on the site and the balance of them ' ` are behind the building I have on Eddy Street, that ' s about � three hundred feet away^ . MR~ NEAVER'+ Could you be more specific? Where on Eddy Street? ' MR, FANE*+ The address of that building is 418-420 Eddy Street, and the spaces are behind that building, you enter them from ` ^ Williams Street^ MR~ BOOTH*# When you began describing your building you described it as a retail building. ' MR, FANE't That is correct. That is the only use of the . building, there is no residential in it, there is no office in ^ it, there is no manufacturing, there is really no other use of the building, just stores* ' MR. BOOTH** Well restaurants are dealt with, under the Zoning ' ` Ordinance different than retail establishments - in B2 zones° - - ' ' ` BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 28 . MR, FANE*f I don ' t think there is a mistake in the B2b zone - I ' -- think in the B2a zone it is an issue in having to 8o with how many seats the restaurant has, but then a restaurant is a legal use for a B2a zone, I' m not an expert on this but that is my ' understanding and I know that Mr . Hoard will correct me if I ' m ^ wrong, I hope he will . ' � SECRETARY HOARD*+ They are both legal uses. MR. BOOTH++ I understand that^ As I read the B2 description, . restaurants are listed separately from retail stores . ' ' SECRETARY HOARD'* Yes because they have a different parking ' � requirement. That ' s where the problem is. ' i ' | MR^ BOOTH** Well , I guess that ' s what I am asking, because they | / � are listed and treated differently, because you built a retail i store, I don ' t understand why you didn' t understand that when you | ` leased this to a restaurant, the requirements would change? | | MR^ FANE'# Well , I understand the question that you are asking, ! | ) let me explain a little bit more about the process and how we � � deal with it, maybe this will clarify it. I have a vacant store and there is a list of legal uses, which in this case includes a restaurant and we have a sign advertising the space - other pro- motion to interest possible tenants in this space, In our lease it very specifically explains that it is the obligation of the tenant to comply with all the legal requirements attended to their business, which includes anything in terms of the code or ' of the zoning or any possible federal regulatory laws or state - . laws or the county health department or even laws which may not BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE44 29 be passed yet (unintelligible) and we don' t direct the tenant in the conduct of his business, we feel that the tenant knows his business, or should know his business better than we do and we would like to see the tenant succeed but the obligation is on the tenant in our lease, to comply with each and every and all kinds of laws of whatever nature* You see a landlord is not a police agency - he really has no mechanism for enforcing the law against the tenant. MR~ BOOTH** Tom, where are the specific requirements for restaurant parking? SECRETARY HOARD'* Column 4 - you mean as far as seating? MR. BOOTH*+ Oh I see, right* SECRETARY HDARD'# One space per five seats. And the way that works is that the Fire Department determines the occupancy of the restaurant - the occupancy determines the number of parking spaces that need to be provided, MR* BOOTW The problem with what you - I' m asking a question, but I guess I ' m stating this as an affirmative statement - what you said to os - your tenants are responsible for meeting the requirements - in terms of off-street parking requirements, you have a variance which is limited to the number of off-street sites is that correct? ' � MR. FANE'+ That is correct. MR* BOOTH** If you had rented your store, your building, to two - or three restaurants - each one of them would have needed substantially more off-street parking than your entire building ' . � \ `'- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*+ 30 was allocated, MR, FANE'O Well it has to do with the nature of the restaurant. You see the question is not whether or not it is a restaurant, but how many seats does the restaurant have? Now some restau- rants are primarily kitchen and take-out and they don ' t have seats so therefore might not even require any additional parking spaces, And what the restaurant operator does, the restaurant owner makes a plan of what his restaurant is going to be or any- one who is going to do any construction - then they take their plan to the Building Department and then, I assume the Building Department reviews all this and determines whether or not they are in compliance and if somebody has a proposal which° in any respect, not just parking, bot, I mean, even if its the wrong kind of fan or whateverr they 8o over this plan and they don ' t issue the permit unless they feel it is in compliance and then ' when the construction goes on, the inspectors inspect everything and they do not issue whatever they meed to get on with their ' work unless they are in compliance so that, therefore, it is not a question of a landlord doing it because we don ' t tell them how . many seats to have and if the tenant decides that he wants to take mut seats or change his operation, we are merely renting him space with the requirement that they use it in a legal way, MR~ SCHAAB*9 I guess all I hear you saying then is that this restaurant has violated the lease, You are saying the obligation is on the restaurant to comply with all laws which now include parking so, from your point of view, it is the restaurant, not ' ` ' . ��� _ LAZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE'. 31 your fault at all . I guess all I hear from all of this is that the restaurant is violating its lease with you. I guess that is sort of saying - so what? Somebody has got to come up with parking places. MR. FAME: Well I think that is a point to keep in mind - most of this area is a 82b zone in which there is no parking requirements at all and when you ' ve got twenty or thirty restaurants in Col- legetown and as near as I can - none of the others have any park- ing obligation whatsoever - so that setting aside the detail for which our tenant - I think this is something that should be ad- dressed - that this one restaurant would have parking require- ments and none of the others would have one - I really question whether it is good public policy for any reason to single out one restaurant with a requirement that none of the competitors have, Another point to be considered is the guy applies for a permit to build it - as far as I can tell - in accordance with the permit - should he - suppose I take your suggestion - perhaps I should seek to evict him for building a restaurant - I don ' t know that that would really be a constructive approach. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN** Well there might be another alternative and that is simply some sort of method by which the restaurant could be redesigned, I meant it is not necessary to evict him but certainly if the seating capacity is the question it could be: perhaps just as easy a walk.-in. Have you explored other alternatives? MR+ FAME: I discussed this with the Building Commissioner and he i f ' BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 32 ' suggested that I make this appeal . ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'4 Have you explored the alternatives though with your tenant? ' MR, FANE'* No I have not^ . MR* BOOTH*+ You say that this is the only restaurant that is in B2a, . MR° FANE*+ I think it is the only one in ColleSetown^ I could be wrong but that is my onderstanding^ ' MR, BOOTH'# It is certainly true though that a lot of other � property in Colle8etown is zoned B2a~ Is that not correct? MR* FANE++ There is some other property that is zoned 82a - most ` of it is, in fact, used only residential and there is no commercial establishments on it. I don' t have a zoning map in front of me but that is my recollection, MR^ AEAVER+* Nell , for clarification, it just seems to me that | the basis for granting a variance involves the individual proper- | � � ty not some land osea8e plan - we don ' t generally - modify that � � and it would seem to me that what you are talking about is diffi- culty of being zoned different than others - I would leave that to the legislature to iron ootv as they zone a lot at a time or a block at a time or less than a block in this sensitive area that leaves this Board with less than a clear direction as to what the Community land plan is^ But I don ' t think it shoves over on os the requirement - or the Board of Zoning Appeals, a requirement to be wiser than the legislature? so I ' m not particularly patient with listening to whether the zoning is fair or unfair - all ' ' . - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*# 33 things depending upon who is reviewing the document but it would ' seem to me that on the issue of whether in a 82 area, there ought to be some relief in anticipation of using public parking in place of privately required parking is something beyond - I hope - beyond the decision for this Board* - MR^ FANE*# There is another issue here. This restaurant was - given a building permit to build a restaorant^ I was not in- volved in that but the result was that I wind op with an unmar- ketable boildinS^ This is a tremendous hardship^ I don ' t under- stand what I ' ve done to (unintelligible) , I built the building in accordance with everything. I signed the lease for a legal use* The goy goes down and was given a building permit -builds in accordance to it and then I am told that I can ' t Set a C^O^ on the building" MR, WEAVER*' Well it would seem to me that both the person in the _ restaurant business and the person in the retail business in CoI- legetown ought to be particularly alert to the zoning require- ments they are subject to~ I ' m not interested in laying the blame, I ' m just saying that probably we could all get in a circle and take the responsibility for this but to say that someone who rents the building - with your relatively considerable experience is not alert to the fact that a place of assembly requires more off-street parking than a merchantile would and the problem of who should have been alertv either the tenant or you doesn ' t help me to make a decision on a solution* One solution that hasn ' t been mentioned here is requiring additional off-street parking --- — ---`- - -BZA MINUTES MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*# 34 and I would suggest that would be perfect for all concerned. That it would improve the value of your building and would main- tain your tenant and clear op the lease and would result in a C.Q, being issued. If that is the only deficiency that is being argued on your particular case^ MR. FANE*+ I don ' t know if it would be possible to require that _ _ many permanent parking spaces (unintelligible) MS, FARRELL*# Right now you have ten, right? And how many are required? SECRETARY HOARD** Twenty-six, MS^ FARRELL'+ Twenty-six and and we are talking about? SECRETARY HOARQ*# Sixteen MS^ FARRELL** Sixteen and then this other person had rented sixteen spaces in the area. ~ ~ MR^ FANE'+ He gave himself a one year lease, this Mr ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ Newmao^ SECRETARY HOARD'+ Norman. ' MR* FAME+* Norman, right. . MS~ JOHNSON'* Could you do thatr could you get, , , ' MR^ FANE*# Well I don ' t think there is any assurance that I could Set them on a long-term basis. That doesn ' t create additional parkinS^ MR. BOOTH*+ What doesn ' t? MR, FANE++ Leasing them. ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ Well neither does the variance on the other side of the question. BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*. 35 MR, BOOTH'# The total twenty-six applies to the restaurant and '^ ^ all the other units? SECRETARY HOARD'* The entire property^ MS^ J8HNSON'+ Assuming there continues to be only one restaurant of this size? ` SECRETARY HOARD'* On the condition that the rest of it would have to stay retail ^ MR, SCHNAB*# If and when this parking garage is -boilt, could it come from that on some sort of arrangement, the restaurant pays for the parking or something, or is that impossible? SECRETARY HOARD** The ruling has been that it is illegal to ` assign City parking spaces* Now, I ' m not going to guarantee that that is the way the City is going to handle that parking garage~ � CHAIRMAN TQMLAN*+ Further questions from members of the Board? MS^ FARRELL*+ You still have those additional sixteen spaces now? SECRETARY HOARD+* Yes through July, MS, FARRELL4+ July? . SECRETARY HOARD'# Yes, July. MR^ BQDTH'+ Jost as a matter of informationr because the parking ' ' . spaces have now been acquired, why haven' t you issued the Certificate of Occupancy now? Is it because you anticipate ' that^ . ` SECRETARY HOARD'+ He has one store under construction right now and what he is trying to do is - the problem is that, as I under- stand it, is with renting places when the prospective tenant . isn ' t sore what the game plan is going to be for the next year or ^ - - / ` � BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 36 ' ' so, if they are going to lose the Certificate of Occupancy if the parking is lost~ One of the things that happened during all of ' ` this is that the Common Council was talking about enacting the C-CD zoning in Colle8etoun and if they had done that the parking . requirement for Mr . Fane' s property would have dropped consider- ' ably^ He would have not had a problem in keeping it in compli- ` ance^ So that is why things kind of - when we talked with him - we would wait to see what happened* As I understand it, what ^ ` happened was that other neighbors op there - the proposed zoning would have covered both the B2a and the 82br it would have raised ` " the parking requirement for the B2b, which had no parking re- quirement, it would have lowered it for the B2a and the property ` owners in the B2b filed a petition of protest which meant that ^ under State law - that the Council had to have 8 to 2 majority i vote to pass the zoning change, They didn ' t get it. � ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN� Further questions from the members of the � ^ Board? Thank you Mr , Fane, Is there anyone else who would like ' to speak in favor of the granting of this variance? (no one) Is ' there anyone out there who would like to speak in opposition to granting this variance, If not, it ' s ours, ' i __ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 37 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO, 1619 115-21 DRY0EN ROAD MR. BQOTH*+ I think we ought to ask Tom some questions. I 3oess they center around, Tom, how was it that the restaurant lessee applied for a permit and had the permit granted without the problem having been recognized or had it been recognized, would that have offset the difficulty that Mr . Fane is now in? SECRETARY HOARD** If it had been recognized at the time - when Mr ^ Fane Sot his variance - his variance request said that he would provide the parking* When the Deputy Building Commissioner ~ ' / met with the restaurant owner - prospective restaurant owner - ` and #r . Dieterich looked at the file on it - it said that parking � would be providedv he didn ' t So any further than that, MR. BOOTH'+ He didn ' t ask about what number of spaces and size of the restaorant^ ~ , , SECRETARY HOARD** They did have some discussion on that and there was a figure arrived at. Subsequent to that the Fire Department went in there and raised the number of people or the occupancy from fifty-five to eighty-five, or something like that^ MS. FARRELL'# Is eighty-five the occupancy now? SECRETARY HOARD'# Yes, And that brought that requirement op accordingly, MS, FARRELL'# But even if it had been fifty-five originally, it . would have increased the parking* ~ , , ' SECRETARY HOARDt Yes, there would have been an increase. MR* BOOTH'+ And what was anticipated as a result of that increase? For fifty-five people? ____ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE.' 38 ' SECRETARY HOARD*+ That the property owner would provide the parking. MR, BOOTH*+ So the restaurant owner in a sense was saying, the property owner will provide whatever parking is necessary? SECRETARY HOARD*+ I don ' t know what the restaurant owner was saying, I wasn' t a party to that discussion, Bot, when I ' realized what had happened there and notified Mr , Fane - that was about the time that they were talking about rezoning so it looked like it wasn ' t going to be a problem. Whether something could . have been done to correct it at that point" I ' m not sore because the restaurant owner had begun construction, MR. BOOTH*+ Did Mr . Norman send os all a letter last summer? Did one of the tenants in this building send os a letter about parking problems? CHAIRMAN TOMLAM** Not to my knowledge. SECRETARY HGARD*# He may have, ' MR^ 0OOTH*+ I recall some knowledge about the problem^ - CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'4 In this building? MR, BOOTH+# In this particular building - last summer * Someone - ` I thought wrote a letter to the Board - not part of any appeal it was just - he wrote a letter to each of os, saying that this ' was a problem^ We never dealt with it formally, CHAIRMAN TOML##** Well there is probably no reason or no way in which we could have. ' ` SECRETARY HOARD** Z had hoped - as part of this process that this . appeal would 8o through the Planning Board^ It is interesting _ _' - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE'* 39 that they chose to deal with a home occupation and not this, which seems to be a much more significant planning issue. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN40 It is also a lot thornier . SECRETARY HOARD'* Because they would have a better idea of what the plans are - if there are any plans for rezoning* MS, FARRELL'* The problem with individual tenants obtaining leases for parking is that the building could So in and out of compliance, depending on which tenants stay - and if the parking gets renewed every year ~ I mean, it just makes it more " iffy" than if the owner of the building has the parking* SECRETARY HQARD*# Yes, MR. SCHNAB'# And the owner has to change the amount of parking depending on what tenants he has. MR. WEAVER'# Well this conversation about a lease doesn ' t stimu- late me to any great change of mind - whether the owner of the building or the tenant should provide that - that is a matter between them - but as far as the City is concerned - it is my understanding that there was a zoning variance granted to pot op _ - a merchantile building and by doing that, it wasn ' t a license to ' occupy it with a movie theater or a restaurant or some other oc- cupancy that would bring the requirement for additional off- street parking - so as far as this Board is concerned, we were - never approached with the potential , by the owner of the building - of other than a merchantile boildin8. However the present pre- dicament in which both the owner and the tenants are trying to � � conform with a difficult or impossible task - it just seems to me ! . ' -~- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*. 40 ' that the very fact of all the intention that College Avenue -or Colle8etown has received from a rather peculiar zoning pattern area - that to try to guess the planning and guess the legisla- tive intent - it seems to me a pretty hazardous occupation for a Board of Zoning Appeals* It goes beyond what I understand to be our char8e^ MR, SCHWAB*# I a8ree^ MR. WEAVER** It is not improper for the zoning officer to suggest to Mr ^ Fane that he exhaust this as one avenue of remedy, but failing that, it would seem that there is a potential for a couple of remedies - one is to appeal directly to Common Council ^ which has listened to other predicaments of commercial develop- ment in this area and also in ColleSetown - so that they may be encouraged to use the same fine tuning they have used on these other properties or failing that, have the building owner and the tenant try to solve their problem with some kind of additional off-street parking. Neither of these possibilities have been exhausted and to jump in there ahead of those possibilities seems to me to be inappropriate, CHAIRMAN TQMLAN41 Do I hear a motion for appeal number 1619? MR° BOOTH** I will make a motion* Let me preface my motion by making two comments* One, it appears to me that (unintelligible) � a meeting of what happened, happened, indicates that the Deputy Building Commissioner made, certainly an honest mistake, but a mistake that caused some difficulties in this thing and I suppose that is re8retable but I don ' t think it changes what the neces- ` -- ^ - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE: 41 sary outcome is. Secondly, this Board has heard before and I an, sure we are going to near it againy a great deal of concern about the spillover of Parking associated with uses in Collegetown - impacts felt by neighborhoods around Collegetown. --'~--` BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*. 42 DECISION - APPEAL NO, 1619 115-21 DRYDEN ROAD / The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of Jason Fane for an area variance for deficient off-street parking and for lot coverage to permit the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for ' the one story building containing a restaurant and retail stores - at 115-21 Dryden Road^ The decision of the Board was as follows! MR, BOOTH4* I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1619^ MR, SCHNAB*# I second the motion* FINDINGS OF FACT*. 1 ) This is a self-imposed difficulty that was clearly avoidable upon a reading of the clear language of the Zoning Ordinance and of the variance previously granted by this Board, 2) It appears that there may well be alternatives for solving the off-street parking requirements for this facility that have not been explored and exhausted by the parties involved. VOTE'* 6 YES; 0 NO DENIED ` ^ , _ _ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 43 SECRETARY HOARD** The next case is APPEAL NO. 1620 106 SHORT STREET Appeal of Louis and Carolyn A, Fabi for an area variance for a deficient sideyard under Section 30^25, Column 12 of the Zoning Ordinance° and a variance from the sideyard requirement of Sec- tion 35 ^4 of the Swimming Pool Ordinance, to permit the installation of an above-ground pool at 106 Short Street. The property is located in - an R-2b (residential , one- and two-family dwell- ing) Use District in which a family swimming pool is a permitted use; however , under Sections 30,49 and 30,57 of the Zoning Ordinance and the _ requirements of the Swimming Pool Ordinance, the appellants must first obtain variances for the listed deficiencies before a building permit can be issued for the pool installation, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*4 Will the appellant step forward please? Again beginning with identifying yourself and your address, MR, FABI** My name is Lou Fabi , I live at 106 Short Street and I was denied a building permit for whet we just discussed, I need a - I ' m shy five feet on one side property line and I need a � variance for that - for a deck and an eighteen foot round ` swimming pool . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ One of the questions I had in reviewing your statement and the reason for your appeal , is that - the questions I had resulted from your having said if the pool were centered on ' the lot there would be no view from the main house and yet I noted that in the rear , center and it really is smack dab in the ' center of your 1975 addition, there is a double glass door - some six foot high and I asked myself, well now he is saying there ' isn ' t any way in which one can watch the pool and yet there is. ` MR. FABI'+ What we meant by that was° if we were in the kitchen . ^ ` - - BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE*# 44 -there is a window right off the kitchen - now you can see the pool from the double - from the back room, of course, and another ` room - what I want for safety purposes - just to see the pool from the kitchen - I think I was misquoted. Jost from the kit- chen area, which has a window that would view the pool - even half the pool and if there was anything that fell in the pool you could see it ripple or something - if nobody was in the back -say we were having dinner - that is mostly what that was for ^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'# Another thought that occurred to mev I was won- dering just as a point of information - whether it had occurred to you - is if you moved the pool back further on the lot slight- ly - again within the tolerances of the permitted use -or permit- ted location - I was wondering whether you couldn ' t see it a lit- tle bit better in any event from the kitchen^ MR* FABI'* Welly not really, because the window - if it goes back any farther - I am still shy the feet, If Z - one side or the other - if I move it back, I' m okay, If I move it towards the center again - that is what you are saying~ , * CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*+ Yes, Back further on the lot but in the center ^ I was just wondering if you could see more of it by / virtue of the fact that there is not quite the angle that there would be close op^ MR* FABI*+ You probably would see it, yes^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN4+ Questions from other members of the Board? MR, FABI++ Excuse me - just to finish* To 8o out - if you see the diagram - you have a twenty-four by twenty-four deck. What � / � � / ' BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 45 we wanted was the pool coming right off the deck. If we went back any farther I' d have to take a loan at another bank to finish off the deck* CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*+ Okay. MR, BOOTH; So you are going to build the deck as well as the pool? MR, FABI*f Yes sir , MR~ B0OTH'# And the deck at its closest point to your south - ' property line would be how close? MR. FABI*# From the back room would be twenty-four feet by twenty-four ~ ^ ^ _ MR, BOOTH'* No, no* From the edge of the deck, ° ^ MR~ FABI*+ From the edge of the deck to ^ ^ ^ MR. BOOTH! The property line toward Franklin Street* MR, WEAVER'* One hundred and four . MR^ FABI*+ Franklin Street would be ^ . . MR~ BO8TH'# From the deck to the property lime " ^ ^ MR. FABI+# From the deck to the property line would be ten feet. That ' s where the end of the pool also is* What I need there is five - fifteen. MS~ FARRELL*+ Then how far is the pool from the other lot line? - MR* FABI++ It is seventeen actually. MS, FARRELL'* So it is seventeen on one side - you propose � seventeen on one side and ten on the other? MR. FABI'# Well for the whole thing is ten and there is seven / feet of deck - then there is the eighteen foot pool and then ` ^ ` BZA MINUTES 516/85 PAGE** 46 there is the ten on Franklin. So it goes ten► eighteen, seven and ten. Actually the whole back. lot. MR. BOOTH: Say that again. MR. FABI** Okay. Starting on Franklin Street. MR. BOOTH; Right - ten feet. MR. FABI** I need ten feet to the deck which is the end of the ipool . Eighteen feet - diameter of the Fool - then there is a seven foot, which is the deck and then from the deck to the Lincoln Street line there would be ten feet, approximately+ MR. BOOTH** So your 1975 addition is ten feet from that northern property line? Is this measurement ten feet? From the deck to that property line? MR. FABI** iso. From the deck to the property line will be ten feet. The 1975 addition is more - it ' s . . . MR. BOOTH** But this shows the deck and the 75 addition . . . MR. FABI** Okayr let ' s see here. . . I would say it is a good twenty feet from the 75 - on the back.. MR. BOOTH: Twenty feet? MR. FABI: I would say, well - it would be fifteen► roughly. MR . BOOTH: From where to where? MR. FABI: Well from the old - the back addition► right, that is what you are talking about? MR. BOOTH: YES. MR, FABI: To the property line on Franklin Street. MR. BOOTH: Is fifteen feet? MR. FABI: Fifteen - I imagine it goes up. . . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE: 47 MR. SCHWAB*+ You aren ' t talking about the property line to Franklin Street► you are talking about the other property line. MR. BOOTH: Yesy I' m talking about the . . . MR. FABI*+ On Short Street► towards Lincoln Street . . . MR. BOOTH*+ That ' s right. MR. FABI+* I think that._' s right because that is the same as the Pool or the deck. MR. SCHWAB*+ Let me ask you a little different thing. You ' ve got basically forty - this is basically a rectangular lot - it may be perfectly rectangular . Forty-five feet and the Pool Ordinance essentially requires thirty feet - fifteen feet on each side4 so if you centered it you could have a fifteen foot Pool . Why do you need an eighteen foot Pool rather than a fifteen foot Pool? MR. FABI+* Why? MR. SCHWAB'+ Yes: why? MR. FABI: Because it was already Purchased without knowing that we needed a variance for an eighteen foot round Pool . If I had known I. needed a fifteen foot round pools I would have bought a fifteen foot round Pool . It was bought before we knew and that is why we didn ' t get our building Permit and everything else. MR. SCHWAB** Right. MR. BOOTH; When did you buy it? MR. FABI'+ February. MR. SCHWAB+* So a fifteen foot Pool ► centeredy still would have your kitchen viewing Problem butt looking at its at least now would be all right with you compared with - with all that you ' ve BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE: 48 Sone through. MR, FABI** Definitely, If you noticed the diagrams there is a deck. and everything else - what we wanted - and then we ran into Problems like that. What I am asking is for the five foot variance on one side. Unless there are other Problems that I don ' t know about# MR, SCHWAB*# Bight. So the Pool is not returnable I guess. MR, FABI** Flo, We ' d have to sell it. MR, BOOTH; On the Franklin Street side of your houser the distance from your house to your Property line is approximately six feet? MR, FABIS From the main house, . , MR, BOOTH; To the Franklin Street side. . . MR. FABI: There was also a problem there. From the existing house, MR, WEAVER+* As a matter of clarifications I hopes Columns 12 and 13 show the conditions as being one side yard being eight foot and the other . . . . MR, BOOTH: Yess I wasn ' t sure where that was being measured. MR, WEAVERS I don ' t know where it is either but we are talking about six inches: whether it is on the north side or on the south sides not to be critical , . , MR, BOOTH: Oh I seer those are the main house dimensions. MR. WEAVERS I ' m sere it is the main house (unintelligible) lot line . , , MR. BOOTHS That is what I was trying to figurer I didn ' t look. BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*+ 49 back at that. MR^ WEAVER'* So, looking at the existing conditions and what he proposes to create doesn ' t change that* MR. BOOTH'+ That is the point that I have been trying to get at. ' ` MR * HEAVER'# Welly one place that he changed it radically is the rear yard, MR. SCHNAB+# Rear yard, and the swimming pool has its own special ' reqoirmments^ As a matter of interest, do any of your neighbors ' have swimming pools? ' MR. FABI*+ There is one on the corner of Franklin - Mrs* Carlson ' | -Franklin and Auburn Street, they live right on the corner ^ . Their pool was pot in many years ago, so , ^ ^ ' ' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*4 Further questions? ! MS~ FARRELL*+ If the pool were centered in the back yard - from ' both sides of the lot, there would still be a two and one-half ' | foot deficiency on each side? � / MR, FABI'* Yes, ma' amr if it were centered. � � MR. BOOTH! One and a half. MR^ FABI'+ One and a half, yes, I 'm sorry, -' MR^ SCHWAB'* One and a half, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN! Any other thoughts? We ' ve tried to move that ` pool around from one side of the lot to the other ~ SECRETARY HOARD*# Have you thought about making it oval? CHAIRMAN TOMLAM** Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else who ' would like to speak in favor of granting this appeal? (no one) Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to the - . . e BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE; 50 granting of this appeal? Once againy it ' s ours. | BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 51 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO* 1620 106 SHORT STREET (CHANGED TAPE HERE, MISSED SOME OF THE DISCUSSION) MR* AEAVER+* . ^ * would it not be appropriate to treat the deck and pool as separate entities* The requirements for the two are substantial (unintelligible) I am worried about the findings of , fact - what we are talking about - whether we are talking about _ the Swimming Pool Ordinance ^ ^ ^ ^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*+ I assumed we were dealing with the Swimming Pool Ordinance solely, MR~ WEAVER'* He have an application for a deck, SECRETARY HOARD** ^ ^ . ^ percentage of lot coverage problem* . MR,, BOOTH*+ You have a rear yard problemv too, don ' t you? ' SECRETARY HQARD'+ Yes, and a rear yard problem, MR~ SCHWAB! And existing deficiencies - he would have to apply for the deck (unintelligible) MR^ BOOTH'* Well if you deal with the deck first, how does that affect the pool and if we deal with the pool , how does that affect the deck? MR, WEAVER++ Nell , I ' m just concerned - if I don ' t have to make the findings, I ' m not quite as concerned^ MR, SCHWAB*+ Nell , without addressing Charles ' point, is it a practical difficulty to have an eighteen foot pool which you ^ soddenly realize that you can ' t use? Which strikes me, in essense of what he is asking. MS. FARRELL+# It certainly would be difficult. � MR^ SCHWAB'* And what is the other side, should he have known? ' ' -- ` | ` | \ '^'- BZA MINUTES 5I6f85 PAGE** 52 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ Well the other side: of courser is ignorance of the law is no excuse. Does it become easier if we deal with the deck. first? MS. FARRELL'+ (unintelligible) MR. WEAVER'* Maybe for him but MS. FARRELL'+ Rights yess that is what I means so why don' t we start with the swimming pools if the swimming pool doesn' t get built maybe the deck is not important. I don ' t know. MS, JOHNSON'+ So the deck isn ' t already constructed? The appeal only talks about the swimming pool . A MR. WEAVER'+ I have been in his back yards and there is no deck.. , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ That ' s rights I looked too. And there is a lot of sand where the pool should be. SECRETARY HOARD: The Swimming Fool Ordinance - there is a fifteen foot sideyard question that is fairly arbitrary . . . + what if it were a hundred foot diameter pools why fifteen feet - is it for safetys is it for noises what is it for? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ Splashing. 1 SECRETARY HOARD** So a pool this sizes maybe fifteen feet doesn' t seem such a hard and fast requirement. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ What are the usual diameters of the pools? I bet there is no planning study about that. SECRETARY HOARD** I don ' t know. I was going to say we haven ' t pooled our information. . . . . I really don ' t know. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; One could says before we drown in information. Helen did you say someone should make a motion before we go any BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE*+ 54 DECISION ON APPEAL NO, 1620 106 SHORT STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Louis and Carolyn Fabi for an area variance and a variance from the sideyard requirement of Section 35^4 of the Swimming Pool Ordinance to permit the installation of an above-ground pool at 106 Short Street~ The decision of the Board was as follows*. MR* WEAVER*# ][ move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1620^ MS* JOHNSON*# I second the motion~ FINDINGS OF FACT*+ ' 1 ) The size of the pool , eighteen feet in diameter , is compatible with the dimension of the property on which it is to be installed* The deficiencies in its placement relative to the side yards are five feet or less out of a maximum requirement of fifteen feet and would not seriously affect adjacent properties* 2) The deck would merely be an extension of the existing structure as far as side yard is concerned and would not increase the deficiencies of the side yard deficiency, The percentage of lot coverage resulting from the installation of ' the pool and deck is less than four percent beyond the requirements of the Ordinance and would be an acceptable variance insofar as lot coverage percentage is concerned° 3) The pool and attendant deck are compatible with the residential character of the neighborhood° � | 4) Practical difficulties are that no pool of reasonable � - . | | i BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 WAGE* 55 dimensions would be possible on this property if it were to strictly conform- to the Ordinance. 5) The deck is a reasonable amenity for a hack yard pool . VOTE: 5 YES; 1 NO GRANTED ' BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE44 56 SECRETARY HOARD** I don ' t see anybody here for appeal number 1621 , 520 East Buffalo Street, anybody here? (no one) We ' ll 8o on to the last case then, APPEAL NO~ 1622 - 506 SOUTH CAYQCA STREET Appeal of James Iacovelli for an area variance for deficient off-street parking" deficient lot size, and deficient setbacks for the front yard, one side yard, and the rear yardr under Section ` 30^25, Columns 4, 6, 11 , 12° and 14v to permit the issuance of a building permit and Certificate of Occupancy for the now two-family dwelling at 506 South Cayuga Street° The property is located in an R3b (residential , multiple dwelling) Use District in which the use as a two-family dwelling is a permitted use; however under -' Section 30,57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant most obtain an area variance for the ` listed deficiencies before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the property, This property was converted without a required building permit and area variance~ MR, MAZZA*+ My name is Ed Mazza and I represent Mr * Iacovelli , - ~ the appellant. I have offices at 307 M^ Tioga Street^ Unfortun- ately my client commenced doing some renovations to a property at 506 S^ Cayuga Street without a permit~ What he was doing there was he was converting a single family hoose which had five bed- rooms in it, to a two-family hoose, with a total five bedrooms in ' it, He was doing this by taking the basement apartment - base- ment rooms and making that into a separate apartment where his daughter would live* During this construction he was advised that he needed a building permit for that and subsequently to get this appeal * There are several deficiencies on the property | | which, except for one° have existed since prior to the enactment / | of the Zoning Ordinance, none of which will be increased by the | ! / | ^ ' � BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 57 granting of the variance^ Those deficiencies are, the minimum lot size, the minimum front yard setback° minimum side yard re- quirement and the minimum rear yard requirement. The one that would be increased, because it would be divided from a one-family _ structure to a two-family structure, is the off-street parking* As it is, I don ' t know if you have driven by the site or nmt° but there is - right on the side of the hill - and there is no place ' � for any parking to occur on the lot itself and it has been done, � as it has been a five bedroom unit since it started. All of the parking was on the street* If this variance is granted, he has been able to secure, at the property next south - just op the hill - three parking spaces which would meet the requirements of the Ordinance and you would have this on a three year lease^ I would suggest that quite possibly what you could do if you were so inclined, would be to grant the variance with a condition on it that he have these parking places - that the Certificate ron . the term of the lease so that if he had a three-year lease, if you were inclined you could Sive him a Certificate of Compliance for three years, at which time he would have to come in with ap- proval of the parking, once a3ain. If he does this and hegets these parking placesn actually what he has done is he has elimin- ated some of the deficiencies that exist there now, because he would have provided three parking spaces where there were none before^ The other -the minimum lot size - there is nothing changed on the exterior of the building - everything is on the interior , so the lot size - that ' s the lot size, he - can ' t change BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE** 58 that. The front yard setback is not being changed and it is not very significant - the deficiency anyway - it kind of sits funny � / ` on the lot, it is not parallel to the road - at its closest point !it is three feet deficient and at other points it is not defi- cient at all . The minimum side yard is ten feet on one side and ' - five feet on the other and it complies with the ten foot side ` yard but not the five foot side yard - it being one foot defi- cient at its worst pmint^ The rear yard requirement is twenty ! feet and the building on the property is no closer than eighteen � feet to the rear yard so it is deficient by no more than two ' feet^ So I think that this variance is not increasing any of the ` � ` deficiencies, it is in fact decreasing one of the deficiencies ' and we respectfully request that you grant this variance. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*4 Do you have the lease for the parking with you? ' MR. MAZZA*# No it has not been signed yet^ As I say, I suggest ` that it be a condition* He didn ' t want to enter into a lease to ' incur another cost unless we knew the variance would be granted, ` CHAIRMAN TOMLAN4+ I see~ You could then produce some sort of intent to that effect? ' MR, MAZZA*+ Yes. ` CHAIRMAN T0MLAN'O Further questions from the Board? . MR, MAZZA*+ I think I neglected to tell you that the spaces would ' _ be rented from a Carl Carpenter - the property is next, soutbv on � this street° It is between two properties owned by Mr ~ . � Iacowelli ^ CHAIRMAN TOMLAM*+ It is essentially the multi-car garage with - - -- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE: 59 in fact: I believe some of your tenants are now making use of that space? MR. IACOVELLI: Yes that is why Carl wants me to rent three spaces. CHAIRMAN! TOMLAN: I see. I happened to be there long enough today to notice how it was being used. SECRETARY HOARD: A 1954 Dodge that has probably been there since 1954. CHAIRMAN! TOMLANl: Further questions? MR. BOOTH: Mr . Iacovellir do you own other properties in this area? MR. IACOVELLI: I have one other house there. MR. BOOTH: One other house? MR. IACOVELLI: Yes. MR. BOOTH: And both of these houses are rental properties? MR. IACOVELLI: Yes they are. MR. BOOTH: Do you have other rental properties in the City? MR. IACOVELLI: Yes I do. MR. BOOTH: How is it that you weren ' t aware that a permit was necessary? MR. IACOVELLI: I wouldn ' t say that - I would say that I was aware: but it was just something that we thought - one of my help a man who works for me - it was just one of those things that we overlooked. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'* Further questions? MR. WEAVER: I ' d like to continue on that a little bit. I ' d be BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 60 ` more easily persuaded if this were an inexperienced operator rather than a very experienced one, to forget a building permit" It just seems to me that rather than coming in here with an es- ' tablished fact and asking for approval of this Board, the proce- dure, as you experienced on other properties that you own and operate, come in here asking for a variance and then get a build- ing permit and we grant it or we torn it down^ In the present . instance it would seem to me that if you are rejected in this case, it is certainly a self-imposed difficulty and it is not a matter of sodden discovery by an experienced builder here that there is a City Hall and they even take phone calls^ It just seems to me most inappropriate and I resent the after the fact appeals, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'# Further comments from members of the Board or � questions? Thank you, Is there anyone else out there who would like to speak in favor of granting this variance? (no one) Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition? (no one) Once again and for the last time this evening, it is ours* ��_ BZA MINUTES 5!6/85 PAGE: 61 DECISION ON APPEAL NO. 1622 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of James Iacovelli for an area variance to permit the issuance of a building permit and Certificate of Occupancy for the now two-family dwelling at 506 South Cayuga Street. The decision of the Board was as follows*# MR. BOOTH*# I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1622. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*# I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT; 1 ? It is very evident that this is a self-imposed hardship. DISCUSSION ON APPEAL N0. 1622 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*# The Chair will second the motion just for the sake of discussion so we can get an with discussion, MR. BOOTH: Well I think that there is a difficulty with any land f use law in terms of some peoples not understanding what the law W says and running afoul of the various requirements but I think. ' that we are seeing a number of circumstances where► I think this one and one other one we saw tonighty exhibit the fact that know- ledgable people who have good reason to know what the require- ments of this Ordinance are► and violated - they are here to hope that they can get by the requirements and then when they can ' t: they apply for the necessary variance and I think that this would be a good place to make a statement that self-imposed hardships are not grounds for this Board to issue variances. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*# Anyone else like to comment? BZA MINUTES 5/6y85 PACE*+ 62 . MR^ NEAVER'4 Well by my discussion with Mr ^ Iacovelli , it was ' ' quite obvious - my feelings - I would also temper that with say- ` ing that we are here today and that the results of our decision . can effect the use of the property and can effect the nei8hbor- ' hoodv and can effect the City ' s administration of the Zoning Or- dinance and the Building Department^ It would - I am quite sym- pathetic with Dick ' s motion to the effect that I do feel that ` there should be some form of action by the City in cases where ^ builders build without benefit of permit* However to deny this variance would negate the possibility of issuing the variance that would accomplish a goal of the Zoning Ordinance, providing adequate off-street parking for housing and in this ' . case a conditional variance requiring three off-street parking . ' spaces be provided might well be more beneficial to the neighbor- hood than the other very important matter of trying to get the / ` | attention of builders and managers, that permits are required* � i Not to mix the two op but to try to settle in territory that would be beneficial - most beneficial - I' m assuming my choices are limited to the two and that neither of them is the most at- ` tractive - but I ' ve settled for the less and I ' d be inclined to vote against the motion~ ' MS. FARRELL*+ I feel the same way~ I really resent that this is . coming to os now - this is a person who knew that building per- mits should have been applied for and everything and if this case ' were coming to me fresh and that hadn ' t gone through and there ' were provisions for parkin8, I would feel a lot better about it^ ^ ___ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 63 As it is° I don ' t feel comfortable denying the variance because it came in the back door ~ When the provisions for parking are being - are going to be met now and that clearly needs to be a condition, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'* Any thoughts from the other side of the table? My side of the table that is~ MR^ SCHNAB'+ Is it clear that this is a grantable variance but for this? MR. BOOTH*# I think that this probably is 3rantable^ I agree with that - I agree with Charlie ' s sentiments about the parking situation - on that street in particular - but I think we are seeing a number of situations that are regrettable and I think that those situations are likely to continue unless appropriate actions are taken* But to answer your qoestionr yes, my sense is that this is grantable except for this reason, MS^ FARRELL'* And I think we can continue to look at things on a case by case basis and if it looks as though provisions aren ' t going to be met, as they were in a previous case this evening° then we can deny the variance, I mean, a self-imposed hardship is a self-imposed hardship and I don ' t have much sympathy with that* If the provisions can be met, I can look at it slightly differently^ SECRETARY HOARD** I might mention that we have Mr ^ Iacovelli in Court now and he is scheduled for a hearing and to reappear in . Court on Wednesday so^ , ^ ' MS. FARRELL*t For this property? ~--^ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE** 64 SECRETARY HOARD'F For this property^ MR, BO0TH*# What does that relate to? SECRETARY H8ARD*+ To the conversion of the property without a permit^ MS^ FARRELL** That takes its own course regardless of what happens? ' MR* BOOTH*+ You mean at the time the City is proceeding against this gentleman? SECRETARY HOARD** He is attempting to get a variance* , . MR° BOOTH*# We are about ready to grant a variance^ ^ ^ SECRETARY HOARD** I don ' t know what you are ready to do bot^ ^ . MR. AEAVER*+ I feel surrounded by attorneys but (unintelligible) long enough to suggest that granting the variance doesn ' t clean the slate of the violation - that was a building without a building permit rather than occupying this property as a duplex, I hope, MS^ FARRELL'+ Is there something else we should know about it? CHAIRMAN T0MLAN*4 Helen you have not said anything in particular . MS. JOHNSON'� Well I tend to agree with Mr . Weaver and Tracy, as well , that - and I think it is increased by what Tom has said that if this kind of situation is being taken care of through the ~ Courts then it seems that is punishment enough to set something as a precedent for all of those other people who may be lurking out there ready to build something without the proper permits* It seems like we can separate those two* ' MR, WEAVER** Well to wear this out a little bit, the very fact BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE'* 65 that a denial would make this a single family dwelling° grandfathered with no off-street parking - so those are the � choices I see rather clearly, not withstanding any other considerations, here is an opportunity to require off-street �parking on a grandfathered property and I wouldn ' t torn it down lightly, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*# The Chair would suggest to the maker of the motion that it appears his motion would fail if voted upon and thereby to expedite matters it might be prudent to withdraw the ' motion and cast it in a different fashion, SECRETARY HOARD'* He has already made out his ballot ^ ' MR. BOOTH** I realize that, I said when I made the motion that this might not be a fruitful point but I think it is a motion that needs to be made and I will intend to make similar motions ' in the future, I will not withdraw it . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN40 All righty then let ' s vote at this point. ' \ MR, NEAVER*+ Shall we call it a? � CHAIRMAN TOMLAN*4 Yes, 1622a ^ . MR. SCHNAB*+ May I ask Tom what kind of a proceeding it is? Is it a criminal proceeding against him or ^ . ^ SECRETARY HOARD++ It is a civil , I guess . CHAIRMAN TOMLANI+ So that a yes would be to deny . MR^ BOOTH+* A yes vote is to deny the variance, The motion was ' to deny the variance. Findings of Fact was that this was a ' self-imposed hardship, So a yes vote is to deny* VOTEO+ 2 YES; 4 NO MOTION FAILED^ BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE: 66 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN'+ The motion failed so now we ' ll have an . alternative motion perhaps? MS^ FARRELL** I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1622(b) with the condition that the property owner shows a lease for three parking spaces within 500 ' of the property, on an annual basis. MR, WEAVER*. I second the motion^ FINDINGS OF FACT*. ' 1 ) The proposed changes do not exacerbate the present deficiencies in lot size - front yard, side yardv and rear ' ` yard. Meeting those requirements presents practical . difficulties which can only be solved by moving the property ' or acquiring additional property* | | 2) The proposed use is permitted in this zone^ / 3) The owner proposes to lease the additional parking spaces ' which are required. ! VOTE ON 1622(b) 5 YES; 1 NO GRANTED N/CONDITION � ' ' - - - - 67 - I , BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY THAT I took the minLtes of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York, in the matters of Appeals numbered 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619, 1620, and 1622 on May 6, 1985 in the Common Council Chambers, City of Ithaca, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, New York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the action taken of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability. 4d,.�2�22 Barbara C. uane Recording S cretary Sworn to before me this day of �7Z� 1985 Notary Public JEAN .• i.ANKI�ISG(d NOTARY F!"?= 'STATE OF NEW YORK 55.1580800 QUALIFIED IN T05APKINS CCU 41� MY CO'+�iSl°BION EXPIR'ILS MARCH 30.19 D3� BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK May 6, 1985 Page APPEAL NO. 1616 DAVID GARDNER 3 318-20 PLEASANT STREET APPEAL NO. 1616 DISCUSSION 7 APPEAL NO. 1616 DECISION 8 APPEAL NO. 1617 WILLIAM LOWER 9 114 HIGHLAND PLACE APPEAL NO. 1617 DECISION 17 APPEAL NO. 1618 DAISY KIRKPATRICK 19 106 WASHINGTON STREET APPEAL NO. 1618 DISCUSSION 22 APPEAL NO. 1618 DECISION �3 APPEAL NO. 1619 JASON FANE 24 115-21 DRYDEN ROAD APPEAL NO. 1619 DISCUSSION 37 APPEAL NO. 1619 DECISION 42 APPEAL NO. 1620 LOUIS & CAROLYN A. FABI 43 106 SHORT STREET APPEAL NO. 1620 DISCUSSION 51 APPEAL NO. 1620 DECISION 54 APPEAL NO. 1621 MARK WALDO HAAG (POSTPONED) 520 EAST BUFFALO STREET APPEAL NO. 1622 JAMES IACOVELLI 56 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET APPEAL NO. 1622 MOTION & DISCUSSION 61 VOTE 1622a 65 '� " VOTE 1622b 67 BZA MINUTES PAGE 1 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK MAY 61. 1985 CHAIRMAN 70MLAN� I ' d like tu uall to urder the May 6' 1985 meeting uf' the City cif Ithaca Board of Zcoing Appeals The Board nperates under the provisions of the Ithaca City Charter ' the Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and the Ithaca Sign Ordinance and the Board' s uWn Rules and Requlations Members uf the Board who are present tonight include : MP CHARLES WEAVER MS TRACY FARRELL MR , RICHARD BOOTH MR STEWART SCHWAB MS HELEN JOHNSON MR MICHAEL TOMLAN' CHAIRMAN MR THOMAS H0ARD , S.ECRETARY TO THE BOARD AND BUILDING COMMISSIONER M:- BARBARA RUANE, REC"8RDING SECRETARY The Bua/ d hear eeuh case in the order listed in the agendum . First we hear from the appellant and esJ: that he or she pre.- sent the ar�ument for the o��e �s �uccinctly as possible and then be available to answer questions from the B:ord . We will then hear fram those interested pa/ties who are in support of the ap- pIicatiuo, folluwed by those whu are opposed to the applioation . I should note here that the 8oerd considers interested; parties to be Persons who own property within two, hundred feet �f the prop- erty in uueStion or who live ur work within two hundred feet of that property ThUs the Board Will nut hear testimany from per - sons whc do nut meet the definition of an nterested part- While d nut adhere tc the strict rules of evidence, we du EIZA MINUTES 50/6/fS5 PACiE consider thiEz a quasi-judicial p r oceed ing and we b ase our dec i- s ic.ns on the record . The record consists of the application ma- ter 41 a I a- filed wit h the. Bu i I d i rig Department, cr�r r espondence. r e I at- illig to the. eases as r ived by the SUi lding D.:epar tment, the Planning and De-velopment Board' s finding=_. and recommendations,, where. there. are arty , and the record of tonight ' s hearing . c; ince a record I.E. teeing made :J this. hear ing., it is e=ssential that any- r=ne who wants to be heard come forward and speak directly into the micropthcries., on the other side from me her e., into the micro- phones., sc-, that the tape recorder can pick it up arid e,4eryone in the room., likewise, can hear Extraneous c .:,mments ftrom, the audi- ence will riot tie recorded arid will theref cre rtcit be considered by the Board in its deliberation=_; on the r.;.ase We ask that everyone limit their- comments to the zzi--ning issues of the case and riot comment on aspects that are beyond the sur isdiction of this Board After everyone has beers heard -:n a gi,.,en case , the hear - ing or; that case, will be closed arid the Board will deliberate and reach a Once the hearing is closed., ric, further testi- mony will IL-le taken and the audience is requested to refrain from commenting during the deliberations It takes four 'Votes to 3p- prove a motion to grant or deny a variance or a special permit . In rare cases where there is a tie vote the. variance or special permit is automatically denied Are there any, questions out there abOUt our pror:edt_rre? If not then we -:art girO-Ceed to our f irst case . 97A MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 3 SECRET�Rv HOARD ' The first case tonight is APPEAL NO . 1616 31l8- 2O PLEASANT STREET Appeal of David Gardner for an area xarience for deficient front yard and side yard setbacks under Section 30 . 25 . Columns 11 and 12 of the Zuning Ordinance, to permit the addition of a deck to the rear of the two-family dwelling at 318-320 Pleasant Street . The property is located in an R3a ( residential, multiple dwelling) Use District Ln which the proposed use is permitted : however ' under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 the appellant must first obtain an area variance for the listed de- ficiencies before a building permit or Certifi- cate- of 0uuupanuy uan be issued for construction of the- proposed deck . CHAIRMAN T0MLAN , Please begin with ide'ntifivatiuo and where you . live., for the record egein ' MR . GARDNERM� name is David Gardner' I Ii*e at 318- 22O ` Pleasant Street I would like to try to clean up 31 ?-320 ` ^ i Plea- ,sant., the inside and out I ' d like to add a deck on the back . / to get a better view of Cayuga Loke � CHAIRMAN T0MLAN, Well let me try to just move things along here ' | ' a little bit You ' ve contacted the neighbors? | MP . GARDNER ' Yes I have . ' CHAIRMAN 78MLr-NDid you get any feedback? MR GARDNERNo I haven ' t . CHAIRMAN T8MLAN Everyone was quiet? � | MR , 6ARDNER . Nobody said anythinq , I came to the Planning and Development meeting e couple of weeks eQu ( unintelligible) ' CHAIRMAN T0MLAN: Questions frum other people on the Bu�rd? MR . WEAVER � I have a question, if I may . The little addition to the rear of the main building frame' will that remain-) 82A MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE4 MR G�RQt,I ER No., I ' m going to rip it uff , It ' s a shed that was just thruwn up arid tac:ked on to the bauk of the huuse . MH WEAVER� So the dimensions of the proposed structure will be against the building - extend only, the ten feet frum the - was it not ten feet ? MR , 6ARDNER. l think eotuallV I hed inttmated that �t wuuld be about by thirty going along the entire rear of the building That huwever has recently been renegotiated a little bit I have Ken \/ineburg as an architect and he suggested another possibility so I ` m only going to go half way across the baok and perhaps eight foot or something like that MR WEAVGR � But regardless, the addition will be removed" MA , 8ARDNER ' Yes it will � CHAIRMAN T0MLANPerhaps you might say a word or two about what Ken has suQ9eyted so that we know exautl� what we are dealing With I /nean, on the drawing that You have indioated here is different than what you are suggesting MR GARDNEP . RightIt was just tonight that I went to see him , as h* is drawiog me some plans for the interior and be is trying ! to impro-ve both eides of the split duplex and just make them nicer aPertmuents an both sides The,, are pretty ratty, un the inside and incorporate two aPmrtments that were shot down {unin- telligible) at least or, one side onywa-v . Su With the deck it would tie - the deck would probably Come out fifteen feet across the be�� right where the shed is now and it would no lunger - the shed is atiout five feet off the back of the house I propose to BZA MINUTES 5/61-185 PAGE . make thee de-c:k'. about eight feet off the back: of the house, so it would be. about eight by fifteen . MR . BOOTH : Your diagram, shows a shed near the back of the , property - you are talking about a different shed? MR GARDNER ; I am . That also actually I would like to get rid of but yes. , this is the one tacked on to the back: of the house., it is. just . . . catches water MR . aOOTH: How many units two units in that house? MR, GA.RDNER : There are two units - there were four years ago . MR . BOOTH' I take it from what you submitted that while the house has some existing deficienc: ies in terms f setbacks this will riot aggravate any of them`' MR . GAP.DNER ; The deck.? MR . BOOTH, The deck will rict aggravate any of them? MR . s ARDNER ` No . Its basically .dust ripping off what is there and repIac:ing It with a ni;:;e.r deck. - pretty much, the same size . MR . WEAVER : I ' d like to .-: Iarify that if I may Will the deck e;e.tend to the eastern edge of the house`' MR . CARD,NERTo the eastern edge of the house - as does the shed: yes . MR . `LEAVER ; Richard I react that to mean that it will extend to a very minor degree the eastern boundarY� of the nonconforming east end of the house . CHAIRMAN TOMtAN: In other words- YOU are creating a little bit . . MR, WEAVER ' A little bit but he is saying now art estimated eight feet instead of six but it will continuee the dimensions plus BZA MINUTES. 5/6/8P- PAGE � 6 mw'a y1R. 8887H 8ut it won ` t extend any closer to the property line will it? MS , FARRELL � On the property line . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN� Cluser , but it is already deficient MR , 800TH ' Nu, I understand that CHAIRMAN T0MLAW Any further c- uestimns? Stewart? Helen? MS J0HNS8W No . MR SCHWA8 ' No . CHAIRMAN T8MLAN. Thank you Oev±d Is there anyone else who Wuuld } ike to. speak in supPurf of this appliaati�n? (nu one) Is there anyone then who would like to speak in opposition to this variance? ( nu one) ` BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : ? DISCUSSION - APPEAL NO . 1616 318-320 PLEASANT STREET CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I would assume that the variance is - as we have shown it as tieing six. by thirty has now been changed to eight by fifteen? For those of you to wham it would make. a difference . MP. . BOOTH ' Is that r ight Tam? SECRETARY HOARD' That ' =_ what was presented here tonight . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: That being a difference of sixty square feet . i MS . FARRELL : Smaller . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Smaller . right . As Apposed to the original one hundred eighty, which would be the six, by thirty., so it is a bit smaller than what was originally suggested , 8ZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE � 8 DECISION - APPEAL NO 1616 318-20 PLEASANT STREET The 8uard of Zmning AppealaS ounsidered the appeal of David Gardner fn, em area variance for deficient front yard and side yard setbacks under Section 30 . 215., Columns 11 and 13 of the Zoninq @rdinenue' to permit the addition of a deck to the rear of the two-family dwelling at 318-320 Pleasant Street . ' MS FARRELL ' I move that the board grant the area variance requested in appeal number l��6 MR WEAVER : l second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT � 1 ) The proposed changes would only exacerbate the present side yard deficiency by approximately two ( 2 ` ) feet, which is relatively minor 2 ) Pract ioel diffioulties have been shown by the app lioant in meet in8 the re4uirements of the present. frunt and aide yard defiuienuies which could only be solved by moving the � building . �) The proposed changes would appear to maintain the character of the neighborhood , ' VOTE , 6 YES.: D NO GRANTED ` ` / BBA MINUTES 5, 6/85 PALE , 9 =;ECPETAP ,? HCA_PD� The next appeal is APPEAL NO . 1617 - 1. 14 HIGHLAND PLACE Appeal of William Lower for ars area variance for deficient lot width and deficient side yard setback under Section 30 . 25, Columns 7 and 13 of the Zoning Ordinance . to permit a one-story addition to the rear of the multi- ple dwelling at 114 Highland Place . The property is located in ars R- 3a ( residential,. multiple dwelling) Use District , in which the Proposed use is permitted : however under Sec- tions 30 . 4:) and 30 . 57 the appellant must first obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or Cer - tificate of Occupancy can be issued for the add it ion . MR . GALBRAITH : Good evening ladies and gentlemen., my name is Dirk. t6albraith . I ' m an attorney, I have professional offices at -10'S N, Tic=ga Street irs Ithaca; and I represent the applicant on this appeal.: Mr . William Lower . The property in question.. 114 Highland Place., is presently a multiple residence in a zone that permits multiple residence use . Mr . Lower seeks to rehabilitate the basement apartment to provide a somewhat larger living space for the. tersants with the same nuimber of bedrooms that presently eist . There are two bedrooms in the downstairs; apartment , Mr Lowen desc:r itsed those as being rather small arid dingy . The apartment itself is rather unattrac_tI ve and a hardship, which Mr Lower faces: is that in the rental market in (,cllegetowr, with a rssrmber c,f large new apartment buildings; going upoffering first c: la=_:s; apartmer+t life for tenants - in order tc, s;tav competitive in that market , Mr . Lowen must keep his properties up and keep the apartments which he has. in first class , attract ive, condi- a7A MINUTES 57 /6e"P,15 PAGE 10 tier; . we submitted a set of - a survey map showing the lc- at i on i- f the proposed addition . Ac.tually we have clesc:ribed that .3s be in'g fourteen ti,, thirty-six: feet - in actuality it would tie appr o�,,:irvately thirteen by thirty-three feet and it would , in ef- feetlmove the bedrooms back out into the props-)sed addition and at the sams time. enable Mr - Lower to enlarge ttie living rocirri and enlarge- the kitchen , The clef icienc: ies which require a variance are two one of them., and most notic:able I think. , is the street frontage . Although this is - I think - a rather large lot, be- only has approximately twenty- of, its peculiar shape... 'I I L four feet of frontage. on Highland Plarje . However ,, there is ade- quate ac:c.ess to the propert), and adequate on-site parking which does not need to tie varianc.ecl , The second defic: ienc.-y ar' ises be- CaLlSe. one. corner of the building is approximately three feet from the property line and a five foot setback. is required . Neither of these deficiencies would be increased by the grant of the pro- posed var iaric'e. What Mr- . Lower is attempting to do is upgrade this property., we would not be inc.reasinq the density in terms 0f the number of bedrooms or the number of oc;c.upants and we would like to request your consideration for this variance application , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions? M P, . W E A V E R, I have a question about your statement about riot increasing the occuparicy . If you were to have this addition , is it riot SO that YOU could legally occupy those spaces with more peep I e? MF. . LOWE P My feeling is that this Board has the power to - I 8 Z A MINUTES r /% 1E6S PAGE ; 11 may tie wr :rrrg - to issue. this var ianc;e with a restr i tic':r, . N +with+ the. size of the . bedrooms - with; what we have now we cart rent this to three people . I have no intentions of renting it to any more than, three people and I ' m perfectly agreeable to you r e.st r icrt ing it to that use - it won' t be rented to any more than that and probably won ' t be recited to that many . MR . WEAVER '. In other word=_. YOU are inviting a variance with a conditional? MR . LOWER ' Absolutely . i CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Further questions? MR . E1 CiCI(TH . How {,ld is this building? MR LOWER . Well it is prr'babl - 19_+O ' s - probably fifty years old . Fifty to sixty . MR El0OFT H : Are you doing other renovations in it to upgrade this Property? MR , LOWER . Well we ha-.1e done other renovations and I intend to do an excessive - of the addition here - you : an see where I acct going to enlarge the bathroom and we are going to upgrade tremen- dously - we- are going to paint the outside of the building this year too . It is rather undes.ireable looking ori the outside, to answer your question, we have done a lot of work: on this prop- erty , It is; very diff icUlt to rent basement apartment= and if they aren' t really good basement apartments - first of all when someone Galls and yr`u, tell them you have a basement apartment - eighty percent of therr, don ' t evert ,rant tc lric,k at it Ari:-J then: if .cru can convince them to l :;i>k at 'it , it better rtr_ t be RZA MINUTE9 S/6 /8S PA6E l2 a din�� auartment like we have, her beoause yuu are rea� ly handicapped . MR Ell 0UTHIs the apartment renfed now for this academic year MR L0WER l think it has been' J think we sac/ tficed it - thot was part uf the reason for my motivation here to du something about it - I am usually not in the habit of having to give my . apartments away ' MR , BOOTH: What is the rent? ' MR , L0WER � How much is the rent? I couldn ' t tell you that - as . e matter of fact., l uuuldn` t fell YOU for Sure but I think it ' was rented at e sacrifice We du have. e ouopIe of apartments ' that way . MS FARRELLWhat wuuld be the non-sac rtfice / ent on the epartment? Like if you had rented it at What YOU wanted to, what would it be? ' MA L0WER� When it is dune' whet would I get' YOU mean? ' MS . FARRELLNo, I mean,. now - the way it is . . MR . LOWERWell for a two-bedroum apartment we wuuld normally get about fou/ seventy-five a month . Aseurifice price., in my upiniun, Wuuld he about two seventy-fixe' three hundred That would include all of the utilities, by the wayThat would be on a ten month lease., not a twelve MR , SCHWAB . If the variance is granted without the restriction that YOU are suggesting, would there have to be more. parking� ` MR LOWER' I don ' t know , l Would have to ask Tom . MR . SCHWABBecause right now,, six is required and you have six 8ZA MINUTES 516/85 PAGE : 13 SECRETARY HOA.R.D: There would be no change in the requirement because he is: trading two bedrooms for.. two bedrooms . MR . LOWER : But if we put more people in it than, what we are permitted now., would there have to be art extra parking place`' SECRETARY HOARDNo it would be. based on the number of bedrooms . MR LOWER' We could provide more parking anyhow, there . I won ' t be doing that , and I have no desire to increase the number of people in: there and that is what I ' m more than glad to have you put restriction=_: on the variance . MR . WEAVER , Clarifying clueStion with the Commissioner , if I may , please . U=_; ing the maximum capability of the Hou=_:ing mode . would the proposed addition increase the potential 0--CLIpancy by more than one'' Or shall I assume that the living room Could legally tie used - the proposec! living room - could legally be used for a bedroom and that we could have two - four. - six., legally? I ' m trying to compare the present situation with the proposed, with- out a limited variance . SECRETARY HOARD-, The two new bedrooms would be - they are dust shy of beirt�j large enough for three each so they would riot - the maximum they could have in that is two each . The existing situation - it is a pretty big - the existing living room, if that were used for a bedroom - it is pretty twig . so - 1 would see a net increase if you are allowed to have two perr new bedroom . MR . WEAVER' Part of my question was - not to be mischievous - but was intended to also take a look: at the bedroom that is next to the boiler room, south - aren ' t we down to:, - is it one hundred 62A MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE14 and twenty f eet for a . . . SECRETARY HOARD : One hundred and twenty for two people and eighty for one . MR WEAVE F' Eighty, so we have a single, if they sleep irs the study . MR . LOWER ' Could I add one thing" This. =_study really is an illegal room . CHAIRMAN TDMLAN� No exterior ventilation MR . WE A.VER . Nice to hear you say information of that sort . MR . LC?WEF" Well thank: you, Tom might verify that . SECRETARY HOAPDL It has a variance from the Housing Board of Review but crtce he charges this apartment then - when you change apartments, Housing Board variances are last . He will be giving up that room as a bedroom . MR. . LDWEP. The. reason I said that is the window is very high and it would be very difficult to get out MR . BOOTH : What is the total number of beds in this house? MR . LOWER : The whole house' Oh, I couldn ' t tell you that - there i=_. four apartments there . MR BOOTH : You can' t tell us that? MF' LOWER No I . . . SECRETARY HOARD '. He owns: a lot of property . MR , ALFRAITH : Your best estimate? MR LOWER' Let ' s see - three and four is seven - eleven - I e-uld say thirteen or fourteen . I am going by the number of bed- rooms and rarely do we ever have two people in a bedroom . I SZA MINUTES S/6/85 PAGE ' 15 might a:'d that this addition ir, my opinion., adds to the fire safety factor somewhat., in that it provides a pretty easily ac- cess ib I e c:-c,es:sible drop to the grc:und here from the back: end ofthe house which is pretty high . C:HAIRMAt TCIMLAN . On the other side of the question., though Bill. wouldn' t you agree that it would be mor-e. difficult for any apparatus to make use of that back: yard - when the back. yard wasn' t there and , in fact . . . MR . LOWER : It is impo=_sibis to use that back yard anyhow, for any apparatus which would have to go on wheels or anything like that - not f-,r f ireman with a hose - no because YOU have plenty _.f space in back: of the addition , after thee addition is on . It is „ ust that this roof will be - not flat or close to flat and on the second and third floor in the back of this house , there is no acresacress to get out as far as f ire is concerned . It is not re- quired because there is a fire escape in the front and this will have a <--: inder block: wall between the addition and the house which means that if the hou=se caught fire underneath,, it wouldn' t burn this roof c-,f f , Am T right Tom`' SECRETARY HOARDRight . MR. . Lf;WER . And I think; this does provide. somewhat an additional means of getting out . CHAIRMAN T0MLA CAN, Further cjuek.s. =_,tioncO SECRETARYLLSECRETARYSECRETARYHOARDi YOUr wortieets, by the way,• should show that Cc}lump 13 - I got carried away with writing O . K . , I guess - Column 13 is the second one that should be deficient . The one BZA MINUTES PAGE � 16 with zero MR SCHWABAs I understand it, you said.. Dirk, that this side yar,1-1 is within - this corner is within three feet of the lot line and it requires five? MR 0ALBRAITH: That is correct . MR SCHWAB � What we have on our charts is zero SECRETARY HOARD ' That is what our map showed but MR LUWER � Thirty-eight inches to be exact . MR , 8ALBRAITHi This is a fairly recent survey and I think it s� aIes off at about three feet , ' MR WEAVER . 9imply - it is deficient \ MR 8007H : 7om, neither of those deficiencies are going to be ' ` increased by this? | SECRETARY H0ARD � That ' s riQht ' CHAIRMAN T0MLAN . Further thoughts - questions ,' Thank YOU Dirk' ' � 8ill 'is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of | the granting of this ve/ ianue� ( no one) Is there anyone out there who would like to speak in opposition to the granting of this variance? ( no one ) ^ 8ZA MINUTES PAGE : 17 DECISI8N ON APPEAL NO . 1617 114 HIGHLAND PLACE The Bne/ d of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of William Lower for an area varzence for deficient lot width and deficient side yard setback to permit e one-story addition to the. rear of the multiple dwelling at 114 Highland Plece � The decision of the Board was as fulluws � MR \JEAVERi I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1617 with the following conditions * 1 ) that the granting of this variance is limited and the apartment not be occupied by more than three (3 ) persons,'. and 21 that the 9 ' 8" x 8 ' 6" bedroom be discontinued permanently as e bedroom . MS FARRELL : I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) The re are pract ioel difficulties in comp lyirig wlth the � Ordinance that wuuld require either dem�litimn and reconstruction or muving the building in order to conform with setback requirements . :1 "1 The prupuaed addttiun will impruve the living accommodations for the occupants of the subject apartment . ' �) The addition will riot in fart detract from the aesthetics of ` the neighborhood . . 4) The p/upased adclitiun does not exacerbate- the existing side ` �,nrd def ioienoies 62A MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 19 SECRETARY HC'IARD ' The next case is APPEAL NO . 161`i IBE, WA.SHIN&TON ';TREET Appeal of Daisy Kirkpatrick for a Special Permit under Section 30 . 26 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the accessory use of the property at IDE, Washington, Street for a home occupation . The property is located in an R?b ( residential., one- and two-family dwellings) Use District, in which the proposed use of handweaving of items for sale requires a special permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals . M`; . KIRk::PAT RICK : My name is Daisy Kirkpatrick: and I live at 106 Was hirig"on {street . I am here to a=_;k: the Hoard to grant me a special permit so that I may pursue my (unintelligible) in my home . C:HA:IRMAP-4 TC?MLAN _ You have ass.umed1v circulated some sora of 1 notice or contacted the neighbors? MS . KI RKPAT RIC.K ; Yes; I contacted the neighbors . CHAIRMAN TOMLA.N: Arid there is . . . MS . KIRKPATRICK : I received two phone calls the gist of which was essentially., what on earth do you have to go through this for in circler- to, tie a weaver . As a matter of fact., one lady wanted me to teach, her daughter - there was no negative feedback. CHAIRMAN TCMLAN' Questions from members: of the Board? MR . HCIOTH' Where do you do your weaving now" M`.. . K.IR.k;F'AIR.IC:!! : I hrye a loom in my home - I ' rn nrst really geared Lip tc: be full production. yet . I have been remodelling and doing some work in the house and I wanted to - I bought the house beciuse there was room for a studio - it wasn' t until after the Building Inspector started coming around that he let me know 8ZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE '. 20 that I needed o permit to be a weaver in the area So' I just want ta make sure that this is U , K , - otherwise I will have to rent studiu speoe somewhere else M'5 FARRELL . Will you be seIling things frum that location? MS KlRKPATRIC-K No primarily If you are a retail afure you can' t weave , yOu are a store keeper If you are. e weever You have to not do a lot of selltng from your home . Put I du commis- ; pieces and those I would have people come to my home and I would te teaching - again— out a lot - teaching, again is minor ' but uoue in a while I would take a student . CHAIRMAN T8MLAN� Further questions' ' MR . SCH|A'A8Do you have parking in your driveway - one car yarage? . MS KIRKPATRJCK � Yea, rightThere is ruum fmr a oer, or two ' � behind my oar in the driveway i MR B8UTH � Is parking allowed on Your side of the street? | MS KJRK,PATRICKYes there is parking un both sides of' � Washington Street MR BOOTH ' On both sides CHAIRMAN T0MLAN: Any further quest ions? Thank you , Is there . anyone else who would like to speak for granting the permit? (no one) Is there enyune uut there who would like to speak in uppus�� imn tu grenting the permit ? ( nu one) SECRETARY HOARD: We do have a letter to the City 8uilding De- partment from Alice 6 Darn of' 110 Washington Street '`Gentle- men � As the owner of property adjoining that of Daisy Kirkpat- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE '. 21 rich' this is to advise you that I have no object ion whatever to the issuance to her of a special permit to engage in the home occupation described above and in the Notice of Appeal received b---° me cin April 18th . We are pleased to have tier in the. neighbor - hood and hope. the Board of Planning and Development and the Board of Zoning Appeals will approve her request for a special per-mit Very trtil,' Yours: , /s:/ Alice G . Donn" CHAIRMAN TOMDAN. Thant: vou . In that regard , of com=e, the Planning and Development Board minutes shorn that they were in favor - there was a vote 6 - 0 on April Z-ird - You 311 received copies . Do I hear a motion? BZA MINUTES S/�/85 PAGE , 22 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO . 161r 106 WASHINGTON STREET MR BOOTH ! Did you ask for opponents? C:HAIRMAP& TOMLA.N' 'fes a long time ago . MR. . BOOTH : Tom.. I have a question . Notice that you read says that this is .dust for a special permit . SECRETARY HOARD : Right . MR . BOOTH, There is no variance at all ever; though there is a deficiency? SECRETARY HOARD : No, it is an accessory use . MS . FARRELL . ( unintelligible ) SECRETARY HOARD : Yes a special permit goes with that person and that use-,, not with the property . BZA MINUTES 5!6/85 PAGE 2? DECISION ON APPEAL NG . 1612 106 WASHINGTON STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Daisy Kirkpatrick for a Special Permit under Section 30 . 26 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the accessory use of the property at 106 Washington Street for a home occupation . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTH: I move that the Board grant the request for a Special Permit in appeal number 1618 . MP`. . SCHWAB : I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 11 The proposed use is consistent with the character of the present structure and the character of the neighborhood , 21 The proposed use will not adversely impact any development on any adjacent or nearby lands per Section 30 . 26 VOTE : 6 YES; G NO GRANTEE i BZA MINUTE`. 5,16/85 PACE 24 SECRETARY HOARD : The next appeal is: APPEAL NO . 1619 - 115- 121 DRYDEN ROAD Appeal of Jason Fane for an area variance for deficient off-street parking and for lot coverage exceeding the maximum permitted., under Section 30 . 25: Columns 4 and 10 of the Zoning Ordinance , to permit the issuance of a Certificate of Occu- pancy for the one story building containing a restaurant and retail stores at 115-21 Dryden Road . The property is located in a B2a (busi- ness ) Use District in which the proposed and ex- isting uses are permitted; however- under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 the appellant must first obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies be- fore a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the property , MP. . FANS : My name, is Jason Fane., I ' m the appellant in this ease and I ' m the c:.wner- of the building and I also built the building . The: history, is that after I acquired the. lot I came before the Boar-d cf Zoning Appeals arid applied for a variance to build the retail building that is now there . That variance was apprc.,ved and based on that variance I had my architect design the building it was c<r>e hundred percent in compliance with what Was approved to- build . The architect designed the building and a building permit was issued to build the building and then work: was Con- tr •3cted out and the contractors built the building in accordance with the Plans for which the permit was issued . Following cort- struc:tion - during construction the work: was inspected and all the work: was done in accordance with the plans for which the building permit was issued and also in accordance with the code and the construction was approved as such by the Building Depart- merit . epart-mserit . We then proceeded to rent most of the stones in the build- BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGV 25 ing and some of the stores took occupancy directly and some of the stores wanted to du work on their spaces before opening for business - particularly the eastern two stores of the building were erected by and established - were called the 6/eek House which is a restaurant and they filed o plan and o building permit was issued for them to construct their restaurant which I under- stand - I can ' t guarantee - but I think they spent about one hun- dred and twenty thousand dollars to open that establishment . And their work was inspected and their work was approved and their restaurant was also inspected and approved by the Health Depart- ment . Following this I was told T could not get e Certificate of Occupancy on the building because I had e restaurant - because there was a restaurant in the building there was a different per- king requirement Now this Put me in a situation where I did everything that - I thought I was one hundred percent in compli- ance with all of the rules and codes and ordinances, and was - l rented only to people for legal uses -tenants were advised for building permits - were given e permit -this tenant I really have no control over - then I am told that I em not in compliance . This has been n situation that without a Certificate of Occupancy it is difficult to lease other vacancies as they may occur and there is a risk that additional tenants may not be able to get e building permit for work they might seek to do to properly pursue their businesses - it makes it difficult to mortgage the property and it can make it difficult to sell the property because some attorneys who represent purchasers feel that a building should � BZA. MINUTE 5/6/85 PAGE ! 26 have a C 0 , and there is the question of whether I produce the proper, assessed value of, the pr-operty if the building can' t be legally used , A few weeks ago I went to see Mr . Hoard in his office about a situation that I had and he recommended that 1 file this appeal which I make now and, in fact, he filled out the chart form - he filled that out in his handwriting . I would like to point out that in the location of this building - this build- ing is right in the very heart of Collegetown . It is directly opposite the location where I understand the City is about to build a major parking ramp - I think it is going to be in the vicinity of about one hundred fifty., two hundred car spaces . They changed the size so I am not sure exactly what it is,, but this., I think is a matter of public; record = it is a major pro- ject . It ' s directly across the street from where Cornell Univer - sity, I think:, is about to spend seventeen million dollars build- ing the Performing Arts Center and about where the City has changed H2b for Mr . Travis where I understand he is going to build additional retail satires and I think sixty or eighty apart- ments , part-ment=_ , Much of the area surrounding my parcel has the 82b zone and in the D2b zone there is no parking requirement whatsoever and this is a isolated pocket of Etta which has a more stringent requirement which I don' t really understand why it is different from the surrounding area . It is my understanding that the City ' s plan is that following - when they build this parking ramp that they intend to assess the nearby property owners, including me., for the cost of constructing this ramp and I feel that it is 87A MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 27 a gross injustice on the one hand to be required to pay for this ramp and on the other hand not to be able to use it for parking for property that is directly across the street . I think: that is my appeal . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Any questions from the members of the Board? MS . FARRELL : Do you have any parking associated with the property right now? MR . FA.NV Yes; I have the ten spaces which were required in the application that I made for the Building Department and I continue to have those spaces . MR . WEAVEV Where are they located? MR . FA.NV Two of them are Can the site and the balance of them are behind the building I have on Eddy Street., that ' s about three hundred feet away . MR, WEAVER' Could you be more specific:? Where on Eddy Street? MR . FAKE : The address of that building is 418-420 Eddy Street, and the spacess are behind that building, you enter them from Williams Street . MR . BOOT4When you began describing your building you described it as a retail building . MR FAKE That is correct . That is the only use of the building, there is no residential in it , there is no office in it , there is: no manufacturing, there is really no other use of the building, just stores . MR . BOOTH: Well restaurants are dealt with., under the Zoning Ordinance different than retail establishments - in Eat zones . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 WAGE : 28 ME'. . EAtIE : I don ' t think: there is a mistake in the 82b gone - I think. ,n the 82'a zone it is an issue in having to go with how many seats; the restaurant has:, but then a r'es'taurant is a legal use for a 82a lone . I ' m riot ars expert on this but that is my under stand irig and I know that Mr . Hoard will correct me if I ' m wrong, I hope he will . SECRETAE`.Y HOARD'. They are both legal uses - MR . ses -MR . BOOTH' I understand that . As I read the 82 description, restaurants are listed separately from retail stores SECRETARY HOARDYes bec:aus:ee they have a different park. iny re(Iuirerment . That ' s where the problem is . ME.'. . ;,00THWeII I guess that ' s what I am ask: ing, because they are listed and treated differently, because you built a retail store., I don' t understand why you didn' t understand that when you leased this to a restaurant.. the requirements would changer' ME; . FANE : Well. I understand the question that you are ask: inq , let me explain a little bit mcire about the prc:cess and how we deal with it., maybe this will clarify it . I have a vacant stere and there. is a list of legal uses, which in this case includes. a restaurant arid we have a sign advertising the space - other pro- motion to interest possible ten-ants in this space . In our lease it very' specifically explains that it is, the obligation of the tenant to comply with all the legal requirements attended to their business,, which includes anything in terms of the code or of the zoning or any possible federal regulatory laws or state laws or the county health departrment or even laws which may riot HZA MINUTES 5/6/l85 PACE 29 be pa=_sed ye+. ( unintelligible) arid we don' t direct the tenant in the C1-�n_L9t_:t of his business, we feel that the tenant knows his busine=_;=_ , or should know his business better than we do and we would like to see the tenant succeed but the obligation is on the tenant in our lease; to comply with each and every and all kinds of laws of whatever nature You see a landlord is; not a police agency - he really has no mechanism for enforcing the law against the tenant , MP. . EtOOTH ' Tom.. where are the specific requirements for restaurant parking? SECRETARY HOAPDE Column 4 - you mean as far as seating ,. MR . BOOTH : Oh I see, right . SECRETARY HOARE), One space per five seats . Arid the ,gay that work=_, is: that the Fire Department determine=_; the occupancy of the restaurant - the occupancy determines the number of parking spaces that need to be provided . MR . BOOTH' The problem with what you - I ' m asking a question , but I guess I ' m stating this as; an affirmative statement - what you said to us: - your tenants are responsible for meeting the requirements - in terms of off'-street parking requirements you have a variance which is limited to the number of off-street sites.. is that correct? MR . FANE : That is correct , MR BOOTH : If' you had rented your store.. your building. to two or three restaurants - each one of them would have needed substantially more off-street parking than your entire building RZA MINUTES 5.'6/85 PAGE 30 Was -511aced MR . FAKE - Well it has to do with the nature of the restaurant , You See the question is not whether or not it is a restaurant, but how man-,,, seats does: the restaurant have` Now some reStaU- r ants are or imar i ly kitchen and t ak:e-c.ut and they don ' t have =_;eats so therefore might riot ever; require arty additional parking space=_. . Arid what the re-staurant operator does., the restaurant owner makes a plan of what his restaurant is going to be or any- One whc= is going to do any construction - then they take their plan to the Building Department and then, I assume the Building Department reviews all this and determines whether or not they are in compliance and if somebody has a proposal which.. in any respect., not .just parking, but, I mean, even if its the wrong kind of fart Or whatever . the;' go over this plan artd they don' t issue the permit unless they feel it is in compliance and then when: the construction goes on , the inspecter =_ inspect everything arid the; i+c> not issue whatever they need to get on with their work. ,_rule=_;=_: they are in compliance so that.: therefore, it is not a question of a landlord doing it because we don' t tell them how many seats to have and if the tenant decides that he wants to take: out =_.eats or change his operation, we are merely renting him space with the requirement that they use it in a legal way . MF' . SCHWAB ' I guess_: all I hear you saying then is that this restaurant has violated the lea=se . You are saying the obligation is on the restaurant to comply with all laws which now include parking so., from your point of view, it is the restaurant, not EZA MINUTE 5/6/85 PAGE 31 your fault at all . 1 guests all I hear from all of this is that the restaurant is violating its lease with you . I guess that is sort of saying - so what? Somebody has got to came up with parking places . MR . FAKE ' Well I think that is a paint to keep in mind - most of this area is: a B2b zone in which there is no parking requirements at all and when you' ve got twenty or thirty restaurants in C:ol- legetown and as near as I cart - none of the others- have any park- ing obligation whatsoever - so that setting aside the detail for 'chic.h our tenant - I think: this is something that should be -ad- dressed - that this one restaurant would have parking require- merits and none of the others would have one - I really question whether it is good public policy for any reason to =_single out one restaurant with a requirement that none of the competitors have . Another point to be considered is the guy applies, for a permit to build it as far as I cart tell - in accordance with the permit - should he - suppose I take your suggestion - perhaps. I should seek. to evict him for building a restaurant - I don' t know that that Would really be a constructive approach . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well there might tie another alternative and that is simply some sort of method by which the restaurant could be redesigned . I mean, it is riot necessary to evict him but certainly if the seating capacity is the question it could be, perhaps JUSt as easy a walk.- in . Have you explored -ther alternatives? MP . FAKE . I discussed this with the Building Commissioner and he BZA MINUTES 56/85 FAG : 32 suggested that I make this appeal . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; Have you explored the alternatives though with your tenant'? MR . FANS : No I have not . MR . BOOTH' You say that this is the only restaurant that is in Ma . MR . FAKE : I think: it is the only one in C:olle_3etown . I could be wrong but that is my understanding . MR . BOOTH : It is; certainly true though that a lot of other property in Callegetown is zoned 61a . Is that not correct;' MR. . FA.NE : There is some other property that is zoned 62a - most of it is, in fact, used only residential and there is no commercial establishments on it . I don ' t have a zoning map in front of me but that is my recollection . MR. . WEAVEV Well, for clarification, it ,just seems to me that the basis for granting a variance involves the individual proper - ty not some lana useage plan - we don' t generally - modify that and it would seem to me that what you are talking about is diffi- culty of being zoned different than others - I would leave that to the legislature to iron out, as they zone a lot at a time or a block: at a time or less than a block: in this sensitive area that leaves this Board with less than a clear direction as to what the Community lane{ plan is . But I don' t think: it shoves over on us the requirement - or the Bear:', cf toning Appeals , a requirement to be wiser than the legislature , so I ' m not particularly patient with listening to whether the zoning is fair or unfair - all BZA MINUTES 5/6./85 PAGE ' 33 things depending upon who is reviewing the document but it would =_:eem to me that on the issue of whether in a B2 area, there ought to tie some relief in anticipation of using public parking in place .:*f privately required parking is something beyond - I hope beyond the decision for this Board . MR . FAKE : There is another issue here . This restaurant was given a 'building permit to guild a restaurant . I was not in- volved in that but the result was that I wind up with an unmar - ketable building . This is a tremendo.-us hardship . I don ' t under - stand what I ' ve done to ( unintelligible.) . I 'built the building iri accordance with everything . I signed the lease for a legal use. The guy goes down and was given a building permit -builds in accordance to, it and then I am told that I can' t get a C . G . on the building . MR . WEAVER Well it would seem to me that both the person in the restaurant business and the person in the retail business in Col- legetown ought to be particularly alert to the zoning require- ments they are subject to . I ' m riot intere=sted in laying the blame; I ' m ,just saying that probably we, could all get in a circle and take the responsibility for this but to say that someone who rents the building - with .your relatively considerable experience is. riot alert to the fact that a. place of assembly requires more off-street parking than a merchantile would and the problem of who should have beers alert., either the tenant or you doesn' t help me to make a decision on a solution , One solution that hasn' t been mentioned here is requiring additional off-street parking 62A MINUTES 5/E=/8 PAGE : 34 arid I WO l t Suggest that Would be perfect for all concerned . That it would improve the value of your building and would main- twin your tenant and clear up the lease and would result in a C . O . being issued . If that is the only deficiency that is: being argued on your particular case . MR " FAKE : I don' t know if it Would tie possible. to require that many permanent parking spaces ( unintelligible) MS . FARRELL : Right now you have ten, right "' Arid how Marty .are required? SECRETARY HOARD : Twenty-six . MS . FARRELL ' Twenty-six and and we are talking about? SECRETARY HOARD : Sixteen MS . FAR.R,ELL =sixteen artci then this r_.ther nerson had rented siteen spaces in the area . . " MR . FAKE : He nave himselfa one year lease , this Mr . Newman . SECRETARY HOARD : Norman . MR . FAKE : Norman, right . MS . JOHNSON-. Could you dc: that ., could you get . . . MR . FANE ' Well I don ' t think: there is any assurance that I could get them --in a long-term basis . That doesn ' t create additional parking . MR , BOOTH' What doesn ' t;' MR . FAKE : Leasing them . CHAIRMAN TCMLA.N' Well n* ither does the var ianc:e on the other- side of the question . aZA MINUTES 5/6//5 PAGE , 2115 MR . BOOTH , The total twenty-six: applies to the restaurant and all the other units? SECRETARY HOARD The entire property . MS . JOHNSON', Assuming there continues to be only one restaurant of this size? SECRETARY HOARD'. On the condition that the rest of it would have to stay retail . MR , SCHWAB '. If and when this parking garage is built, could it come from that on some scat of arrangement, the restaurant pays for the parking or something, or is that impossible? SECRETARY HOARD'. The ruling has been that it is illegal to assign City parking space=_; . Now . I ' m not going to guarantee that that is the way the City is going to handle that parking garage . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions from members of the Board? MS . FAR.R,ELL : YOU still have. those additional sixteen spaces now? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes through July . MS . FARRELL : July? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes, July . MF: . EtCtCbTH ' Jiist as a matter of information, because the parking spaces have now been acquired, why haven ' t you issued the Certificate of Occupancy naw`' Is it because you anticipate that . . SECRETARY HOARD, He has one stare under construction right now and what ?ie is trying to do is - the problem is: that . as I under- stand it., is with renting places when the prospective tenant isn ' t sure what the game plan is going to be for the next year or B?A MINUTES 5/6/85 PAG : 6 so it they are: going to lose the Certificate of. Occupancy if the parking is lost , One of the things that happened during all of this is that the Common Council was talking about enacting the C-CD zoning in Collegetown and if they had done that the parking requirement for Mr . Fane' s property would have dropped consider - ably , He would have not had a problem in keeping it in compli- ance , ;ompli-an e , So that is why things kind of - when we talked with him we would wait to see what happened . As I understand it, what happened was that other neighbors up there - the proposed zoning would have covered both the 62a and the B2b, it would have raised the parking requirement for the 62b_, which had no parking re- quirement, it would have lowered it for the B2a and the property owners in the 62b filed a petition of prote=st which meant that - under State law - that the Council had to have A to 2 majority vote to pass the zoning change - They didn ' t get it . CHAIRMAN TOMLAW Further questions from the members of the Board? Thank: you Mr . Fane . Is there anyone else who would like to speak: in favor of the granting of this •variance? ( no one) Is there anyone out there who would like to speak in opposition to granting thtis. variance . If not., it ' s ours . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : :37 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO . 1619 115-21 DRYDEN ROAD MR. , BOOTH: I think we ought to ask: Tom some questions . I guess they center around, Tom,, how was it that the restaurant lessee applied for a permit and had the permit granted without the problem having been recognized or had it been recognized, would that have offset the difficulty that Mr . Fane is now in`' SECRETARY HOARY If it had been recognized at the time - when Mr . Fane got his variance - his variance request said that he would provide the parking . When the Deputy Building Commissioner met with the restaurant owner - prospective restaurant owner - and Mr . Dieteric:h looked at the file on it - it said that parking would be provided, he didn' t go any further than that . MR . BOOTH : He didn ' t ask: about what number of spaces and size of the restaurant . . . . SECRETARY HOARD: They did have some discussion on that and there was a figure arrived at . Subsequent to that the Fire Department went in there and raised the number of people. or the occupancy from fifty-five to eighty-five, or something like that . MS . FAF'RELL " Is eighty-five the occupancy now? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes , And that brought that requirement up accordingly . MS . FARRELL ! But even if it had been fifty-five originally, it would have increased the parking . . . . SECRETARY HOARD: Yes., there would have been an increase . MR . BOOTH; And what was anticipated as a result of that increase? For fifty-five people? BZA MINUTES 5/6/8 PACE : 38 SECRETARY HOARD : That the property owner Would provide the parking . MR . BOOTH : So the restaurant owner irk a sense was saying, the property owner will provide whatever- parking is necessary? SECRETARY HOARD ' I don ' t know what the restaurant owner was saying, I wasn' t a party to that discussion . But, when I realized what had happened there and notified Mr . Farre - that was about the time that they were talking about rezoning so it looked like it wasn' t !going to be a problem . Whether something Could have been done to correct it at that paint.. I ' m not sure because the restaurant owner had begun construction . MR . BOOTH '. Did Mr . Norman send us all a letter last summer '' Did one of the tenants in this building send us a letter about parking problems"' CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; Not to my knowledge . SECRETARY HOARD : He may have . MR. . BOOTH '. I recall some knowledge about the problem. CHAIRMAN TC'MLAN' In this building? MR . BOOTH: In this particular building last summer . Someone - I thought wrote a letter to the Board - not part of any appeal - it was just - he wrote a letter to each of us, saying that this was a problerr,. We never dealt with it formally . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. Well there is probably no reason or no way in which we could have . SECRETARY HOARD '. I had hoped - as part of this process that this appeal would go through the Planning Board . It is interesting BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 39 that they ,:hos:; to deal with a home occupation and not this, which seems to be a much more significant planning issue . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: It is also a lot thornier - SECRETARY HOARD: Because they would have a better idea of what the plans are - if there are any plans for rezoning . MS . FARR.ELL : The problem with individual tenants obtaining leases for parking is that the building could go in and out of compliance, depending an which tenants stay - and if the parking gets renewed every year . I mean., it just makes it more "iffy" than if the owner of the building has the parking . SECRETARY HOARD : Yes . ' M6.'. . SCHWAB : And the owner has to change the amount of parking depending on what tenants he has . MR . WEAVER.: Well this conversation about a lease doesn ' t stimu- late me to any great change of mind - whether the owner of the building or the tenant should provide that - that is a matter ' between them - but as far as the City is concerned - it is my understanding that there was a zoning variance granted to put up a merchantiie building and by doing that: it wa=sn' t a license to occupy it with a movie theater or a restaurant or some other oc- cupancy that would bring the requirement for additional off- street parking - so as far as this Board is concerned, we were never approached with the potential , by the owner of the building of other than a merchantile building . However the present pre- dicament in which both the owner and the tenants are trying to ` conform with a difficult or impossible task: - it just seems to me BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 40 that the very fact of all the intention that College Avenue -or C:ollegetown has received from a rather peculiar zoning pattern area - that to try to guess the planning and guess the legisla- tive intent - it seems to me a pretty hazardous_: occupation for a Berard of Loraine Appeals . It goes beyond what I understand to be our charge . MP. . SCHWAB : 1 agree . MR . WEAVEP, : It is not improper for the zoning officer to suggest to Mr . Fane that he exhaust this as one avenue of remedy., but failing that, it would seem that there is a potential for a couple of remedies - one is to appeal directly to Common Council which has: listened to other predicaments of commercial develop- ment in this area and also in Collegetown - so that they may be encouraged to use the same fine tuning they have used on these other properties or failing that,; have the building owner and the -tenant -try to solve their problem with some kind of additional off-street parking . Neither of these possibilities have been exhausted and to jump in there ahead of those possibilities seems to me to be inappropriate . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Do I hear a motion for appeal number 1619? MR . BOOTH: I will make a motion . Let me preface my motion by making two comments . One,, it appears to me that ( unintelligible) a meeting of what happened, happened, indicates that the Deputy Building Commissioner made, certainly an honest mistake, but a mistake that caused some difficulties in this thing and I suppose that is regretable but I don' t think: it changes what the neces- BZA MINUTES 5/6/u= PAGE : 41 sary outcome is . Secondly, this Board has heard before and I am sure we are going to hear it again, a :great deal of concern about the spillover of parking associated with uses in C:ollegetown - impacts felt by neighborhoods around C:ollegetown . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE : 42 DECI =SION - APPEAL NO . 1619 115-21 DRYDEN ROAD The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of Jason Fane for an area variance for deficient off-street parking and for lot coverage to permit the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the one story building containing a restaurant and retail stores at 115-21 Dryden Road , The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTHi I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1619 . MR . SCHWAB , I second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT : 1 ) This is a self- imposed difficulty that was clearly avoidable upon a reading of the clear language of the Zoning Ordinance and of the variance previously granted by this Board . 2) It appears that there may well be alternatives for solving the off-street parking requirements for this facility that have not been explored and exhausted by the parties_; involved . VOTE : 6 YES; 0 NO DENIED 8ZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 43 tiECRETAR HOARD ' The next case is APPEAL NO . 1620 106 SHORT STREET Appeal of Louis and Carolyn A . Fabi for an area variance for a deficient sideyard under Section 30 . 25, Column 12 of the Zoning Ordinance, and a variance from the sideyard requirement of Sec- tion 35 . 4 `of the Swimming Pool Ordinance, to permit the installation of an above-ground pool at 106 Short Street . The property is located in an R-2b ( residential, one- and two-family dwell- ing) Use District in which a family swimming pool is a permitted use; however , under Sections 30 . 49 and 30 . 57 of the Zoning Ordinance and the requirements of the Swimming Pool Ordinance, the appellants must first obtain variances for the listed deficiencies before a building permit can be issued for the pool installation . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Will the appellant step forward please' Again beginning with identifying yourself and Your address . MR . FARI : My name is Lou Fabi, I live at 106 Short Street and I G was denied a building permit for what we just discussed . I need a - I ' m s,hy five: feet on one side property line and I need a variance. for that - for a deck. and an eighteen foot round swimming pool . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: One of the questions: I had in reviewing your statement and the reason for your appeal., is that - the questions I had resulted from your having said if the pool were centered on the lot there would be no view from the main house and yet I noted that in the rear., center and it really is smack: dab in the center of your 1975 addition , there is a double glass door - some six. foot high and I asked myself.; well now he is saying there isn' t any way in which one can watch the pool and yet there is . MR . FABI : What we meant by that was., if we were in the kitchen BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 RAGE : 44 -there is a window right off the kitchen - now you can see the pool frcim the double - from the back: room., of course. and another room - what I want for safety purposes - ,just to see the pool from the kitchen - I think. I was misquoted . Just from the kit- chen area, which has a window that would view the pool - even half the pool and if there was anything that fell in the pool you could see it ripple or something - if nobody was in the back. -say we were having dinner - that is mostly what that was for . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Another thought that occurred to me, I was won- der ing on-dering just as a point of information - whether it had occurred to you - is if you moved the pool back further on the lot slight- ly - again within the tolerances of the permitted use -or permit- ted location - I was wondering whether you couldn' t see it a lit- tle tilt better in arty event from the. kitchen . MR . EABI : Well, not really, because the window - if it goes back: arty farther - I am still shy the feet . If I - one side or the other - if I move it batik., I ' m okay . If' I move it towards the center again - that is what you are saying . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN. Yes . Back: further on the lot but in the center' . I was just wondering if you could see more of it by virtue of the fact that there is not quite tete angle that there would be. close up . MR . EABI : You probably would see it, yes . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions from other members of the Board? MR , FABI : Excuse me - just to finish . To go out - if you see the diagram you have a twenty-four by twenty-four deck . What BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 45 we wanted was the pool coming right off the deck . If we went track: any farther I ' d have to take a loan at another bank to finish off the deck . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN : Okay . MR. . BOOTH: So you are going to build the deck: as well as the pool': MR . FABI : Yes sir . MR. BOOTH : And the deck: at its closest point to your south property line would be how close? MR. . FABI : From the back room would be twenty-four feet by twenty-four . . . MR . DOOTH' No, no . From the edge of the deck: . . . MR . FABl : From the edge of the deck: to . . . MR . BOOTH' The: property line toward Franklin Street . MR . WEAVER : One hundred and four . MR . FABI : Franklin Street would be . . . MR . BOOTH: From the deck: to the property line MR . FABP From the deck: to the property line would be ten feet . That ' s where the end of the pool also is , What I need there is five - fifteen . MS . FARRELL : Then how far is the pool from the other lot line? MR . FABI : It is seventeen actually . MS . FARRELL7 So it is seventeen on one side - you propose seventeen on one side and ten on the other? MR . FABI : Well for the whole thing is ten and there is seven feet of deck; - then there is the eighteen foot pool and then BBA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 46 a there is the ten on Franklin . So it goes ten, eighteen, seven and ten . Actually the whole back lot . MR . BOOTH ' Say that again . MR FABI : Okay . Starting on Franklin Street . MR . BOOTH ' Right - ten feet . MR . FABII need ten feet to the deck: which is the end of the pool . Eighteen feet - diameter of the pool - then there is a sever: foot, which is the deck: and then from the deck to the Lincoln Street line there would be ten feet, approximately . MR BOOTH '- r-c: your 1975 addition is ten feet from that northern property line'' Is this measurement ten feet? From the deck to that property line? MR . FABI ' No . From the deck: to the property line will be ten feet . The 1975 addition is more - it ' s . . . MR . BOOTH' E1Lit this; shows the deck: and the 75 addition . . . MR . FAE1I : 0k.aY., let ' s see here . . . I would say it is a good twenty feet from the 75 - on the back . MR . BOOTH : Twenty feet? MR . FABI : I would say: well - it would be fifteen, roughly . MR . BOOTH : From where to where? MR , FABI : Well from the old - the back: addition., right, that is What you are talking about? MR . BOOTH , YES . MR . FAB1 ,, To the property line on Franklin Street . MR . BOOTH : Is fifteen feet? MR . FABI ' Fifteen - I imagine it goes LIP . . . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 47 MR . SCHWAB� You aren' t talking about the property line to Franklin Street, YOU are talking abc.ut the other property line _ MR , BOOTH: Yes: I ' m talking about the . . . MR . FABI . On. Short Street , towards Lincoln =street MR , BOOTH : That ' s right . MR . FABI : I think: that ' s right because that is the same as the pool or the deck: . MR . SCHWAB Let me ask: YOU a little different thing . You ' ve got basically forty - this is basically a rectangular lot - it may be perfectly rectangular Fort;, -five feet and the Pool Ordinance essentially requires thirty feet - fifteen feet on each side,, so if you centered it you could have a fifteen foot pool . Why do you nee.: ars eighteen foot pool rather than a fifteen foot pool'? MR . FABI : Why? MR . SCHWAB : Yes , why? MR. . FAPI . Because it was already purchased without knowing that we. needed a variance for an eighteen foot rr_rund pool If I had known I needed a fifteen foot round pool , I W<.;,_II hclVe bought a f i f t e e n foot round pool . It was bought before we knew and that is why we didn' t get our building permit and everything else . MR . SCHWABRight . MR . aOOTH . When did you buy it? MR . FART February . MR SCHWAB So a fifteen toot pool., centered, still would have yoUr k: itc:her, viewing problem but, looking at it . at least now i Would be all right with you compared with - with all that you ' ve BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 48 gone through MR . FABl : Definitely . If you noticed the diagram, there is a deck and everything else - what we wanted - and then we ran into problem; like that . What I am asking is for the five foot variance on one side . Unless there are other problems that I don' t know about . MR . SCHWAB: Right . So the pool is not returnable I guess . MR . FABI : No . We' d have to sell it . MR . BOOTH : On the Franklin Street side of your house; the distance from your house to your property line is approximately six feet? MR FABI : From the main house . . . MR . BOOTH' To the Franklin -street side . . . MR, FABli There was also a problem there . From the existing house . MR . WEAVER : As a matter of clarification,; I hope, Columns 12 and lit show the conditions as being one side yard being eight foot and the other . . . . MR.. BOOTH ; Yes, I wasn ' t sure where that was being measured . MR . WEAVER ; I don' t know where it is either but we are talking about six inches, whether it is on the north side or on the south side, not to be critical . . . MR . BOOTH: Oh I see: those are the main house dimensions . MR . WEAVER ; I ' m sure it is the main house ( unintelligible) lot line . . . MR . ROOTH' That is what I was trying to figure, I didn' t look. BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE ' 49 back at that . MR . WEAVER ! So,, looking at the existing conditions and what he proposes to create doesn' t change that . MR . BOOTH: That is the point that I have been trying to get at . MR . WEAVER ! Well., one place that he changed it radically is the rear yard . MR . SCHWAK Rear yard, and the swimming pool has its own special requirements . As a matter of interest , do any of your neighbors have swimming pools? MR , FABI : There is one on the: corner of Franklin - Mrs . Carlson -Franklin and Auburn Street, they live right on the corner . Their pool was put in many years ago, so CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? MS . FARRELL : If the pool were centered in the back: yard - from both skies of the lot; there would still be a two and one-half foot deficiency on each side'? MR . FABI Yes, ma' am, if it were centered . MR . BOOTH : One and a half . MR . FABI : One and a half., yes, I ' m sorry , MR . SCHWAB : One and a half . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Any other thoughts? We've tried to move that pool around from one side of the lot to the other . SECRETARY HOA.RW Have you thought about making it oval? CHAIRMAN TOMLA.N: Okay, thank: you , Is there anyone else who would like to speak: in favor of granting this appeal? (no one) Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to the BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 51 DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO . 1620 106 SHORT STREET (CHANGED TAPE HERE: MISSED SOME of THE DISCUSSION) MR . WEAVERi . . . would it not be appropriate to treat the deck: and pool as separate entities . The requirements for the two are substantial ( unintelligible) I am worried about the findings of fact - what we are talking about - whether we are talking about the Swimming Pool ordinance . . . C:HAIRMA.N TOMLAN: I assumed we were dealing with the Swimming Pool ordinance solely . MR . WEAVER: We have an application for a :.leek. . SECRETARY HOARD : I . . . percentage of lot coverage problem. MR. . BOOTH : You have a rear yard problem, too., don' t you? SECRETARY HOARD : Yes, and a rear yard problem . MR . SCHWAB : And existing deficiencies - he would have to apply for the deck ( unintelligible) MR . BOOTH: Well if you deal with the deck: first, how does that affect the pool and if we deal with the pool, how does that affect the deck? MR . WEAVER! Well, I ' m ,just concerned - if I don ' t have to make the findings, I ' m not quite as concerned . MR . SC:HWAR ' Well., without addressing Charles ' point; is it a practical difficulty to have an eighteen foot pool which you suddenly realize that you can ' t use? Which strikes me: in essense of what he is ask ing . MS . FARRELL ' It certainly would be difficult . / MR . SC`.HWAK And what is the other side, should he have known? BZA MINUTES 516/85 PAGE : 51 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Well the other side. of course, is ignorance of the law is no excuse . Does it become easier if we deal with the deck first? MS , FARRELL ! Cunintelligible) MR . WEAVEK Maybe for him but . . . MS . FARRELL : Right., yes, that is what I mean., so why don' t we start with the swimming pool, if the swimming pool doesn ' t get built maybe the deck: is not important . I don' t know . MS . JOHNSON: So the deck isn ' t already constructed? The appeal only talks about the swimming pool . MR . WEAVER! I have been in his back yard: and there is no deck . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN! That ' s right , I looked too . And there is a lot of sand where the pool should be . SECRETARY HOARD; The Swimming Fool Ordinance - there is a fifteen foot sideyard question that is fairly arbitrary . . . . what if it were a hundred foot diameter pool, why fifteen feet - is it for safety., is it for noise, what is it for ? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Splashing . SECRETARY HOARD : So a pool this size, maybe fifteen feet doesn ' t seem such a hard and fast requirement . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: What are the usual diameters of the pools? I bet there is no planning study about that . SECRETARY HOARD : I don ' t know . I was going to say we haven ' t pooled our information . . . I really don ' t know . , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; One could say., before we drown in information . Helen did you say someone should make a motion before we go any MA. MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 54 DECISION ON APPEAL NO . 1620 106 SHORT STREET The hoard of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Louis and Carolyn Fabi for an area variance and a variance from the sideyard requirement of Section 35 , 4 of the Swimming Pool Ordinance to permit the installation of an above-ground pool at 106 Short Street . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . WEAVER' I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 1620 . MS . JOHNSON: I second the motion . FINDINGS UE FACT : 1 I The size of the pool , eighteen feet in diameter, is compatible with the dimension of the property on which it is to be installed . The deficiencies in its placement relative to the side yards are five feet or less out of a maximum requirement of fifteen feet and would not seriously affect adjacent properties . 11 The deck: would merely be an extension of the existing structure as far as side yard is concerned and would not increase the deficiencies of the side yard deficiency . The percentage of lot coverage resulting from the installation of the pool and deck: is less than four percent beyond the requirements of the Ordinance and would be an acceptable variance insofar as lot coverage percentage is concerned . 3) The pool and attendant deck: are compatible with the residential character of the neighborhood . 4) Practical difficulties are that no pool of reasonable i 8ZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE55 dimensions would be possible on this property if it were to strictly conform to the Ordinance , 5] The deck is e reasonable amenity fur e beck yard pool . V0TE � YE'-_i,' 1 NO GRANTED BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PACE ' 56 SECRETARY HOARD : I don ' t see. anybody here for appeal number 1621, 520 East Buffalo Street , anybody here? ( no one) We ' 11 go on to the last ease then, APPEAL NO . 1622 - 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET Appeal of James Iacovelli for an area variance for deficient off-street parking , deficient lot size , and deficient setbacks for the front yard, one side ,yard, and the rear yard, under Section 30 . 25, Columns 4, F. . 11 ; 12, and 14., to permit the issuance of a building permit and Certificate of Occupancy for the now two-family dwelling at 506 South Cayuga Street . The property is located in an R3b ( residential, multiple dwelling' 4_i=_.e District in which the use as a two-family dwelling is a permitted use ; however under Section 30 . 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant must obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the pr6perty . This property was converted without a required building permit and area variance . . MR . MAZZA: My name is Ed Mazza and I represent Mr . Iacovelli, the appellant , I have offices at 307 N. Tioga Street . Unfortun- ately my client commenced doing some renovations to a property at 506 S . Cayuga Street without a permit . What he was doing there was he was converting a single family house which had five bed- rooms: in it, to a two-family house, with a total five bedrooms in it . He was doing this by tab: ing the basement apartment - base- merit rooms and making that into a separate apartment where his daughter would live . During this construction he was advised that he needed a building permit for that and subsequently to get this appeal . There ar-e several deficiencies on the property Which, except for one, have existed since prior to the enactment of the Toning Ordinance,, none of which will be increased by the BZA MINUTE 5x6/85 PAGE : 57 granting of the variance , Those deficiencies are , the minimum lot size, the minimum front yard setback , minimum side yard re- quirement and the minimum rear yard requirement . The one that would be increased, because it would be divided from a one-family structure to a two-family structure, is the off-street parking . As: it iso I don' t know if you have driven by thi site or not, but there is - right on the side of the hill - and {here is no place for any parking to occur on the lot itself and it has been done, as it has: been a five bedroom unit since it started . All of the parking was on the =_street . If this variance is' granted,, he has been able to secure, at the property next south - just up the hill - three parking spaces which would meet thl requirements of the Ordinance and you would have this on a three year lease . I would suggest that quite possibly what you could do if you were so inclined, would be to grant the variance with a condition on it that he have the=se parking places - that the Certificate run the term of the lease so that if he had a three-year lease, if you were inclined you could give him a Certificate of Compliance for three years; at which time he would have to come in with ap- proval of the parking, once again . If he does this and he gets these parking places, actually what he has done` is he has elimin- ated some of the deficiencies that exist there now, because he would have provided three parking spaces where there were none before . The other -the minimum lot size - thele is nothing charged on the exterior of the building - everything is on the interior, so the lot size - that ' s the lot size,, he can' t change B2A MINUTES 516/85 PAGV ca that . The front yard setback: is not being changed and it is not very significant - the deficiency anyway - it kind of sits funny on the lot, it is not parallel to the road - 5t its closest point it is three feet deficient and at other points it is not defi- cient at all . The minimum side yard is ten feet an one side and five feet on the other and it complies with the ten foot side yard but not the five foot side yard - it being one foot defi- cient efi-dent at its worst paint . The rear yard requirement is twenty feet and the building on the property is no closer than eighteen feet to the rear yard so it is deficient by no more than two feet . So I think: that this variance is not increasing any of the i deficiencies, it is in fact decreasing one of the deficiencies and we respectfully request that you grant this variance , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Cao you have the lease for the parking with you? MR . MA2ZA ' No it has not been signed yet . As I say, I suggest ' that it be a condition . We didn' t want to enter into a lease to incur another cast unless we knew the variance would be granted . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I see . You could then produce some sort of intent to that effect? MR . MA22A . Yes . , CHAIRMAN TOMLAN! Further questions from the Board? MR . MA22A' I think: I neglected to tell you that the spaces would be rented from a Carl Carpenter - the property is next, south, on this street . It is between two properties owned by Mr . Iacovelli . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN! It is essentially the multi-car garage with - BZA MINUTES 5/6/8 PAGE : 59 in fact., I believe some of your tenants are now making use of that space? MR . IACOVELLI : Yes that is why Carl wants me to rent three spaces . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I see . I happened to be there long enough today to notice how it was being used . SECRETARY HOARD: A 1954 Lodge that has probably been there since 1954 . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' Further questions? MR . BOOTH : Mr . Iaeovelli,. do you own other properties_: in this area? MR . IACOVELLI : i have one other house there . MR . BOOTH : One other house? MR . IACOVELLI : Yes . MR . BOOTH : And both of these houses are rental properties? MR . IACOVELLI : Yes they are . MR . BOOTH: Lo you have other rental properties in the City? MR , IACOVELLI : Yes I do . MR . BOOTH: How is it that you weren' t aware that a permit was necessary? MR . IACOVELLI : I wouldn ' t say that - I would say that I was aware,, but it was just something that we thought - one of my help - a man who works for me - it was just one of those things that we overlooked . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions? MR , WEAVER; I ' d like to continue on that a little bit . I ' d be BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 50 more easily persuaded if this were an inexperienced operator rather than a very experienced one, to forget a building permit . It just seems to me that rather than coming in Frere with an es- tablished fact and asking for approval of this Board, the proce- dure:, as you experienced on other properties that you own and operate, come in here asking for a variance and then get a build- ing permit and we grant it or we turn it down . In the present instance it would seem to me that if you are rejected in' this ease, it is certainly a self- imposed difficulty and it is not a matter of sudden discovery by an experienced guilder here that there is a City Hall and they even take phone calls . It just seems to me most inappropriate and I resent the after the fact appeals . C:HAIRMA.N TCIMLAN: Further comments from members of the Board or i questions? Thank•, you . Is there anyone else out there who would i like to speak: in favor of granting this variance? f no cine) Is there anyone who would like to speak: in opposition? ( no one) Once again and for the last time this evening, it is ours . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 61 DECISION ON APPEAL NO . 1622 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET The Beard of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of .tames Iacovelli for an area variance to permit the issuance of a building permit and Certificate of Occupancy for the now two-family dwelling at 506 South Cayuga Street . The decision of the Board was as follows : MR . BOOTH; I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in appeal number 1622 . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I second the motion . PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT '. 1 ) It is very evident that this is a self- imposed hardship . DISCUSSION ON APPEAL NO . 1621. 506 SOUTH CAYUGA STREET CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: The Chair will second the motion ,just for the sake of discussion so we can yet on with discussion . MR . BOOTH : Well I think: that there is a difficulty with any land use law in terms of some peoples not understanding what the law says and running afoul of the various requirements but I think that we are seeing a number of circumstances where, I think: this one and one other one we saw tonight, exhibit the fact that know- ledgable people who have good reason to know what the require- ments of this Ordinance are., and violated - they are here to hope that they can get by the requirements and then when they can ' t., they apply for the necessary variance and I think that this would be a good place to make a statement that self-imposed hardships are not grounds for this Board to issue variances . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN! Anyone else like to comment' BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 62 MF'. . WEAVER; Well by my discussion with Mr . Iacovelli, it was quite obvious - my feelings - I would also temper that with say- ing that we are here today and that the results of our decision can effect the use of the property and can effect the neighbor- hood; and can effect the Pity ' s administration of the Zoning Or- dinance and the Building Department . It would - I am quite sym- pathetic: with Dick ' s motion to the effect that I do feel that there should be some form of action by the City in cases where builders build without benefit of permit . However to deny this variance would negate the possibility of issuing the variance that would accomplish a goal of the Zoning Ordinance, providing adequate off-street parking for housing and in this case a conditional variance requiring three off-street parking i spaces be provided might well be more beneficial to the neighbor- hood than the other very important matter of trying to get the attention of builders and managers, that permits are required . Not to mix the two up but to try to settle in territory that would be beneficial - most beneficial - I ' m assuming my choices are limited to the two and that neither of them is the most at- tractive - but I ' ve settled for the less and I ' d be inclined to vote against the motion . Mtn . FA.RRELL : I feel the =same way . I really resent that this is coming to us now - this is a person who knew that building per- mits should have been applied for and everything and if this case were coming to me fresh and that hadn' t none through and there were provisions for parking, I would feel a lot better about it . HZA MINUTE; 516/05 PAGE : 63 As it is:_, I don' t feel comfortable denying the variance because it came in the back. door . When the provisions for parking are being - are going to be met now and that clearly needs to be a condition . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Any thoughts from the other side of the table;' My side of the table that is . MR . SCHWAB : Is: it clear that this is a grantable variance but for this? MR . BOOTH: I think: that this probably is grantable . I agree with that - I agree with Charlie' s sentiments about the parking situation - on that street in particular- - but I think we are seeing a number of situations that are regrettable and I think that those situations are likely to continue unless appropriate actions are taken . But to answer your {question, yes, my sense is that this is grantable except for this reason . M5 . FAF'RELL : And I think we can continue to look: at things on a case by case basis and if it looks as though provisions aren ' t going to be met, as they were in a pre•<riou=_s case this evening, then we can deny the variance . I mean, a self- imposed hardship is a self- imposed hardship and I don' t have much sympathy with that . If the provisions can be met, I can look at it slightly differently . SECRETARY HOARY I might mention that we have Mr . Iacovelli in Court now and he is scheduled for a hearing and to reappear in Court on Wednesday so . . MS . FARR.ELL : For this property? BZA MINUTE`_ 5/�/?S PAGE : 64 SECRETARY HOARD: For this property . MR . BOOTHi What does that relate to'? SECRETARY HOARDi To the conversion of the property without a permit . MS , F.ARR'.ELL : That takes its own course regardless of what happens'? MR , BOOTHi You mean at the time the City is proceeding against this gentleman? SECRETARY HOARD: He is attempting to get a variance . . . MR . BOOTH: We are about ready to grant a variance . . . SECRETARY HOARD: I don ' t know what you are ready to do but . . . MR , WEAVERi I feel surrounded by attorneys but (unintelligible) long enough to suggest that granting the variance doesn ' t clean the slate of the violation - that was a building without a building permit rather than occupying this property as a duplex.. , I hope . MS . FARR:ELL ! Is there something else we should know about it? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Helen you have not said anything in particular . MS . JOHNSONi Well I tend to agree with Mr . Weaver and Tracy , as well , that - and I think: it is increased by what Tom has said that if this kind of situation is being taken care of through the Courts then it seems that is punishment enough to set something as a precedent for all of those other people who may be lurking out there ready to build something without the proper permits . It seems like we can separate those two . 1 MR , WEAVER ; Well to wear this out a little bit ; the very fact BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : 65 that a denial would make this a single family dwelling., grandfathered with no off-street parking - so those are the choices I see rather clearly., not withstanding any other considerations, here is an opportunity to require off-street parking on a grandfathered property and 1 wouldn' t turn it dawn lightly . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: The Chair would suggest to the maker of the motion that it appears his motion would fail if ..noted upon and thereby to expedite matters it might be prudent to withdraw the motion and cast it in a different fashion . SECRETARY HOARD : He has already made out his ballot . MR. . BOOTH ! I realize that, I said when I made the motion that this: might not he a fruitful point but I think it is a motion that needs to be made and I will intend to make similar motions in the future . I will not withdraw it . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: All right , then let ' s vote at this point . MR . WEAVER : Shall we call it a? CHAIRMAN TUMLAN: Yes , 1622a . MR . SCHWAB : May I ask: Tom what kind of a preceeding it is? Is it a criminal proceeding against him or . . . SECRETARY HOARD: It is a civil, I guess . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN' So that a yes would be to deny . MR. . BOOTH: A yes vote is to deny the variance . The motion was to deny the variance . Findings of Fac.•t was that this was a self- imposed hardship . So a yes• vote is to deny . VOTE ! 2 YES; 4 NO MOTION FAILED . BZA MINUTES 5/6/85 PAGE : Gr-, CHAIRMAN TOMLAN; The motion failed so now we ' 11. have an alternative motion perhaps? MS . FARRELL : I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in appeal number 16212fb1 with the condition that the property owner shows a lease for three parking spaces within 500 ' of the property; on an annual basis . MR . WEAVERI second the motion . FINDINGS OF FACT ' lj The proposed changes do not exacerbate the present deficiencies in lot size - fr-ont yard., side yard., and rear yard Meeting those requirements presents practical cliff ic;ult ies which can only be solved b;✓ moving the property or acquiring additional property . 2:l The proposed use is; permitted in this. tone . 3) The owner proposes to lease the additional parl,. ing spaces which are required . VOTE ON 1622(b) 5 YES.: 1 NO GRANTED WICONDITIUN _ 67 - ' | ° BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY THAT \ took the minLtes of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York, in the matters of Appeals numbered 1616, 1617, 1618, 109, 1620, and 1622 on May G, 1985 in the Common Council Chambers, City of Ithaca, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, New York, that i have transcribed same, and the foregoing is e 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 �� ~3/ ^�' day of , 1985 Nbtary Public JEAN j. HAN0NSO0 NOTARY PUBLIC,STATE orNEW YORK No.55a6608o ' QUALIFIED mromp m,COw:/,uuw EXPIRES MARCH 30,nm-e2