Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1987-07-06 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 6 , 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE APPEAL NO. 1769 Nan True 3 124 Seneca Way APPEAL NO. 1769 Decision 6 APPEAL NO. 1770 Robert Vanderbeck 7 109 Glen Place APPEAL NO. 1770 Decision 13 APPEAL NO. 1771 Fred S. & Stephanie E. Madden 14 513 North Tioga Street APPEAL NO. 1771 Decision 19 APPEAL NO. 1772 Joseph C . Moro 20 214 Fayette Street APPEAL NO. 1772 Decision 26 APPEAL NO. 1773 Mary Elizabeth Neilsen 27 314 Utica Street APPEAL NO. 1773 Decision 30 APPEAL NO. 1774 Abraham A. Lee POSTPONED 248 Floral Avenue CERTIFICATION OF RECORDING SECRETARY 31 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ITHACA NEW YORK JULY 6, 1987 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Good evening. I 'd like to call to order the July 6, 1987 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, the Ithaca Sign Ordinance and the Board's own Rules and Regulations. Members of the Board who are present tonight are: HELEN JOHNSON JOHN OAKLEY HERMAN SIEVERDING STEWART SCHWAB CHARLES WEAVER MICHAEL TOMLAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD THOMAS D. HOARD, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD, BUILDING COMMISSIONER & ZONING OFFICER BARBARA RUANE, RECORDING SECRETARY The Board will hear each case in the order listed in the Agendum. First we will hear from the appellant and ask he or she to present the arguments for the case as succinctly as possible and then be available to answer questions from the Board. We will then hear from those interested parties who are in support of the applica- tion, followed by those who are opposed to the application. I should note here that the Board considers "interested parties" to PAGE 1 BZA MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987 be persons who own property within two hundred feet of the property in question or who live or work within two hundred feet of that 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 the strict rules of evidence, we do consider this a quasi-judicial proceeding and we base our decisions on the record. The record consists of the application materials filed with the Building Department, the correspondence relating to the cases as received by the Building Department, the Planning and Development Board's recommendations and findings, 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 can come forward and speak directly into the microphones so that their comments can be picked up by the tape recorder and heard by everyone in the room. Extraneous comments from the audience will not be recorded and therefore will not be considered by the Board in its delibera- tions 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 hearing on that case will be closed and the Board will then deliberate and reach a decision. Once the hearing is closed no further testimony will be taken and the audience is requested to refrain from commenting during our delib- erations. It takes four votes to approve a motion to grant or deny a special permit or a variance. In the rare cases where there is a tie vote the variance or special permit is automatically denied. PAGE 2 BZA MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987 Are there questions from that crowd out there, about our procedure? [none] That being the case, we' ll move forward. SECRETARY HOARD: The first appeal is APPEAL NO. 1769 FOR 124 SENECA WAY: Appeal of Nan True for an area variance for deficient rear yard setback, under Section 30.25, Column 14 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the construction of a one-story addition to the front of the existing building at 124 Seneca Way (True Insurance Company) , for addition- al office space. The building contains an insurance business and three apartments. The property is located in a B4 (Business) Use District in which the existing uses are permitted; however under Sections 30.49 and 30. 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant must obtain an area variance for the deficient rear yard before a building permit or Certificate of Compliance can be issued for the proposed addition. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Good evening - you are. . . MR. SHARMA: My name is Jagat Sharma, Architect, with offices at 312 East Seneca Street and I represent the Appellant, Nan True. Outlined in our proposal, the project is a very small - three hundred and fifty square feet - addition to this building, enclos- ing the area on the southwest corner and primarily to be used for a waiting/reception area. I think everybody has the drawings of the proposed project. The floor plan as seen here - the entire first floor is used as an insurance office and the addition will be used to house the reception and waiting area and create some more space PAGE 3 BZA MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987 for office use here in the present building. Architecturally, basically there will be a window wall (unintelligible) under the glass to keep the continuity of what we have in the front of the building. It will be (unintelligible) glass for the vestibule and for the new addition (unintelligible) and it complies with every- thing in the Code except for rear yard deficiency which exists on this side of the property - it would require, being a corner lot, it requires at least ten feet and we have from one point four feet to one point two feet - as you can see on the site plan and I think, being a corner lot - we don't require (unintelligible) rear yard for the entire width of the property also - fifty feet. We have all the parking requirements and we meet everything else. This is an existing condition and the building can't be moved to create a rear yard, so we are requesting the variance be granted. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions from members of the Board? MR. SIEVERDING: The proposed addition really doesn't have anything to do with the deficiency - I mean, it is not going to impact the rear yard deficiency in any way? MR. SHARMA: No. In fact, you know, (unintelligible) to make the building more attractive - fill in the corner - designwise - fill in the corner. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: No further questions from members of the Board? MR. SCHWAB: The parking will be the same (unintelligible) ? MR. SHARMA: Yes. The entrance will be the same - where we have - right now we have parking on the corner - it will be moved (unin- telligible) we have enough parking there. PAGE 4 BZA MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: There are so many questions, I think we' ll excuse you at this point and move on, thanks. Is there anyone else 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] That being the case, perhaps we can have a motion. PAGE 5 BZA MINUTES - JULY 6, 1987 DECISION ON APPEAL NO. 1769 FOR 124 SENECA WAY The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Nan T. True for an area variance to permit the construction of a one-story addition to the front of the existing building at 124 Seneca Way (True Insurance Company) . The decision of the Board was as fol- lows: MR. SIEVERDING: I move that the Board grant the area variance requested in Appeal Number 1769. MR. WEAVER: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. There are practical difficulties related to meeting the single deficiency which is the rear yard which can only be solved by removing a portion of the building. 2 . The variance is for an addition to the front of the property which will in no way have any impact or affect on the rear yard deficiency. 3 . The exception observes the spirit of the ordinance and will not change the character of the neighborhood. VOTE: 6 YES; 0 NO AREA VARIANCE GRANTED PAGE 6 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is APPEAL NO. 1770 FOR 109 GLEN PLACE: Appeal of Robert Vanderbeck for an area variance for deficient rear yard setback, under Section 30.25, Column 14 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit a Certificate of Compliance and a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued for the conversion of one two-bedroom apartment of the two-family dwelling at 109 Glen Place to a three-bedroom apartment. The property is located in an R3b (Residen- tial, multiple dwelling) Use District in which this use is permitted; however under Section 30.57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellant must first obtain an area vari- ance for the deficient rear yard before a Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the property. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Please begin by identifying yourself and where you live. MR. VANDERBECK: I 'm Robert Vanderbeck, I live at 204 Genung Road in Ithaca. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: And perhaps you want to say just about two words about why you want the variance? MR. VANDERBECK: I need this variance in order to get a Certificate of Occupancy for my house. It is sort of a request to - what we need to do is convert a room in the house to a bedroom - it has already been a bedroom as long as I 've owned it. I don't under- stand what I 'm supposed to do here. . . PAGE 7 1 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Okay. Applications for the area variance - as you would have remembered, perhaps, if you would have looked at the appeal papers - require that you demonstrate some practical difficulty and special conditions which make compliance with the regulations impossible and that you, in some sense, the exception observes the spirit of the ordinance and does not change the character of the district - so those are the two things that we are looking at for you to address - practical difficulties and special conditions and something about the character of the district. MR. VANDERBECK: Well there is no change in the character of the district because there is no change whatsoever to the building, in particular there is no change to the outside of the building. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Is it possible to continue to use the building the way it has been up to this point? MR. VANDERBECK: Yes. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Herman, you wanted to chime in? MR. SIEVERDING: I 'm trying to understand what happened here. There is a garage that is actually part of the overall structure, that sometime prior to your purchase of the property was converted from a garage to a bedroom, without the previous owner having gone through a variance procedure. . . MR. VANDERBECK: That's right. MR. SIEVERDING: The question I have is why - over the last eight years - what has been happening with the property? Why are we, all of a sudden now, discussing this? SECRETARY HOARD: Okay. What happened was, there was a period of time when this unit was occupied by a family - that, I believe, was PAGE 8 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 when the conversion of the garage took place - we didn't make an issue of it with a family - there was no zoning issue there because there was no control on number of people who were family members. When it became rental - at some point - then it became a concern because of the possible occupancy problem. MR. SIEVERDING: Although it is in R3? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes, it is a permitted use so it is only a question of the rear yard setback. MR. SCHWAB: Was there a complaint? SECRETARY HOARD: No, I think this came up because the property is for sale? MR. VANDERBECK: Yes. MR. SIEVERDING: I see, a C of O is a contingency of the sale? MR. VANDERBECK: Yes. MS. JOHNSON: So you are selling it? MR. VANDERBECK: That's right. MR. WEAVER: You did file this application didn't you? MR. VANDERBECK: Yes. MR. WEAVER: I noted that you said that you didn't understand - you understand the procedure but not why, is that what you meant? Or didn't you understand what it said? MR. VANDERBECK: I understand the procedure, yes. MR. SIEVERDING: The C of 0 issued in this case - say the variance is requested and the C of O is issued - then it is transferable to the new owner or does the new owner have to come back and get a C.O. as well? PAGE 9 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 SECRETARY HOARD: It will go with the property, if he gets a variance. MR. SIEVERDING: It goes with the property. MR. WEAVER: Well if this were - the other side - if this were denied, that would become a study or a living room or any other kind of room without a variance, is that correct? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes. MR. OAKLEY: They don't have to tear the room down. I guess my only problem with this and it relates in some sense to the com- plaint about parking. It looks to me like - although those bed- rooms qualify as for two persons rather than one person, is that correct? - I mean, they are over one hundred and twenty square feet. SECRETARY HOARD: Yes. MR. OAKLEY: So in theory then this has to be occupied by six persons rather than by three. SECRETARY HOARD: Well the limitation then would be the number of parking spaces he can provide. He has to provide enough parking for the number of unrelated individuals. MR. OAKLEY: So that is still controllable. MS. JOHNSON: But it would still be two parking spaces for six, isn't one for three persons? SECRETARY HOARD: Yes. Unless it's a cooperative (unintelligible) MR. OAKLEY: Right at the moment there is no off-street parking, is there? Am I correct? MR. VANDERBECK: Yes, that is correct. Given the nature of the terrain there it would be impossible to build parking places on the PAGE 10 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 property. There is a three foot high wall in front of the property (unintelligible) in the back - goes right up (unintelligible) SECRETARY HOARD: Don't you own part of Glen Place, the street? My understanding was - from the previous owner - that they claimed parking on Glen Place because it is a privately owned street. MR. VANDERBECK: Well, that's in fact, where people park, on Glen Place. But the survey of the land shows the part that I own goes right along that wall in front of the property. MR. OAKLEY: Is it a city street? MR. VANDERBECK: No. MR. OAKLEY: So whose is it? SECRETARY HOARD: I thought it was his. MR. WEAVER: He says that he doesn't own it so he can't help us. MR. SIEVERDING: Typically on non-publicly owned streets - aren't you conveying - if you've got street frontage, aren't you conveyed to the center line of the street? CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Not necessarily. Access would be sufficient. MR. SIEVERDING: On your analysis worksheet, Tom, we have proposed condition and/or use, three claimed on non-city street - District Regulations for Proposed is two, Note Non-conforming conditions for proposed - and you say okay. SECRETARY HOARD: Well - the City's Planning Director used to live in that house and he claimed that the parking was those spaces in front - he didn't own the house but. . . MR. SIEVERDING: So it's a question as to whether there are, in fact, two spaces there or whether it is a couple spaces deficient. SECRETARY HOARD: Yes. PAGE 11 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 MR. WEAVER: Might have a little trouble enforcing it. You could say - this is mine, no parking except the residents of this proper- ty - would be a little hard to enforce up there, by anyone. MR. OAKLEY: Although it would be rather easier than on a City street, since it is private property. You could park there until whoever owns the street. . . MR. SIEVERDING: (unintelligible) you can no longer park there. MR. VANDERBECK: Typically the people who live there - who occupy the place - wouldn't have, because it is so close to things they don't have to have a parking place. Mostly people without cars - that could change, of course, but. . . whenever I go there there is always a place or two - so I can park there without any problem. MR. WEAVER: That's what everyone on east hill says. SECRETARY HOARD: That's the way it was when I was up there today. MR. SIEVERDING: Course it is July - summer session is light. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions from members of the Board? [none] Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? [no one] Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition? [no one] Is there a motion? PAGE 12 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 DECISION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1770 FOR 109 GLEN PLACE The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Robert Vanderbeck for an area variance to permit a Certificate of Compli- ance and a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued for the conversion of the one two-bedroom apartment of the two-family dwelling at 109 Glen Place to a three-bedroom apartment. The decision of the Board was as follows: MR. WEAVER: I move that the Board grant the area variance request- ed in Appeal Number 1770. MS. JOHNSON: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. There are practical difficulties involved with reserving the room for non-bedroom use. 2 . The requirement would reduce the housing stock on east hill by one bedroom. 3 . The practical difficulty of compliance would mean precisely the reduction of one bedroom. 4. The exception would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and would not change the character of the neighborhood. VOTE: 5 YES; 1 NO AREA VARIANCE GRANTED PAGE 13 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is APPEAL NO. 1771 FOR 513 NORTH TIOGA STREET: Appeal of Fred S. and Stephanie E. Madden for an area variance for excessive lot coverage, and deficient setbacks for the front yard and one side yard, under Section 30.25, Columns 10, 11, and 12 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the construction of an addition to the rear of the single-family dwell- ing at 513 North Tioga Street for a bedroom and a family room. The property is located in an R2b (Residential, one- and two-family dwellings) Use District in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Sections 30.49 and 30. 57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellants must obtain an area vari- ance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the proposed addition. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Good evening. If you would begin by identifying yourself and where you live. MR. MADDEN: I 'm Fred Madden - 513 North Tioga Street. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Is everything self-explanatory or would you like to say a few more words? MR. MADDEN: I think it is reasonably self-explanatory, I have plans here if you want to see them. The reason that I went over the thirty-five percent of lot coverage is because the present house is remodelled - it is a Greek Revival house - it was remodelled about 1930 and they put dormers along the sides of the PAGE 14 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 Greek Revival (unintelligible) and to continue that series of dormers it would take that - to keep it in some kind of line with the present building - it would take that extra bit of extension which is thirty-six percent of lot coverage - I don't want to squish the dormer. . . MR. WEAVER: I need help - we are talking about a bay window, not a dormer - is that correct? MR. MADDEN: We are talking about a dormer - the bay window is the existing condition at the time that they did remodelling in the 130 's. . . MR. SIEVERDING: You are talking about dormers that are on the south elevation of the house? MR. MADDEN: Along both sides of the house and to continue that along we need to put another dormer in to make it look like it was part of the same. . . MR. SIEVERDING: The addition itself. . . MR. MADDEN: Yes the addition will have dormers on the side. . . MR. SIEVERDING: I think there are three there now and what you will have is four to have symmetrical spacing. . . MR. MADDEN: We want to keep that symmetrical arrangement - other- wise we would have to squish the thing. . . MR. OAKLEY: What kind of distance are we talking about? I haven't figured it out - what kind of distance are we talking about - I know we are talking about one percent. . . I 've got the plans - how much shorter will you have to make it to bring it into compliance in the area variance? MS. JOHNSON: You mean what are the proportions. PAGE 15 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 MR. MADDEN: I never worked that out - I mean - we never worked that out, we just drew the plans and then. . . it didn't fit into the thirty-five percent, it did the thirty-six. MR. SIEVERDING: We are talking one percent, Tom? SECRETARY HOARD: One hundred and fifty square feet - which would be. . . the house is about thirty feet wide, is it or. . . MR. MADDEN: It is twenty-two. . . it's about twenty-eight. . . MR. WEAVER: Is all this calculation over one percent? MR. SIEVERDING: Yes. MR. WEAVER: Well I wonder why I should pay close attention or just let you go. MR. SIEVERDING: No - the symmetry is what is important. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: We are trying to reach perfection here Charlie. In this aspect of the application of the Code we are trying hard to reach perfection. Further questions from members of the Board? MR. WEAVER: Some of you go to fast for me, that's all. MR. SCHWAB: Is something going to change - are you going to do something to get more space - according to our worksheet, or is that not right? MR. MADDEN: According to the worksheet there is some question about putting an extra parking space in but it is a single family dwelling - we would have to take down two (unintelligible) pear trees to do it plus (unintelligible) MR. WEAVER: You mean we ought to require a feasibility study by an architect - for the plant removal. . . MR. SIEVERDING: How about an environmental impact statement? PAGE 16 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 MR. SCHWAB: The parking does go up because of this - adding the bedrooms? SECRETARY HOARD: Does it go from three to four? MR. WEAVER: The worksheet says "okay" - whatever that means. MS. JOHNSON: You are not adding a bedroom are you? MR. WEAVER: Yes, a master bedroom. MR. MADDEN: Yes, up above. The driveway actually has two spaces but one is behind the other so. . . SECRETARY HOARD: That' s okay. MR. SCHWAB: Or is it a shared driveway? MR. MADDEN: It is shared with the neighbor but as you can see, it forks. MR. SCHWAB: Here, in front of the garage? MR. MADDEN: It forks here [pointing to sketch] - this is their driveway - this is ours. MR. SCHWAB: So this is existing. . . MR. MADDEN: This is existing out this far [pointing to sketch] . . . MR. SCHWAB: I see. You can fit two cars in there, okay. So this is really not part of the plan - this extra little. . . MR. MADDEN: Right, it's the driveway - not part of the proposal. We were just told that we might have to have an extra space. MR. SCHWAB: So is the requirement two parking places? SECRETARY HOARD: For three or four bedrooms? The break is two spaces for four or five bed or sleeping rooms. MR. SCHWAB: So you do need two spaces. . . . you can have them right there without any trouble. . . PAGE 17 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 MR. MADDEN: Existing we can fit two cars. . . in front of the garage. MR. SIEVERDING: So we are all set on that - I mean, you've got one in the driveway and one of those spaces. . . CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions from members of the Board? [none] Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? [no one] Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition? [no one] That being the case, perhaps a motion. PAGE 18 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 DECISION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1771 FOR 513 NORTH TIOGA STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Fred and Stephenie Madden for an area variance to permit the construction of an addition to the rear of the single-family dwelling at 513 North Tioga Street for a bedroom and a family room. The decision of the Board was as follows: MS. JOHNSON: I move that the Board grant the area variance re- quested in Appeal Number 1771. MR. SIEVERDING:' I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The front and side yard deficiencies are pre-existing condi- tions which makes a practical difficulty in complying with the Code. 2 . The 1% problem with the percentage of lot coverage is so small that it is impractical to consider it important. 3 . The addition proposed would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and the architectural integrity of the house. 4 . There is no neighborhood opposition. VOTE: 6 YES; 0 NO AREA VARIANCE GRANTED PAGE 19 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is APPEAL NUMBER 1772 FOR 214 FAYETTE STREET: Appeal of Joseph C. Moro for a Special Permit for a Home Occupation under Section 30.25, Column 3, to permit the continued use of the one-family dwelling at 214 Fayette Street for a mail order business. The property is located in an R2b (Residential, one- and two-family dwellings) Use District in which a Home Occupation is permitted as an accessory use only under a Special Permit issued by the Board of Zoning Appeals. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Good evening. If you would begin by identifying yourself and where you live. MR. MORO: My name is Joseph Moro, I live at 214 Fayette Street. My occupation is, I'm an industrial designer fulltime at NCR and the reason I 'm here, obviously, is I have a mail order business, I 'm selling a bowling product and it is from my house and - very part time - it is not all the time that I 'm not working at my other job - I have no employees and there is no retailing - no one comes to my house - it is basically all through UPS. There is really negligible traffic - none basically. No noise, no fumes and UPS picks up one to three times a week at four o'clock in the after- noon, approximately. The assembly takes place - I really don't manufacture anything, I 'm only assembling things that are already made - there is really no painting or anything like that going on and it takes up a corner of my cellar - the workbench that anyone could have, I guess, in their home. They are packed on my kitchen PAGE 20 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 table and the extent of my advertising is two bowling journals. I use tools like this [holding up the tools which were brought to the hearing] . . . MR. SIEVERDING: (unintelligible) MR. MORO: I have a couple of these. . . this is the extent of the parts of one of them. . . this is the product. . . it is a bowling wrist support - goes on like this - when you have it on your wrist (unintelligible) that direction, but you can adjust your wrist to five set positions in this direction - five in this direction - it is very comfortable, it is not allergenic and all of that stuff. MR. SIEVERDING: Is this something that you designed. . . MR. MORO: Oh yes. This is all designed and detailed and every- thing by me. I do the advertising too. MR. SIEVERDING: So the components are manufactured off-site? MR. MORO: Yes, these are made in Rochester and powder coated in Connecticut - the plastic parts are molded up at NCR. I tried to keep it local but it's rather difficult. Originally I bought the cushions in Buffalo - at least try to keep it in New York State and I am paying $3 . 05 a set. I found by going to Michigan I could get them for $1.50. Same thing with the powder coating, I tried to get that done in Rochester and they wanted $2 .80 something for the three parts and I got it in Connecticut for $.80. You try to stay local but it's - and the cushions, as I said, come from Michigan and the rivets and things come from (unintelligible) . . . MS. JOHNSON: How many of those do you sell? MR. MORO: I 've been doing it a little over a year. Last March was one year and I 've sold - I 'm approaching two thousand of them. And PAGE 21 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 I 've assembled them all myself. I am planning - probably within six months - to get out of my house and find somewhere. It is very difficult because - as you probably know - business space - or assembly space in Ithaca is very tight and very expensive. I haven't had to borrow any money up to this point and I'm getting to the point where I 'll be able to either buy a small building or rent a building that will allow me to do this on a larger scale. MR. SIEVERDING: Certainly a lot of space at 200 East Buffalo Street, if you want to go in there. MR. SCHWAB: Who uses those? MR. MORO: Bowlers. MR. SCHWAB: Good bowlers or. . . . MR. MORO: Good bowlers. The reason I developed. . . it is very important for your wrist to stay very stable and not flex - so that is what that does. . . but obviously MR. WEAVER: So that is what the problem is. . . MR. SCHWAB: Would learners use it too? MR. MORO: No, it is really more for the "serious bowler" . And there are about nine million organized league bowlers in America. It is the largest organized participatory sport. MS. JOHNSON: So you get about ten of those ordered a day? MR. MORO: Whatever that - yes, approximately three thousand - a little over a year comes to. . . MR. OAKLEY: How long does it take you to assemble them? MR. MORO: Six minutes. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Are there any surge periods - I mean, do you get more in the fall? PAGE 22 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 MR. MORO: Yes I get a lot in the end of August and the beginning of September because the bowling league season starts in September. There is a fair amount approaching Christmas, of course and then there is another bulge in February and March because that approach- es what is known as tournament season. Everyone is looking for the thing that is going to allow them to win. MS. JOHNSON: Do you have right and left hand. . . MR. MORO: Yes. MR. WEAVER: The possibility that this might develop into a busi- ness which you hope for. . . might certainly increase United Parcel might set up a terminal over there. . . MR. MORO; No, I assure you I would not be able to I don't employ anyone and for it to get any larger than it is I would have to employ someone and I don't want anyone working in my house - I would certainly get away from there. I probably will move in two or three months. MR. WEAVER: Now that's a question - this is your property? MR. MORO: Yes. MS. JOHNSON: So what you really do there is take the parts and put them together? MR. MORO: Yes, I take what is in this bag and assemble it. SECRETARY HOARD: Shall we time him? MR. MORO: It's all possible. Actually I 'm going to stop the assembly - I 'm probably not going to do any more, I 've found someone in Rochester who will do them at a reasonable rate. Hopefully they will be able to better my time because I have to pay them by the amount of time it takes them. I'm also actually PAGE 23 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 looking at Challenge Industries - if I can - my problem with Challenge Industries is that some of my tools have to be better so that they can't make mistakes - that requires more of my time - to design out possible mistakes. Because right now - I place the cushions on - other than this one, I place the cushion in the center so that it hits just right because it has to fold in there. The others, I just put on by hand and I 've been doing it so long that I 'm pretty good at it and it doesn't take me very long to just snap it on. It is just an adhesive back. You just pull the paper off and stick it on and that's it. MS. JOHNSON: How much does one of those cost? MR. MORO: $44 .95. That's - if someone wants to send me a check in the mail, they send me $44 .95, I pay for the shipping and every- thing and the rest of it. If they want it C.O.D. then they pay for the shipping and if I sell it to Pro Shops - four to thirty-six, they pay $29.95, and if somebody wants to order over thirty-six it drops down to $24.95. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Did you think he was going to strike it rich? MR. WEAVER: No it suggests - have you ever heard of Tompkins County Area Development Corporation? Well there is an outfit in Tompkins County that is interested in start-ups, even though you have been at it more than a year. MR. MORO: I 've already paid off my investment and I 'm. . . MR. WEAVER: But the evolution into larger volume - so locally, even though you have a quote from Rochester, there is local inter- est. PAGE 24 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Further questions from members of the Board? Thank you Charlie. MR. SIEVERDING: That consultation we provide as a service. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: There being no further questions, thank you. If there is anybody else out there who would like to speak in favor? MR. MORO: As a matter of fact, I did have one neighbor who I spoke to, who had something to say and that was that the jazz that I play when I assemble these isn't quite loud enough so she can hear it. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: I understand. Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition? [no one] Could we have a motion? PAGE 25 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 DECISION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1772 FOR 214 FAYETTE STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Joseph Moro for a Special Permit for a Home Occupation to permit the continued use of the one-family dwelling at 214 Fayette Street for a mail order business. The decision of the Board was as follows: MR. OAKLEY: I move that the Board grant the Special Permit re- quested in Appeal Number 1772 with the condition that the business be operated solely by the owner. MS. JOHNSON: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDING OF FACT: 1. The business creates no noise, no excessive traffic and is fully in keeping with the requirements for a Special Permit. VOTE: 6 YES; 0 NO SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED W/CONDITION PAGE 26 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is APPEAL NUMBER 1773 FOR 314 UTICA STREET: Appeal of Mary Elizabeth Neilsen for an area vari- ance for deficient off-street parking, deficient lot size, and a deficient front yard setback under Section 30. 25, Columns 4, 6, and 11 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the enclosure of a one-story porch and replacement of a shed with a one-story addition, both at the rear of the single-family house at 314 Utica Street for additional living space and a sun room. The property is located in an R2b (Residential, one- and two-family dwellings) Use District in which the proposed use is permitted; however under Sections 30.49 and 30.57 of the Zoning Ordinance the appellants must obtain an area vari- ance for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or Certificate of Compliance can be issued for the proposed work. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Good evening. If you would begin by identifying yourself and where you live. MS. NEILSEN: My name is Mary Elizabeth Neilsen, I live at 314 Utica Street, Ithaca. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: You have filled this out very thoroughly. Perhaps you want to say a few words about it? MS. NEILSEN: Well I don't know what to add except that I can't change any of the things that exist because all of the deficiencies existed before I moved there and the deficiencies in size or in PAGE 27 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 area, whatever you call it are really not very great. I cannot have any parking off-street because of the way the house was permitted to be built initially so all I 'm trying to do is improve my own living environment and I don't think it is going to change the character of the neighborhood at all. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Questions from members of the Board? MR. SIEVERDING: The porch steps are going to be enclosed will be used as what type of a room - that isn't going to be converted into a bedroom or anything like that is it? MS. NEILSEN: No. I 'm planning on having it as a living room but, of course, it could be a bedroom. However, I 'm taking out the northern wall that is in the house so there will still only be two bedrooms. MR. SCHWAB: When you decided to enlarge what is a shed now, to even it up so it will be even and not square with the current porch? MS. NEILSEN: That's right. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: No questions? MR. SIEVERDING: Can I ask a question totally unrelated to this appeal? I go up and down Utica Street a lot. How did this house happen to be built? MS. NEILSEN: Heaven only knows. MR. SIEVERDING: You bought it as was - you didn't have. . . MS. NEILSEN: I 've only been in it just about three years. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: So much for questions unrelated to the case at hand. PAGE 28 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 MR. SIEVERDING: There are some houses that sort of catch your eye and you wonder how they happen to be there. That one has been on my list for a long time. CHAIRMAN TOMLAN: Charlie, any further questions? Stewart? [none] Fine, thank you. There is no one to speak on your behalf and there is certainly no one else out there to complain, so perhaps we can move right along to a motion. PAGE 29 BZA MINUTES - 7/6/87 DECISION ON APPEAL NUMBER 1773 FOR 314 UTICA STREET The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request of Mary Eliza- beth Neilsen for an area variance to permit the enclosure of a one-story porch and replacement of a shed with a one-story addi- tion, both at the rear of the single-family house at 314 Utica Street. The decision of the Board was as follows: MR. OAKLEY: I move that the Board grant the area variance request- ed in Appeal Number 1773 . MS. JOHNSON: I second the motion. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The proposed addition does not exacerbate the existing defi- ciencies and is in keeping with the character of the existing property and the neighborhood. 2. There would be practical difficulties in resolving the exist- ing deficiencies. VOTE: 6 YES; 0 NO AREA VARIANCE GRANTED PAGE 30 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 1769 , 1770 , 1771 , 1772 and 1773 on July 6 , 1987 , in the Common Council Chambers, City of Ithaca, 108 E . Green Street, Ithaca, New York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the action taken of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, New York on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability. Barbara C . Ruane Recording Secretary Sworn to before me this (1 day of 1987 Notary Public JEAN J. HANKINSON. NOTARY PUBLIC,STATE OF NEW Y.O.R14 NO.55-it 0800 QUALIFIED IN TGAPKINS COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXP1ncS APRIL SO,18 31