Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1986-08-11 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HALL OF JUSTICE CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK AUGUST 11 , 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE APPEAL NO. 1678 David & Flora Sagan NO ONE SHOWED 4 705 N. Aurora Street APPEAL NO. 1709 Michael A. Simmons 5 210-212 Columbia Street DECISION 13 APPEAL NO. 1710 Margaret M. Rumsey 14 319 W. Buffalo Street Deliberation 23 " Decision 25 APPEAL NO. 1711 Ken Ash 26 139 Coddington Road Deliberation 40 Decision 41 CERTIFICATION OF RECORDING SECRETARY 42 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ITHACA HALL OF JUSTICE AUGUST 11 , 1986 SECRETARY HOARD: Good evening . I would like to call to order the August 11 , 1986 meeting of the City of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals. The chairman is not here tonight , the Chairman, Michael Tomlan, so, as Building Commissioner - I 'm Building Commissioner Thomas Hoard , the first order is to ask the Board to nominate an Acting Chairman for this meeting, which I ' ll do now and entertain nominations from the Board . MR. SCHWAB: I nominate Helen Johnson. MS. FARRELL: Second . SECRETARY HOARD: Do you accept? Do I hear any other nominations? MR. WEAVER: I move the nominations be closed and that one ballot be cast . . MS. FARRELL: Voice vote? MR. SCHWAB: Voice vote. I MS. FARRELL: Okay. VOTE: 5 AYE VOTES. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: The Board of Zoning Appeals operates under the provisions of the Ithaca City Charter , the Ithaca City Zoning Ordinance, the Ithaca Sign Ordinance and the Board's own Rules and Regulations. Members of the Board who are present tonight are: PAGE 1 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 STEWART SCHWAB TRACY FARRELL HERMAN SIEVERDING CHARLES WEAVER HELEN JOHNSON, ACTING CHAIRMAN THOMAS D. HOARD, SECRETARY TO THE HOARD, BLDG. COMMISSIONER & ZONING OFFICER BARBARA RUANE, RECORDING SECRETARY ABSENT: MICHAEL TOMLAN The Board will hear each case in the order listed in the Agendum. First we will hear from the appellant and ask that he or she present the arguments for the case as succinctly as possible and then be available to answer the questions from the Board. We will then hear from those interested parties who are in support of the application, 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 property in question or who live or work within two hundred feet of the property. Thus the Board will not hear testimony from persons who do not meet the definition of an interested party. While we do not adhere to strict rules of evidence, we do consider this a quasi-judicial proceeding and we base our decisions on the record . The record consists of the application materials filed with the Building Department, correspondence relating to the cases as received by the Building Department , the Planning and PAGE 2 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 Development Board 's findings and recommendations, if any, and the record of tonight 's hearing . Since a record is being made of this hearing, it is essential that anyone who wants to be heard come forward and speak directly into the microphone so that the comments can be picked up by the tape recorder and heard by everyone in the room. Extraneous comments from the audience will not be recorded and will therefore not be considered by the Board in its deliberations on the case. We ask that everyone limit their comments to the zoning issues of the case and not comment on aspects that are beyond the jurisdiction of this Board . After eveyone has been heard on a given case, the hearing on that case will be closed and the Board will deliberate and reach a decision. Once the hearing is closed no further testimony will be taken and the audience is required to refrain from commenting during deliberations. It takes four votes to approve a motion to grant or deny a variance or special permit . In the rare cases where there is a tie vote the variance or special permit is automatically denied . If only four or five members of the Board are present the appellant may decide to request postponement of his or her case until five or six Board members are present , in this case until six , or the full Board is present . Are there any questions about procedure? If not we will proceed to the first case. Mr . Secretary? PAGE 3 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 SECRETARY HOARD: The first case tonight is APPEAL NO. 1678 FOR 705 N. AURORA STREET: Appeal of David and Flora Sagan for an area variance for deficient setbacks for the front, side and rear yards under Section 30.259 Columns 11 , 129 and 14 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit conversion of the existing garage at 705 North Aurora Street for a "home office" and for storage. The property is located in an R2b (Residential , one- and two-family dwelling) Use District in which such private use of an accessory building is permitted; however under Section 30.49 the appellants must first obtain an area variance for the setback deficiencies before a building permit can be issued for the proposed conversion. This appeal was heard by the Hoard at its March 10, 1986 meeting and a variance granted; it is being reheard in response to a petition from neighbors which states that they did not receive proper notification. The rehearing was originally scheduled for the July 79 1986 meeting of the Hoard, but was held over at the appellants' request due to the lack of a full Hoard. Are the appellants here or their representative? Okay, what happens now is that we go through the rest of the Agendum and any case where the appellant hasn' t shown up when called, we have to recall so anybody who is here on that PAGE 4 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 case would have to wait until the end . The next appeal then is APPEAL NUMBER 1709 FOR 210-212 COLUMBIA STREET: Appeal of Michael A. Simmons for an area variance for deficient setbacks for the front yard and one side yard, under Section 30.49, Columns 11 and 12 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit conversion of the single-family house at 210-212 Columbia Street to a two-family dwelling. The property is located in an R2a (one- or two-family dwelling) Use District in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Section 30.57 of the Zoning Ordinance the owner must first obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed conversion. Is there anyone here on this appeal? Please come forward and present your case. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: State your name please and. . . MR. SIMMONS: My name is Michael Simmons and pretty much as you stated , this is a proposal to convert 212 Columbia Street which has been a single family house with four renters, to a two-family house with a live-in owner , which would be me and the other half would be an apartment with a maximum occupancy of two persons. The entire house would be refurbished , inside and out, foundation to roof, but it can' t be moved and that is my only problem. I am several feet too close on two sides, in fact it is a double lot and PAGE 5 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 plenty of square footage for the two family designation - I just will need a little bit more clearance on the east and the south boundaries. No other buildings or additions are intended to go into this. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Thank you. Any questions from members of the Board? MS. FARRELL: I have a question. If this is all put in one lot - one piece of property - then how come it still would count as a deficient side yard or how come it would count as a deficient side yard - things like that - one would still but the other wouldn' t then. . . SECRETARY HOARD: Well if he decides to deed them together , he would not need the. . . MR. SIMMONS: It is not a side yard problem - it is the front and one side. MS. FARRELL: Right but right now - if you consider the lot with the house separately, it is both side yards or problem if you put the two lots together , it is just one side yard, would still be a problem, right? SECRETARY HOARD: Well he would still have a problem with the front yard and this one side yard but if they are deeded together then the lot width and lot area deficiencies disappear . MS. FARRELL: Yes and one of the side yards is a problem. MR. SIEVERDING: Is that in fact what is happening? Are the two lots going to be deeded together? MR. SIMMONS: They are all under one. PAGE 6 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MS. FARRELL: They are now? MR. SIMMONS: Yes. MS. FARRELL: Okay so we end up with just a side yard and a front yard deficiency. MR. SCHWAB: Can you tell me about the parking arrangements? At the Planning Board they recommended that this Board consider this. MR. SIMMONS: Well right now there is approximately seven spaces available in the parking lot . Is that what you are concerned about? MR. SCHWAB: Well what they say is what is believed to be a neighborhood parking area be upgraded . MR. SIMMONS: Oh, well , it is not really a neighborhood parking area, per se. People would like to believe it is but I have been renting a couple of spaces to some local people at the moment but that 's all there is to that . People have the impression that that 's not a private lot because of the way it looks right now, I suppose. MR. SIEVERDING: I just wanted to ask a question of Tom. If somebody leases space on their property for parking, for others, are there requirements that have to be met relative to how that parking is prepared and how it 's relationship is to the street and all that? SECRETARY HOARD: Well if - knowing it is four more parking spaces then it has to have a surface and that can be just crushed gravel or something like that . . . MR. SIMMONS: Well it 's a gravel block presently. PAGE 7 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MS. FARRELL: So it meets the requirements? SECRETARY HOARD: If you get a larger than four - then you start having to put in grading and that sort of thing . MR. SIEVERDING: Are there any setback requirements relative to how close someone can park to the sidewalk . . . SECRETARY HOARD: The first car has to be twenty feet back , if it is parked parallel to the street . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: From the street or the. . . SECRETARY HOARD: From the front property line. MS. FARRELL: So it meets the requirements for that now? SECRETARY HOARD: No, I think . . . MR. SIEVERDING: Not at the moment , no . MR. SIMMONS: What 's. . . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Twenty by twenty feet setback . . . MR. SIMMONS: Sure - my lot runs. . . MR. SIEVERDING: Just the relationship of the parking that you have now to the side. . SECRETARY HOARD: The way it is shown on the survey, you need to start your parking lot twenty feet back from the front property line instead of right on the line. MR. SIMMONS: Right . Well , okay, I have the parking running - I mean I could have people start parking twenty feet away and just leave that space as - just relandscape that if that is appropriate. I would prefer - I really want to relandscape that entire area. Right now I am really just kind of giving people a break who are in the area - who have been depending on the lot . I really don' t want to be the PAGE 8 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 owner of a parking lot - that is not the whole purpose of this. MS. FARRELL: So if it is twenty feet back , is there still room for seven cars? MR. SIMMONS: Seven? Well that 's what the total is there, I have a total of four customers right now and there is parking behind the house as well and that is where I normally park . MR. WEAVER: I was puzzled also by that comment - was it an attempt by the Planning Board to limit parking on this property? Was it the character of the parking or what? I didn' t understand the thing , I assume I must have some company as to what they had in mind . MR. SIEVERDING: I interpreted it to mean that they are concerned about whether there is appropriate setback for where the parking begins and whether the access to and from the street - is that what is outlined Tom in Section 30.37B1? I vaguely remember a sketch that shows what the dimensions ought to be for a parking spaces. . . . MR. WEAVER: Yes, well , as a practical matter , here is a recommendation from a Board that is advisory only to us and we have before us an application for a variance and there is adequate parking to meet the requirements if we grant the variance and I 'd prefer - if it 's necessary for the authorities to require that there be an application for a community parking lot - rather than to have it shoehorned in to this variance - which seems to me to have nothing to do PAGE 9 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 with it . It's an opportunity, I grant you, to make a conditional granting but in a neighborhood as sensitive to the needs of off-street parking I can imagine there could be a variance for some exceptions to the Zoning Ordinance on parking lots if we were to have that before us. So I 'm not terribly keen on accepting their recommendation to consider that also tonight . It is not before us, it is merely a message which comes free of charge. MS. FARRELL: So without the community parking lot designation, four cars would still be allowed to park there and that is what you have now? MR. WEAVER: Well they have raised the question, it isn' t before us. It seems to me to be a much cleaner operation if, in fact, someone on that Board finds this some kind of a neighborhood nuisance or a violation, let 's say so and say what is wrong with it and cause the owner to come in here for a variance. Then we will be talking about a parking lot, a community parking lot, if one is required. Right now, one isn' t required except by a possible casual useage and you are right now renting two spaces? MR. SIMMONS: Four . MR. WEAVER: You are renting four and is four or more in the Ordinance? CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Plans shall be submitted for a private neighborhood parking area for four or more cars and a permit obtained from the Building Commissioner . MS. FARRELL: So it 's four or more. Okay. PAGE 10 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MR. WEAVER: Well I repeat that I 'd like to see an application for a variance on the neighborhood parking , if one is needed . MR. SIEVERDING: If one is needed . MR. WEAVER: My point. And give the appellant a chance to try to establish a neighborhood parking lot , if he needs to , rather than to have neither the Board nor the appellant prepared to discuss that issue with any finality. We can, I think , keep our noses in the business at hand and, without prejudicing future action on the rest of the lot, but , again, I am, tonight , one-fifth . MR. SIEVERDING: If someone were to have less than four , spaces on that lot , would they still have to meet those various requirements, setback requirements and that sort of thing, is that stipulated in the section that is referred to here in this 30? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes the setback is - even for one parking space - if it is parallel to the street - has to be twenty feet back from the . . . MR. WEAVER: However , again, what we are not talking about, but are, is if the appellant rented three spaces and he and his tenants used others, would this be a neighborhood parking facility? SECRETARY HOARD% Well the definition is that if they are rented to other neighboring properties then it is a neighborhood parking lot . PAGE 11 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: So if your area variance is granted then do you intend to continue to rent spaces to people in the neighborhood? MR. SIMMONS: Well , I ' ll tell you, like I was saying , I would prefer to phase the whole thing out , really. I don' t really want people coming and going on my land to any extent like that . It would just be me and my renters, that is my long term goal . I don' t really want a driveway there or the things that come with a parking lot . I don' t want to scare all the people who might be here tonight , away, by turning them down. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: So what we are dealing with here is an area variance. Does anyone else have any more questions? MR. SIEVERDING: Just one. The building permit that is currently issued for the property, what is that for? SECRETARY HOARD: Repairs, remove rear porch, insulation, new doors and windows, general code work . MR. SIEVERDING: I see. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Are there no more questions? Thank you. Are there any interested parties in the audience who would like to speak in favor of this application please come forward . (no one) Any interested parties who would like to speak in opposition to this application please come forward . (no one) There being none, I guess we can deliberate. PAGE 12 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 DECISION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1709 FOR 210-212 COLUMBIA STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Michael Simmons for an area variance to permit conversion of the single-family house at 210-212 Columbia Street to a two-family dwelling. The decision of the Board was as follows: MR. SCHWAB: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in Appeal No. 1709. MR. WEAVER: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1 . The proposed combining of the two lots eliminates deficiencies in lot area: lot width and one side yard. 2. The remaining deficiencies in the front yard and side yard are not exacerbated and there are practical difficulties in that the house would have to be moved. 3. There is ample parking on the site. Granting this variance does not consider the possible issue of a neighborhood parking area. VOTE: 5 YES; 0 NO; 1 ABSENT AREA VARIANCE GRANTED PAGE 13 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is Appeal No. 1710 for 319 West Buffalo Street: Appeal of Margaret M. Rumsey for an area variance for deficient off-street parking, lot width and deficient setbacks for the front yard and both side yards, under Section 30.49, Columns 49 7, 119 12 and 13, of the Zoning Ordinances to permit conversion of the single-family house at 319 West Buffalo Street to a two-family dwelling. The property is located in an R-2b (One- and Two-family Dwelling) Use District in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Section 30.57 of the Zoning Ordinance the owner must first obtain an area variance for the listed deficiencies before a Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed conversion. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Would you state your name please? MS. RUMSEY: I 'm Margaret Rumsey. Who all am I addressing? Everybody here? CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Yes. MS. RUMSEY: You are the Zoning Board of Appeals? CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Yes. MS. RUMSEY: I think it might be good if I sent around pictures - you have the rest of the information, right? MR. SIEVERDING: We do . PAGE 14 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MS. RUMSEY: This is 319 West Buffalo , which I bought a year and a half ago and I find it 's got a lot of weird problems because it is so old . It was built in 1815 and this summer I put on a new roof on the front portion of the house - are you on the Zoning Board of Appeals too? MR. WEAVER: I am. MS. RUMSEY: You are not hearing me, I guess. MR. WEAVER: That 's all right . If I can' t hear you I ' ll ask you to repeat . Don' t worry about me. MS. RUMSEY: That 's the front section of the house which is eighteen by twenty-two . That 's all new - had a permit to do that but before doing the rest of the house that needs to be done, it 's a great deal more roofing than this little section which has cost about eighteen hundred dollars to do just this small section. The other section is twenty-two by thirty plus another section behind that and what I 've done is taken a picture of - I guess I ' ll just pass them all around so you can get an idea of the various pitches and types of roofing that there are there - some of it is rolled roofing - some of it is asphalt shingles and some of it is metal roofing , part of that is flat and part of it is angled and it 's got so many different pitches and angles that it presents a tremendous problem for building a roof on the entire parcel because the house was built in sections over the years. When they say 1815, I assume that is when the original portion was built and then it was kind of built like topsy after that . So that it is a story and a half on PAGE 15 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 the front section that I 've now reroofed and in back of that it is all just a single story in a great many different sections that had been roofed and I 've - it 's been leaking off and on over the past year and I 've - several times fixed it - and the builder suggested that instead of trying to fix all the various segments with all their myriad pitches and different kinds of roofing that it would work better if I were to raise the back section up - put a roof over it and then tear out all of that weird roofing under it on this twenty-two by thirty foot section. And justify that expense by making it into a little efficiency apartment up over that basic portion of the house. And then I went to Historic Ithaca because I wanted to maintain the integrity of the house because I really like this Greek Revival roof pitch and didn' t want to do anything to this front portion because it is what really attracted me to the house in the first place that made me want to own it . And I had the idea as did the builder of - behind this original section - which I 've just reroofed - maintaining the same pitch , raising it up enough so that it would meet code for height in that this doesn' t meet code for existing bedroom facilities and in order to make it living quarters where you could also sleep , this would have to be higher than it is now. And my idea was, as the builder suggested , we could raise the pitch of this original section going back over flat over the kitchen section to look like this [held up a picture] and that 's one way of doing it and then he also suggested that this way PAGE 16 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 might work better - I ' ll pass this around also . As a means of using this same pitch sideways, that old Greek Revival pitch of the front , using this pitch - over on the sidewise portion - and as this [photo] comes around you can see how that would be - and doing that , of course, also to code, to solve the weird roof section - let me pass this around also , this shows the many pitches of the roof and I ' ll pass this around which shows the house on the lot - and you may not be able to follow it but I tried to show the various pitches on this survey of the house on the lot, with the myriad pitches and kinds of roofing available. And the idea is to solve the problem of an old, old house that was built in segments in many different ways, with a real roof problem now. And now that since I have bought it , it, of course, had to come under the new code regulations which weren' t there when it was built . So neither of these two rooms can be used for sleeping, as another one down stairs. So that this would not increase in any way, numbers of people that would have been intended for this dwelling originally but it would be an efficiency apartment in a twenty-two by thirty segment and make it structurally sound . And have an integration of the intended architectural type and make it feasible as a means of a home that would work well for me. MS. FARRELL: Are you planning to live in the house? MS. RUMSEY: I 'm hoping to in later years, that's why I bought it . PAGE 17 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MS. FARRELL: Have you considered applying for a accessory apartment rather than - an accessory apartment means that you would be the owner living in the house and then you would put an accessory apartment on the house - but it has to be owner-occupied. MS. RUMSEY: I 'm not owner-occupied now so I couldn' t do that at this point . I bought it intending it as a place for a retirement home for me, for later years. I 'm not retired , it wouldn' t - I couldn' t do that because I 'm not living there. It 's - the little downstairs part is rented now. MR. SIEVERDING: How many people live downstairs now? MS. RUMSEY: Three. MR. SIEVERDING: Three. And that would remain three after all of this renovation? MS. RUMSEY: I would imagine so , they like living there. MR. SIEVERDING: And then upstairs would be. . . MS. RUMSEY: I would expect two . No more than two . It was originally a four-bedroom house. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: How about the parking deficiencies? MS. RUMSEY: What do you mean? CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Well the regulations require two off-street parking spaces and . . . MS. RUMSEY: That lot never had parking, ever , from the beginning . There isn' t space for parking. It was originally a four-bedroom house and it didn' t have parking - the lot hasn' t changed insofar as I 'm aware. It 's a narrow, deep lot that goes back one hundred and thirty-two feet and PAGE 18 92A MINUTES - 8/11/86 the width is thirty-three point three. And the back is thirty-three and a half. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Other questions? MR. SIEVERDING: The current tenants then just park on the street? MS. RUMSEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Are you working up to a question? MR. WEAVER: I have a question. I was waiting my turn. Where is the proposed outside stairway - I don' t see it in any of the drawings. MS. RUMSEY: Oh , okay. It ' s in the back so that the people would walk to the back and come up in the back . MR. WEAVER: It would go into the back , where, can you show me? MS. RUMSEY: Right along this section [pointing to the survey] . . MR. WEAVER: But their entrance would be over here? MS. RUMSEY: No , this is the street . The people that live downstairs have this entrance that goes into the kitchen and this is also an entrance that goes into the living room. This is a sidewalk - a concrete sidewalk - going back here - right back to here - and this would go up from this back part into there. . . MR. WEAVERS Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Any further questions? MS. FARRELL: So the walkway to go to the back would be on F this side of the house? PAGE 19 BZA MINUTES - 8/11 /86 MS. RUMSEY: Yes. There is an existing concrete walk there right now. MS. FARRELL: I guess the bushes cover it up . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Any other questions from the Board MR. WEAVER: Do you contend that to repair the house in its present form would not be practical or . . . . MS. RUMSEY: Extremely expensive for a one bedroom house. MR. WEAVER: In other words, you need more income if you put a roof on it? MS. RUMSEY: That was what started the interest in doing this. Just this little segment here was about eighteen hundred dollars. They had to take off several layers and put on new base - it 's a really old house and this has been leaking and I 've been solving it , over the past year , when it 's been leaking , but it does it different ways so that it 's just very expensive. MR. WEAVER: Okay. MR. SIEVERDING: Is your contractor saying that those areas of roof sections that are currently flat have to be raised or . . . does it go beyond merely resurfacing that or does it need stucco work? MS. RUMSEY: This part is metal - from here to here is flat - that goes up , this comes up here, then this goes down and asphalt shingle behind that - that goes down and asphalt shingle - okay now this is how it goes up and over . . . PAGE 20 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MR. SIEVERDING: Is he saying that the pitch of this section here has to be raised in order to solve your leaking problem or could it be resurfaced? MS. RUMSEY: The entire thing is so complex in the many kinds there are. You see this is straight rolled roof and then down below this is another lap-straight rolled roof. I didn' t get all of them on here in all these pictures. But beyond this - you see this comes back and there is another rolled roof going down on that and then this goes up and down. Over here it goes down and asphalt shingle and there are just so very many different pitches and kinds of roofs it is kind of hard to know where all the leaks are coming from when you get a leak . You know, you just keep thinking , what do we do next , kind of thing . And the builder suggested that if a new roof were raised up - this is very expensive and so we thought , okay, to make it economically justifiable, let 's make an efficiency apartment and since it 's just a story and a half here, we would go either like this or , as Historic Ithaca suggested , possibly making the roof go that way, maintain the same pitch to keep the integrity of the house. Do it one of the two , whichever seemed to work out best , with the same twenty-two by thirty foot area that has all the complexity as is shown here. It 's a combination of fixing an age-old-long problem of a difficult nature with making it economically feasible to do it , and this is what has been recommended to me and I feel good about it . PAGE 21 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Any questions? Thank you. You can take your seat. If there is anyone in the audience who would like to speak in support of the granting of this variance, would they please come forward? (no one) Anyone who would like to speak in opposition to the granting of this variance please come forward . (no one) Seeing none we will deliberate it . PAGE 22 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 DELIBERATION ON APPEAL NO. 1710 FOR 319 WEST BUFFALO STREET MR. SCHWAB: Didn' t we have one letter from the neighbor? MS. FARRELL: There are a lot of deficiencies with this property - it is very close to the neighbors, one of the neighbors who wrote the letter against it . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Currently there are three people living there and it would be a maximum of five possible if the variance were granted . SECRETARY HOARD: Well with the variance to make it into two units, each unit under Zoning - then would be entitled to a family plus two . But it would depend - it would be limited by the number of bedrooms in each unit . MS. FARRELLs Size of the bedrooms? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes. MR. SIEVERDING: Tom, on the table where you summarize all the various dimensions, relative to zoning , Column 13 - Other Side Yard - over line by one point nine? SECRETARY HOARD: The building is skewed a little bit - it actually crosses the property line. MR. SIEVERDING: The property line. SECRETARY HOARD: On the east side. MR. WEAVER: That 's what they call close. MR. SCHWAB: That 's not the side that 's right in the way. MS. FARRELL: No - it's less than three feet . How wide is a normal side walk? PAGE 23 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: That 's three feet but that 's not as wide as (unintelligible) MS. FARRELL: When the schools are in session there is a lot of on-street parking in that neighborhood . Parking spaces are always very tight . MR. WEAVER: Well the point made by the appellant on the complexity of the roof design, and so forth, is something that has been there in various stages of disrepair since 1820 and the roof repair to me is a routine affair , not a special case, although a correction for drainage if pursued might be a consideration. I 'm not persuaded that , at least by what we heard, that this is - other than a method of paying for a roof - it certainly is a neighborhood that does suffer from some intensity of on-street parking much of the year . The proposed use would apparently exacerbate that deficiency . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: That for several hours of the day - - certainly early morning and mid afternoon school hours is a real traffic hazard . MS. FARRELL: Well I think it is, it is a traffic hazard then but it is parking all day there because there is not enough parking for staff members as well as. . . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Is anyone ready to make a motion? MS. FARRELL: Yes I ' ll make a motion. PAGE 24 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 DECISION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1710 FOR 319 WEST BUFFALO STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Margaret Rumsey for an area variance to permit conversion of the single-family house at 319 West Buffalo Street to a two-family dwelling. The decision of the Board was as follows: MS. FARRELL: I move that the Board deny the area variance requested in Appeal Number 1710. MR. WEAVER: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1 ) This is a small , extremely narrow lot, deficient in lot width, with percent of lot coverage - front and both side yards, as well as in parking, as it stands now. The proposed change would increase the parking deficiency or exacerbate the deficiency because it would cause it to go from one to two required spaces. 2) From observation there is a shortage of on-street parking in this neighborhood during the school year. 3) There has been opposition voiced from the immediate side yard neighbors to the proposed changes. VOTE: 5 YES; 0 NO; 1 ABSENT AREA VARIANCE DENIED e PAGE 25 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is APPEAL NO. 1711 for 139 CODDINGTON ROAD: Appeal of Ken Ash for an area variance for deficient setback for the front yard under Section 30.49, Column it of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit conversion of the single-family house at 139 Coddington Road to a two-family dwelling. The property is located in an R-2a (One- or Two-Family Dwelling) Use District in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Section 30.57 of the Zoning Ordinance the owner must first obtain an area variance for the deficient front yard setback before a Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed conversion. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Would the appellant please come forward? State your name please. MR. ASH: My name is Ken Ash, this is my associate, Howard Fuller who is also co-owner of 139 Coddington. We are looking for a front yard variance. We are currently four feet or five feet too close to the road - we are looking for permission to be that close to the road . MR. FULLER: We have an existing structure which meets all the. . VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: Could he speak up please? MR. FULLER: The existing structure meets all the required distances from roadways and side yards except for a carport PAGE 26 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 an existing carport - which , according to the surveyor is twenty-two feet and there is a requirement of twenty-five feet . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Speak up , please - maybe you ought to turn around . MR. FULLER: The existing structure is within the guidelines except for the carport which is twenty-two feet from the road - with a required distance of twenty-five feet . The variance that we request is that - the variance for the existing structure - twenty-two feet versus twenty-five feet . MR. SCHWAB: Have you considered taking off the carport or three feet off the carport? MR. ASH: That is a consideration. MR. SCHWAB: In which case you would not need the variance at all . . MR. ASH: Right . We would not need the variance at all if we cut off three feet . We thought we could save some money by just trying to get the variance. If not , we' ll just cut the carport off. MR. FULLER: The neighborhood . . . MR. ASH¢ The existing carports in the neighborhood are all within - or , in fact , closer - just as far , if not closer to the road . MR. SCHWAB: Yes. Can you park a car with three feet less - in the carport? PAGE 27 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MR. FULLER: Yes. You can park two cars in the driveway now. MR. SIEVERDING: What is the proposed conversion - what are you going to do with the property (unintelligible) - is it going to be income. . . MR. FULLER: It will be income with an upstairs unit and a downstairs unit . VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) MS. FARRELL: Maybe you could all move forward a little bit or something because this is a bad acoustical room - you could kind of move up here and hear a little bit better . MR. SIEVERDING: So there will be one unit up and one unit down? And four and three - am I reading this right? There will be four bedrooms in one unit and three bedrooms in the other? MR. ASH: Three and three for the current zoning . That is all we can have - three up and three down. MR. SIEVERDING: And in terms of occupancy then you will be renting to how many persons per unit? MR. FULLER: Three and three. MR. ASH: Three per unit . MR. SCHWAB: Do you have a guess on the cost of taking two feet off the carport? MR. FULLER: A ball park estimate would probably be three to five hundred dollars. But as I mentioned - it is not out of line with the neighborhood. PAGE 28 HZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: So you propose to have two units, one up and one down with three occupants each? MR. FULLER: Right . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Any other questions? I guess that 's it gentlemen. Thank you. Those interested parties who would like to speak in support of the granting of this variance please come forward . (none) Those in opposition to the granting of this variance, would they please come forward, one at a time. MR. PORTER: I 'm Paul Porter , I live at 141 Coddington Road , right next door . Now these fellows here are the typical people that will break up a neighborhood because he owns a house next door to that one - he got away with that without any permission, right? SECRETARY HOARD: He didn' t need any. MR. PORTER: Well there is no way to govern how many kids are in those houses. We've counted eight to ten kids come out of there in the morning . The front window faces the road, they hang up oilcloths, it looks terrible. The , garbage cans are left out most of the week - this last summer there was garbage left out on the front lawn - a bag of garbage - they don' t do anything to improve it . They are the typical absentee landlord and absentee landlords cannot govern their houses - they have no way of doing it - they don' t care about the neighborhood and it ruins your property right to the ground . Now I got - the guy he bought this house from told us at first that he bought it from a fellow PAGE 29 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 that him and his wife were going to live in it , that 's why he sold it to him and we said "who was it" and he said it was Kenneth Ash . We said - right away - he is not going to do that . Next thing we know, he puts in to start renting to students. He hasn' t improved anything up there and people that live in the house will take care of the property but absentee landlords do not take care of the property and they are running it down - the hedges haven' t been trimmed all summer - it is twice as high as mine right now and I haven' t been able to cut mine the last week . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Okay. Any questions? MR. SCHWAB: You are the next door neighbor? MR. PORTER: Yes. MR. SCHWAB: Does the size of the carport make much of a difference to you? MR. PORTER: Well we don' t want them butting right up against our line, no . MS. FARRELL: Well if he cuts off the carport he can do this legally without a variance. . . MR. PORTER: Yes. . . .well what gets my goat is how these guys can rent under - or buy under false pretenses and then go in there and say they are going to rent to three up and three down - next thing you know - you've got ten to twelve cars sitting out front - kids running in and out - we have to call the police on the noise - they have no way of governing , they don' t care - and they are going to ruin that road . PAGE 30 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: May I speak up , as his wife? MR. WEAVER: You' ll have to take your turn. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: You' ll have to take your turn. MS. FARRELL: Are you done with your turn? MR. PORTER: Yes, unless you want to ask any more questions, I 'm here. I might add one thing - when you have that many kids in a house, you are going to have the same situation they did about twenty-five years ago , here in town, down in the north end when the Conklin Hospital was down there - Ithaca College took it over and rented to students - they had a fire one night and they had kids coming out of the windows, burned and everything . Maybe he (Mr . Weaver ) can elaborate on that , were you around Chief? MR. WEAVER: That is not pertinent to this case and I am on this Board and I cannot speak to any other . . . . MR. PORTER: But they did, a lot of people got burned - there was no way to get out of it - it went right up the stairway and it was nothing - and you are going to have the same problem in this town if you don' t straighten these kids out - or these landlords renting to three kids and end up having five or six living there. Okay? CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Anyone else who would like to speak in opposition? MRS. PORTER: Yes. I 'm the wife of Paul Porter , who just spoke up . The only thing that I would like to mention. . . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Your name? PAGE 31 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MRS. PORTER: Mrs. Anne Porter . I asked for an inspection, I believe I called in April or May - Tom Hoard has a record of it . He was caught then for going against the regulation of three up and three down. . . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Is this in the property we are discussing tonight? MRS. PORTER: This is the one next door , he owns both . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: I think we ought to stick to the property we are discussing and the pertinent issues to this case. MRS. PORTER: I bring it up to show that this has happened before - that he has not been a responsible landlord . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Well I think we need to remember - what we are discussing here is the positioning of the carport - not character of the landlord . So if you have some comments to make about the parking . . . MRS. PORTER: Okay, yes, I don' t know - I just don' t know how many cars he could fit there, probably two - yes, he probably could put two - but I know that there is going to be at least six people living there and there will be at least six cars, so where do the other four cars go? On the road? And it 's a very narrow road . Coddington Road is very narrow. It is dangerous - you know - our mailbox has been knocked down - we do have children in the area. School bus goes by, what are they going to do with all the cars? CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Well it meets the parking - the off-street parking requirement for the zoning . Any questions of Mrs. Porter? PAGE 32 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MR. SIEVERDING: Only a general comment and that - (unintelligible) relates to I guess, the type of people who occupy a typical unit and the zoning doesn' t really make a distinction between unrelated individuals, regardless whether they are students or somebody else. MRS. PORTER: I understand . But you just know that it is going to be a building with cars in front of it . MR. SIEVERDING: But there still really isn' t anything, according to the current zoning , that this Board could do to adjust that problem - it really goes beyond just what is in the zoning itself - it is a much bigger issue I think . MS. FARRELL: It is a frustrating issue. MRS. PORTER: Yes, I know what you mean. MR. SIEVERDING: And what they currently have proposed is, in fact , other than the deficiency relative to the carport , allowable under current zoning . What he does relative to other properties that he owns on this street or in other neighborhoods - doesn' t have any bearing on whether or not he can be granted a variance for this particular use. MRS. PORTER: Well we are trying to stress that he is not being responsible. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Unfortunately that is not something the Board can deal with . MR. SCHWAB: That 's right . Except they are here and that is the purpose of the hearing . . . MRS. PORTER: Right . . . PAGE 33 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MR. SCHWAB: But - I just want you to know that if they cut two feet off that carport there wouldn' t even be a hearing tonight . . . . ' MRS. PORTER: Yes. MR. SCHWAB: They could absolutely do . . . and so really the issue that we as a Board have to focus on is - should we make them spend - in the ball park of three to five hundred bucks to cut two feet off the carport to do what they propose, when that is really tangential to what everyone's real concern is that there is going to be a lot of people. . MRS. PORTER: Yes, there is going to be a lot of cars on the road . . . MR. SCHWAB: But that is what the hearing - in part - is for tonight . . . MRS. PORTER: Okay. MR. PORTER: Who do we go to to stop somebody from coming into a neighborhood and busting it up? MR. WEAVERS We collectively have quite a bit of experience with the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ithaca. It is one of the Ordinances adopted by Common Council legally effective within the City of Ithaca by action of your legislature and ours. This Board is confined to enforcing that Ordinance and the Ordinance says nothing about - it is color blind - we are color blind - we can' t tell the black hats from the white hats - the good guys from the bad guys. It doesn' t say anything about that - it talks about reasonable setbacks and compatible uses and compatible uses PAGE 34 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 includes residential use - it doesn' t say who , or how nice a person they are or whether they sleep different hours than you and I - one of the problems of living next to students is that they sometimes go to bed and when it is, it's much after all the rest of us do . But as far as coming here for a solution, I could suggest - I 'm reading Mrs. Porter 's letter and "renting to students" is not mentioned - "garbage cans" in a very general way might be enforceable under a City Ordinance, but not by this Board . And "where the laundry is hung, if any" is certainly not within our jurisdiction and we are not begging off, I think it is reasonable to say to you, if there is a solution, it is a legislative solution and the two people that represent your Ward are the people - ring their phone. VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: She is worthless. MR. WEAVER: Well you have to vote, too . I 'm not making a pitch here, I 'm just saying that this Board is frustrated and understanding and personally experiencing some of the difficulties that you are expressing and it is not just your street - I have a little - everybody has some. That 's the character of our community to some extent but the cure - there may be some schemes within the Zoning Ordinance that will help control but they are not a cure for the specific case that is before us tonight at all . And if there is some wisdom, it is in the legislature and the only place where there is the power and authority to do it . Whether you have sloppy neighbors or beautiful neighbors is one of those acts PAGE 35 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 that happen to all of us and that 's not limited to students, of course. MR. SIEVERDING: I think it is worth commenting - the Planning Board made a note of the kinds of cases that we are dealing with - all these conversions - and it has certainly been brought to their attention that they ought to be looking to it and I think in addition to doing what Mr . Weaver suggested , is that you go to the Planning and Development Board . . . . MR. PORTER: We've got the whole neighborhood here tonight . That is how interested we are. MR. SIEVERDING: But - again - we are charged with enforcing an existing set of Ordinances. Typically changes to the Zoning Ordinance start - if not with your elected Councilman, sooner or later they really get initiated by the Planning and Development Board . VOICES IN THE AUDIENCE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE - NOT PICKED UP BY THE TAPE RECORDER) CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Could we get things under control here? This isn' t New England Town Meeting here but if anyone else would like - interested party - would like to speak in opposition, would they come forward and state their name. MR. VAN TIENHOVEN: My name is Van Tienhoven, I live on 9 Hudson Place and I urge you to deny the appeal . It is my understanding - I am not a lawyer - it is my understanding that a variance should be based on three grounds; it should be an unusual case, it should be a hardship and it should PAGE 36 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 not affect the neighborhood - or it should affect the neighborhood not unfavorably. It seems to me that there is no hardship , the house can be rented as is to one family, the owners that bought the property knew that there was a deficiency, so they walked into it with their eyes wide open and clearly by denying the variance, you make it a little more difficult for the owners to help with the deterioration of the neighborhood and in that case I think you can look at the record and see from the record that they haven' t done very well with another piece of property. I think that is a fair way to look at the record and I think on that basis you should deny the variance. If they then cut off the carport then it is a different case but that is their problem. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: The point of (unintelligible) SECRETARY HOARD: The question of hardship is for a use variance. This is not a use variance, this is an area , variance. The distinction with a use variance is that a use variance is what they would have to get if this zone did not permit a two-family dwelling , then they would be asking for a use variance. They would have to show that the property , had a hardship that is unique to that property. In this case they are asking for an area variance which means they are only asking for a deficiency on the setback requirement . In that case they only have to demonstrate a practical difficulty. The practical difficulty is whether it makes sense to saw off a number of feet of the front of the carport . PAGE 37 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: (Unintelligible) CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: We need to restrict the testimony to people who come forward , I 'm sorry. Would anyone else like to speak in opposition to the granting? VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: Do you want me up there? MS. FARRELL: Yes. VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: I ask that because I 've got a voice loud enough to make everybody hear and I came to a public meeting - I thought it was when I came and what most of the people have gotten out of this meeting so far is very little because we couldn' t understand what was going on. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: I 'm sorry about that . Could you identify yourself? MR. CRAMER: My name is Roger Cramer , I live at 4 Hudson Place, our lot corners the lot in question, we live down the hill one street which means that we can' t see the garbage cans but we can see them when we drive by as we can a lot of places on South Hill . I don' t care whether they move the carport two feet or not because I can' t tell from where I live. My interest is in the interest of South Hill because I have lived at 4 Hudson Place since 1966 - put quite a little money into it , still maintaining it , still like South Hill but , as I said at a previous meeting , my impression that South Hill is going down hill . For the very reasons that have been indicated here to you and that is that student living is taking over , absentee landlords are taking over - I have nothing against students, I have nothing PAGE 38 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 against individual absentee landlords but this is the effect of a community in which you have students and homes owned by absentee landlords who are not there - who do not know what is going on and my impression is, as I said before, South Hill is going down hill . And I 'm not sure how much money I 'm going to continue to put in our place because I think maybe it 's not going to be financially beneficial in the future. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in opposition to the granting of this variance? MR. CRAMER: Can I say one thing more which I forgot? That is, we may not see the garbage cans, we may not see the two feet difference in the carport but we can hear the difference in modern day music so loud that you need ear drums to live. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: There being no one else who would like to speak in opposition the Board will now deliberate. PAGE 39 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 DELIBERATION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1711 FOR 139 CODDINGTON ROAD MS. FARRELL: What they are proposing to do is cut off the carport . . . MR. SIEVERDING: That 's what it comes down to , I think what they are proposing to do is consistent with the zoning of their neighborhood . I think the current deficiency is - the existing deficiency I think , is relatively minor to the point that it is easily solved by them, whether we grant the variance or not so . . . CHAIRMAN JOHNSON= Do I hear a motion? PAGE 40 BZA MINUTES - 8/11/86 MOTION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1711 FOR 139 CODDINGTON ROAD The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Kenneth Ash for an area variance to permit conversion of the single-family house at 139 Coddington Road to a two-family dwelling. The decision of the Board was as follows: MR. WEAVER: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in Appeal Number 1711 . MR. SIEVERDING: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1 ) The modifications that are proposed will not exacerbate the present front yard deficiency. 2) Requiring the owner to demolish part of the existing carport would not serve any public benefit. 3) The proposed use is completely compatible with the uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. 4) Practical difficulty found that strict compliance would require demolition of part of the building. VOTE: 5 YES; 0 NO; 1 ABSENT AREA VARIANCE GRANTED PAGE 41 I , BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY THAT I took the minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York, in the matters of Appeals numbered 1709, 1710 and 1711 on August 11 , 1986 in the Hall of Justice, 120 E. Clinton Street, Ilthaca, New York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the action taken of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability. Barbara Ruane Recording Secretary Sworn to before me this o2Q day of 1986 ETTA C.GRAY Notary Public,State of NeW York No.4706497 b Notary p 1 i cTerm Expires March 30,19.$7 ,