Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1982-11-17 k � TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 17 , 1982 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Wednesday , November . 17 , 1982 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , N . Y . , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Edward W . King , Edward N . Austen , Joan G . Reuning , Lewis D . Cartee ( Building Inspector ) , Nancy M . Fuller ( Secretary ) . ALSO PRESENT : Town Councilman Marc Cramer , Jack Sherman , Farris Hage , William Frandsen , Eleanor Frandsen , Robin Stedinger , Jery Stedinger , Lorenz E . Johnson , Mildred S . Johnson , Sarah Poyntz , Mary Ann Radzinowicz , Ralph Bacon , Lois Bacon , Edith Becker , Loran Marion , Anne Buckley , A . S . Becker , William Jenks , Theo . Jenks , J . Victor Bagnardi , Saino Zazzara , Louis Mobbs , John K . Cook , Donald A . Turco , Ethel Wurzel , Richard Wurzel , Pat Bennett , Jim Bennett , Peter Cholakis , Erin O ' Connor , David Be Bowlsby , Ann Stanton . • Chairman Aron declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 40 p . m . and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on November 9 , 1982 and November . 12 , 1982 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon all the various neighbors of the properties in question , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , the Finger Lakes State Parks Commission , and the Appellants , as parties to the actions , - on November 11 , 1982 . It was noted that each Board member had received with his / her Agenda copies of all documents pertinent to each matter before the Board . IN THE MATTER OF THE DAVID AND SYLVIA MINTZ APPEAL , Chairman Aron announced that if there were any persons present to hear or speak to the matter of the Mintz Appeal it has been requested that the hearing be adjourned to a later date by Attorney Peter N . Littman and agreed to by Attorney James M . Kerrigan , ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM SEPTEMBER 221 1982 AND OCTOBER 13 , 1982 ) OF NORMA M . GRAY , APPELLANT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE LESS THAN 25 FT . FROM THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY AT 209 TUDOR ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 57 - 1 - 8 . 1681 ITHACA- , N . Y . to Zoning Board of Appeals 2 November 17 , 1982 Chairman Aron declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 42 p . m . and read aloud the Notice as published and as noted above . Mr . Aron commented that this matter has been adjourned twice and his file is getting quite thick . Mr . Aron noted all the documents and correspondence that has been received most recently , as follows : 1 . Letter , with two photographs dated July 1981 and August 1982 attached , from Mrs . Norma M . Gray , 1115 Kilarney Lane , Walnut Creek , CA 94598 , dated November 10 , 1982 , received by Mr . Cartee at 10 : 40 a . m . , November 15 , 1982 : " Dear Members of Ithaca Planning [ sic ] Board , Last year I moved the BOCES house onto my lot . It is a difficult lot , sloping downhill in two directions plus being a triangle shape . I am asking a variance to build a garage in the position I feel is best considering many factors : 1 . Cost : I have paid money to have this lot graded to four different people , the original contractor , the sewer contractor , the current contractor and the landscaper . The grass seed is in , the final grading is done . I cannot • afford anything more . 2 . Stability of ground under garage site : The original contractor over excavated as can be seen in picture # 5 . The soil next to the house is fill and I wish to put no added weight , such as a garage on it . The front wall of basement caved in when the contractor backfilled up to it . I do not wish to risk such a disaster with the East wall . As can be seen by the picture taken in August , 1982 , the site of the proposed placement of the garage will have the S . E . corner on excavated land that has only this season been filled . 3 . Esthetic appeal : I believe along with Frank Lloyd Wright ( noted Chicago architect ) that buildings should fit their surroundings and not just pop up like a sore thumb . As viewed from up the street , the garage would blend in with the house in the forward location and look like a one story garage , firmly planted on the ground . If set back to 25 ' from front lot line , it would project out in back and look [ like ] a two story building . Mr . James Berg is saying the garage will be an ' eyesore ' . The garage is to be of matching siding and roofing to the house with two windowed garage doors . He says it will be an ' eyesore ' because it sets higher than the house . Every building on the street sets higher than the building below it - that ' s the nature of buildings on an uphill street . Every house on the south side [ of ] the street is a two story house except mine . If mine were two stories then my garage would not be higher than my house . 4 . Practicality : My current contractor , Mr . Hubbell , says I need 25 ' between house and garage to drain away from house Zoning Board of Appeals 3 November 17 , 1982 and away from garage . I feel that the space is also needed for light and air into the bedroom windows . I carefully chose the site to avoid a driveway directly opposite Mr . Berg ' s . Sometimes people backing out will run into each other when their driveways are lined up . I want a level driveway - no backing up hill in the wintertime to reach the road - no water draining from road into my downslope garage . 5 . Match the neighborhood : Every house on the street has a Two car garage . I am trying to up grade the property to conform . I feel that cars parked all over are far more of an ' eyesore ' than a garage that conceals , protects and shelters . " 2 . Letter to the Zoning Board of Appeals , attention of Henry Aron Chairman , from James T . Berg , 212 Tudor Road , dated November 9 , 1982 , with attached petition : " I regret it will not be possible to attend the scheduled meeting of November 17th , 1982 . An unexpected and serious accidental injury to my daughter in Cincinnati makes it necessary for me to be in Ohio on that date . TI am enclosing part of the petition with the names of those owner - residents of Tudor Road that wish to be recorded as opposed to the granting of a variance , in the matter of the appeal of Norma M . Gray , of Walnut Creek , California . JMr . • Aron you advised me that you were unwilling to grant me a postponement of this hearing and I ask that you give further consideration to my request in the event you have other and additional reasons for deciding on such a delay . IThank you for your consideration . " Petition , as noted above , signed by 22 area residents , between November 4 , 1982 and November 11 , 1982 : " We , the undersigned wish to go on record as being in opposition to the Appeal of Norma M . Gray for a variance of the Town ' s Zoning Ordinances , which appeal would permit the erection of a garage structure less than 25 feet from the street right of way at 209 Tudor Road , Town of Ithaca , tax parcel 6 - 57 - 1 - 8 . 168 . " 3 . Letter from Robin and Jery Stedinger , representing Mrs . Gray , to the Zoning Board of Appeals , with attachments , dated November 10 , 1982 : " We request that a zoning variance be granted at 209 Tudor Road to allow a garage to be built 15 feet from the front property line . The property line is 19 feet from the edge of the asphalt . The garage would extend 10 feet forward of a plane defined by the front of the house . We request this variance because the land drops off sharply at the back of the property ( as shown in the diagram submitted with the application ) . To build 25 feet back from the property line would involve building on a steep slope composed of unstable Zoning Board of Appeals 4 November 17 , 1982 • fill . Given the contour and shape of this lot we feel that the proposed location is both the wisest and most attractive . Our contractor , Mr . Hubbell , and our landscaper , McGuire Gardens , agree . We feel the garage will be an attractive addition to the neighborhood and will maintain and improve property values along the street . When the Board adjourned our last hearing , they asked us to address objections and concerns that had been raised . Here we list and discuss those objections as we understand them . In an effort to keep this letter brief and to avoid repetition , we assume the Board members have reviewed our letter of 13 October to the Board . We appreciate Mr . Berg ' s statement at the last meeting that he is in favor of the idea of our building a garage ; we also appreciate the effort he has put into analysis of the details of the project . After study and consultation with our contractor and landscaper we are confident that his concerns are unfounded . Unattractiveness The street both curves and rises so that the houses along the street are staggered with one rising above another . Four of the other five houses on that side of the street have garages that protrude in front of the house . All of the houses on that side of the street except 209 are two full stories plus a full basement . A one - story garage , with a level driveway and with the gable pointed toward the • street next to a one - story house , will hardly be obtrusive . Drainage and Flooding Mr . Berg expressed his concern with flooding . Mr . Hubbell , our contractor , and McGuire Gardens , our landscaper , and I ( a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Cornell University specializing in hydrology ) all think the lot has been graded properly . We paid particular attention to drainage . Given that water continues to flow downhill there should be no problem . This issue really has no relationship to our request for a variance . Unfairness to Mr . Frandsen Our letter of 13 October to the board gives the history of the relationship between the Grays and Mr . Frandsen . To summarize , the Grays approached Mr . Frandsen and found it impossible to do business with him . Robert Schwarting made the suggestion that Mrs . Gray and Mr . Frandsen ' could resolve the issue without need for a variance . ' The Grays are requesting a variance because of the topography of the lot , not its size . We do not believe Mr . Frandsen could be of assistance at this time although it would have been helpful if he had been cooperative earlier . Neighborhood Covenant Covenants are cumbersome instruments which employ inflexible restrictions which in practice may not achieve the intended purpose . In our neighborhood a covenant is a nuisance because the Town has good zoning ordinances and this board • serves to judge when exceptions to general zoning regulations are warranted . We note that the covenant is widely disregarded in our neighborhood ( including Mr . Berg ' s Zoning Board of Appeals 5 November 17 , 1982 • next door neighbors , the Ceurvels ) . Fortunately , zoning regulations are the issue here . Once we have resolved the zoning issue , we will take up the issue of the covenant with our neighbors . Tenants The presence of renters in the house clearly distresses Mr . Berg and some others . ( Please see Mr . Berg ' s undated letter to residents of Tudor Road , attached . ) It is unfair to decide placement of the garage based on whether or not the owner lives in the house . Financially the Grays would be ahead if they did not build a garage . However , they are trying to do what is best to improve the utility and visual attractiveness of the property , to improve their own and their neighbor ' s property values , and to satisfy their daughter , who does not like looking at cars parked all over the place . We hope that the Zoning Board of Appeals will decide the case on the structure ' s physical compatibility with the neighborhood . Final Comment Much of the discussion before the Board has focused on alternatives . We would like to discuss what we view as the alternatives if this variance is denied . In that case we will not build a garage set back 25 feet from the property line situated on unstable fill upon a sloping grade nor will we build on piles . What we will do is provide a driveway for the tenants to park their cars . This will have two results : it will be ugly appearing to passersby that the tenants are parking in the frontyard , and it will detract from the attractiveness of the property and hence from our ability to secure tenants with whom our neighborhos might feel more comfortable . Denial of this variance request might be financially to our advantage but that is not the way we would like to do business . We provide the following two pages for your information . Mr . Berg put them in mailboxes in the neighborhood after the October Zoning Board of Appeals meeting . He did not show enough courtesy to give us a copy of his letter even though we have lived on Tudor Road for 5 years . Mr . Berg has owned his house for 7 . 5 years but has only lived there for the last year . Until he moved in it was the worst maintained property on the street . He did not bother to put in a lawn until he moved into the house himself . While he lived on Long Island he did rent the house to students for a time . Attachment # 1 " To the Residents of Tudor Road Area - In recent weeks - - , Robin and Jery Stedinger of 204 Tudor Road have visited with many of you asking you to sign their petitions favoring a variance of Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . They approach you as friendly neighbors when in fact they are on public record as the agents for this commercial property , owned by Robin ' s mother , a permanent resident of Walnut Creek , California . Zoning Board of Appeals 6 November 17 , 1982 • Although Norma M . Gray , of California , received a variance on June 11 , 1981 , to construct or erect a single family dwelling thereon , provided that the main floor area of the dwelling does not exceed 1 , 200 sq . ft . and ( quoting the Zoning Board ) further resolved , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant an area variance to permit the southeasterly corner of the house to be sited within 25 ft . of the southeasterly lot line , that being a rear yard reducing of 30 ft . to 25 ft , at that particular point ; she now seeks another variance to place a 2 car garage protruding more than 10 feet in front of the house , impacting on the Town of Ithaca roadway ( Tudor Road ) . It is also noted that this small dwelling has now been finished inside to provide a second bathroom in the basement to accommodate the student tenants . It is not unusual to find , with such occupancies in this area , that no ' family ' exists , and transient roomers with no special interest in the neighborhood or its residents , comprise the tenancy . The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board met on September 22 , 1982 to hear the appeal of the Appellant Norma M . Gray of California , as represented by Robin Stedinger . My wife and I and several neighbors also appeared to oppose the planned style of construction being granted a variance . A decision was adjourned and the Board made an inspection and gathered information . The Board of Zoning Appeals met to consider the Adjourned Appeal of Norma M . Gray on October 13th , 1982 . Mr . and Mrs . Stedinger presented a carefully prepared appearance , my wife and I again opposed the appeal for a variance as they ask . Again , the Board has adjourned a decision . Presently , the Board of Zoning Appeals will meet in November on this matter , and I hope you can find time to consider these developments , weigh your interests in our unusually attrative neighborhood , and let the Board know of your feelings and opinions . I am sorry to approach you in this fashion , but feel compelled to reply to the petition campaigns of the Stedingers . The property in question is 209 Tudor Road - - why not take a nice Autumn walk and see what ' s happening here ? I am attaching a copy of my reasons for opposition , which I presented to the Board on October 13th , ' 82 . Jim Berg , 212 Tudor Road , Ithaca . 277 - 0955 " Attachment # 2 " To : Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals In the matter of the Adjourned Appeal of Appellant Norma M . Gray , 209 Tudor Road , parcel 6 - 57 - 1 - 8 - 168 , Ithaca , N . Y . This is the statement of James T . Berg and Margaret M . Berg , owners and residents of 212 Tudor Road a 1 family residence directly across the roadway from the Appellant ' s property . Although we do not object to the construction of a garage structure on the parcel in question , and believe such a • properly planned and executed construction would be an asset and of additional values we are reluctantly moved to oppose the granting of a variance which would permit the Zoning Board of Appeals 7 November 17 , 1982 • construction of this garage as presently planned by the Appellant . We note the following detractions , deficiencies , and disadvantages to the proposed construction : 1 . The present sub - standard distance of the residence , being closer to the roadway than the other residences in this section , will magnify the proposed sub - standard position of the garage if it is built more than 10 feet closer to the roadway and in front of the residence . 2 . The construction site as presently graded in preparation for this garage is 4 to 5 feet higher than the grade of the residence only 12 feet away . Unless specific plans are made to avoid it , the garage will be 4 to 5 feet higher than the house , adding to its obtrusiveness . 3 . There is no compelling practical reason for constructing the garage in this fashion or at this point . 4 . The lot at this point can be easily graded to a lower level , close to or the same as that of the residence , and the excess dirt moved toward the rear , a distance of less than 20 feet . This would provide ample level space upon which the garage may be built in line with the front of the hosue andon the same level . It is specifically noted that there is no bedrock and no rock work would be involved in such grading . Neither is the rear of the property so steep as to present grading problems . 5 . As presently graded , in preparation for placing the • proposed structure close to the roadway , the drainage ditch on the town of Ithaca right - of -way has been completely eliminated . In the absence of this drainage , and a culvert beneath the proposed driveway , a serious winter - time hazard may be created . With freezing rains , melting snows , or flooding rains , we may find water flooding across Tudor Road . Respectfully submitted . October 13th , 1982 . Signed : James T . Berg , Margaret M . Berg . " 4 . Letter to the Board of Zoning Appeals , submitted and signed by Mary E . Larkin and Clarence C . Larkin , 111 Tudor Road , dated November 14 , 1982 : " We have lived on Tudor Road since 1971 . During that time , there has been an increasing problem of more and more cars parked on the street . Thus , we support the Stedingers in their plan to build a garage at 209 Tudor Road . This proposed garage will be acceptable esthetically and will help the parking situation in Eastern Heights . " 5 . Memorandum to the Zoning Board of Appeals , submitted and signed by Eric F . Graf and J . Margo Graf , 216 Tudor Road , dated November 16 , 1982 : " Re : Permit for Construction of Garage at 209 Tudor Road • In response to a memorandum circulated by Mr . James Berg in our neighborhood , during the last few weeks , regarding the Zoning Board of Appeals 8 November 17 , 1982 • planned addition of a garage at 209 Tudor Road , we would like to make the following observations concerning Mr . Berg ' s objections to the plan : 1 ) It is essential for us that the property have a garage , since otherwise the traffic on Tudor Road above said property will have an impossible time negotiating in snow . Past winters have proven that for the snow- plowing on Tudor Road , cars parked on the street represent a major hindrance , making the steep , narrow road into a one - lane traffic pattern . 2 ) If there is a water runoff problem ( which is for the town engineers to decide ) , it surely can be taken care of the way it is with all properties and their driveways on this hill . 3 ) The fact that the garage will not be in line with other buildings on the road should not be too much of a problem and may indeed lend some character to an otherwise almost too uniformly established neighborhood ( we did not object to the four years of rather unkempt appearance of the Berg property prior to Mr . & Mrs . Berg ' s moving into it , although one might assume that it affected the appearance of the neighborhood - - one might also assume that it gave it some character ) . 4 ) The fact that the property is presently rented and not lived in by its owners should not make any difference . The • Berg property was rented too , if memory serves us right , rented for some time and not only lived in by Mr . Berg ' s family . In conclusion , we do not object to the building of the garage in a way which complies with Town engineers ' I udgments . " — 6 . Letter to the Town of Ithaca Board of Appeals submitted and signed by Charles S . Hubbell , Owner , Hubbell Construction Co . , 33 Harvey Hill Road , Ithaca , N . Y . , dated November 15 , 1982 : Reference : 20 ' x 20 ' garage at 209 Tudor Road Ithaca , New York . The garage that I have proposed to build for Norma Gray is a stick built type construction , not a pre - fabricated unit and with a reasonable amount of care will be intact as long as the other structures in the surrounding area . By allowing Mrs . Gray to erect this garage it will enhance the area by housing automobiles that would normally be left parked along the road and would benefit the Town and its residents by adding to its tax rolls . I realize the site does not conform to the Town ' s zoning requirements , but still feel the site is the best . To move • it back further would substantially increase construction costs which does not make it feasible . Also in observing the Houses on the road from the bottom of the hill , they all Zoning Board of Appeals 9 November 17 , 1982 • extend out from each other as one looks up the hill , and there is a mixture , split levels , ranch type , two stories , so why object to another structure that will be just following an existing pattern . In closing I recommend that the Board approve Mrs . Gray ' s proposed garage as presented , and feel she should be commended for improving , cleaning up a site which has been used by adjacent property owners for a dumping ground . This dumping was visible during a three week absence after the decks on house was built , and we returned to complete the final grading . " 7 . All submittals from the two previous hearings on this matter . For the record , it is noted that Chairman Aron explained what. " stick built " meant in terms of construction - - built from scratch , board by board , not assembled by panels . It is also noted that all of the above - referenced documents were read aloud for the public by Mr . Aron with the exception of the letter submitted by Mr . and Mrs . Stedinger ( # 3 above ) since the public expressed no interest in hearing it read . Mr . Aron read aloud all the names appearing on the Petition ( # 2 above ) . It was noted that all the persons signing the Petition reside on Tudor Road with the exception of Mr . and Mrs . Schwarting who live on Park • Lane , three blocks away . Chairman Aron stated that the Board members had received copies of all documents and , also , that all members of the Board have been to the property . Chairman Aron referred to nine ( 9 ) pages of drawings presented by Mrs . Stedinger to the Board as drawn by Mr . Gray . Utilizing the blackboard , Mr . Aron drew a picture of the house at 209 Tudor Road , the land , and the proposed garage area and demonstrated the feasibility of a garage being built without the need of variance . He indicated the use of piles . Mr . Aron stated that the Appellant has stated that she has no interest in building on piles . Mr . Aron described how , by the use of piles , a garage can be built very easily within the existing space available without asking for a variance ; there would be 25 feet at the front . Mr . Aron stated that Mr . Hubbell is a good man and knows his work ; he has built this type of thing before . As to fill , Mr . Aron stated that there is a tool for compacting . He described the utilization of a caison and 6 ' x 6 ' of concrete . As to cost , Mr . Aron stated that he did not want to get into that aspect , but that he wanted to give the Board and the public an idea of what can be done . Mr . Aron stated that he was trying to explain to the Board and the people here that there is a possibility to build a garage 25 feet back without variance and that the decision is one to be made, to the satisfaction of the Board and the neighbors . • Mr . King pointed out that the garage is 20 ' x 20 ' and the house is 24 ' wide , therefore , the garage is 29 ' from the edge , and , actually , to comply they could move the garage 4 feet Zoning Board of Appeals 10 November 17 , 1982 • forward and still be within the Statute . Mr . King commented that if the garage were closer to the house , he took it that the slope area would decrease . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present with new information who wished to speak to this matter . Mr . Larry ( Lorenz ) Johnson , 107 Tudor Road , spoke from the floor and stated that all garages are attached and this one should be no different . Mr . King stated that there is no such requirement and the Board could not impose that . Mr . William Frandsen , 252 Van Etten Road , Spencer , N . Y . , spoke from the floor and stated that he would like to describe some of the history of the subdividing of Eastern Heights , noting that his land borders it , and was in the process of being subdivided at the same time . He stated that he had to make a large change which the Planning Board required . He stated that if the garage is placed where it is proposed , he would be left with a piece of land that is completely landlocked . Mr . Frandsen displayed for the Board an 8 / 6 / 68 subdivision map , a drawing prepared by Town Engineer Fabbroni dated 9 / 21 / 76 , and a tax map . Utilizing these drawings , Mr . Frandsen described the way the Planning Board required the subdivision to be and noted that this garage would be another change contrary to what the Planning • Board had said . He stated that the variance that was granted in the first place for the house at 209 is contrary to the Planning Board . He asked whether or not the Planning Board plans are to be followed . He noted that he will have a piece of land in his subdivision which will be landlocked . Mr . King asked Mr . Frandsen how large his tract is . Mr . Frandsen stated that it contains 34 acres . Mr . King noted that it is the northeast corner of Mr . Frandsen ' s 34 acres of land that would be constrained . Mr . Frandsen stated that he did offer to sell Mrs . Gray the land at a reasonable price . A discussion followed between Mr . Stedinger and Mr . Frandsen with respect to agreements and statements by Mr . Stedinger ' s father - in - law . Mr . Frandsen described the problems of his access to his land from Tudor Road after the lots were sold off and he referred again to the drawing prepared by Mr . Fabbroni with respect to drainage . Mr . King stated that it appeared that Mr . Frandsen was saying that he should have been able to buy this easterly triangle and sell westerly , but that did not happen - - he did not buy the lot , the Grays did . Mr . King commented that the Zoning Board of Appeals does not subdivide property . Mr . Frandsen asked again if we have to do what the Planning Board says we have to do . Mr . Aron commented that the matter before the Zoning Board of Appeals is the placement of a garage on a lot upon which exists a house . Mrs . Stedinger stated that Mr . Frandsen has never offered to buy any land from her parents . Chairman Aron asked if there were any further questions or comments from the public . There were none . Chairman Aron Zoning Board of Appeals 11 November 17 , 1982 • declared the Public Hearing duly closed at 8 : 25 p . m . and asked for Board discussion . Mr . King pointed out Section 13 of the Zoning Ordinance which states : " . . . Where the average natural slope of a lot exceeds 8 per cent rise or fall directly from the street line , a private garage not over one story in height and housing not in excess of 2 cars may be located in the front or side yard not less than 5 feet from said street line on approval of the Board of Appeals . " Mr . King noted that the Statute recognizes that there may be steep lots and allows for a 5 ' set back . Mr . King stated that , however , as Mr . Aron pointed out , there are other situations that would not require a variance , and , as he ( King ) indicated , moving the garage closer to the house would provide better drainage with the use of drainage tiles . Mr . King stated that what the Appellant is asking for is a projection - - 10 feet in front of the house - - about the distance from where he was sitting to the wall ( indicating ) , to him , a very large offset . Mr . King commented that if it were a matter of two feet , it might be different , but to him it is a large matter . Mr . King referred to the matter of the Deeds ' covenants ' reference to a 25 - foot setback , and stated that what the Board does makes no difference be it the grant of variance or not ; the covenants can be enforced by the neighbors . • Mr . Austen stated that he did not differ with anything that Mr . King had stated . Mrs . Reuning stated that , based on the Board ' s discussion about the proposed garage being so close to the road , she would have difficulty granting a variance . MOTION by Mr . Edward Austen , seconded by Mr . Edward King : RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca deny and hereby does deny the Appeal of Norma M . Gray , Appellant , from the decision of the Building Inspector denying a building permit for the construction of a detached garage less than 25 ft . from the street right of way at 209 Tudor Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 57 - 1 - 8 . 168 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Gray Appeal duly closed at 8 : 30 p . m . ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS • Chairman Aron asked that the Board consider , at this time , the matter of the expiration of Mr . Hewett ' s term as a member of Zoning Board of Appeals 12 November 17 , 1982 • the Zoning Board of Appeals on December 31 , 1982 . Mr . Aron stated that Mr . Hewett is willing to continue to serve . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mr . Edward King . RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals of . the Town of Ithaca recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board the re - appointment of Mr . Jack D . Hewett as a member of said Board of Appeals for another five - year term commencing January 1 , 1983 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning , Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning : RESOLVED , . that Mr . Jack D . Hewett continue as lst Vice Chairperson and Mr . Edward N . Austen continue as 2nd Vice Chairperson of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals for the year 1`983 , commencing January 1 of said year 1983 . • There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board that Mr . Henry Aron be re - appointed as Chairman of said Board of Appeals for the year 1983 , commencing January 1 of said year 1983 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Austen , King , Reuning , Aron . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM OCTOBER 13 , 1982 ) OF DAVID AND SYLVIA MINTZ , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR A SINGLE - FAMILY DWELLING • HAVING BEEN CONSTRUCTED WITH A SIDE YARD OF 616 " CONTRARY TO THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE FOR A SIDE YARD OF 11 ' , AT 1061 Zoning Board of Appeals 13 November 17 , 1982 • TAUGHANNOCK BLVD . , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 21 - 2 - 13 , ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Aron announced again that a request for adjournment of this matter had been received . MOTION by Mr . Edward Austen , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning . RESOLVED , that the matter of the Mintz Appeal be and hereby is adjourned until the next regular meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , King , Austen , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Mintz Appeal duly adjourned . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM SEPTEMBER 221 1982 AND OCTOBER 131 1982 ) OF SAINO ZAZZARA , APPELLANT AND AGENT FOR THE SONS OF ITALY , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LODGE AT 691 FIVE MILE DRIVE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO , 6 - 31 - 2 - 21 , ITHACA , N . Y . ( SPECIAL APPROVAL OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE III , SECTION 41 PARAGRAPH 15 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . ) Chairman Aron declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 35 p . m . and read aloud the Notice as published and as noted above . Mr . Aron stated that the Board has heard discussion on this matter once , noting that the other hearing was not held because the architect was not ready . Mr . Aron asked that only new facts be presented by those wishing to speak . Mr . John Cook , 209 Coy Glen Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he and his family are still opposed to the building of this lodge ; they feel the area should be kept solely as a residential area . Chairman Aron stated that the Board has before it a set of drawings and Mr . Bagnardi , the architect , is present . Mr . Bagnardi stated to the Board and those present that they have tried to meet all the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance , noting the side yards of 1501 , rear yard of 150 ' and front yard of 100 ' , which are the requirements for this type of building in this area . Mr . Bagnardi pointed out that the site for the lodge • is a piece of Mr . Zazzara ' s property and that he would have 150 ' left to the west . Mr . Bagnardi stated that the proposed building is 44 ' x 22 ' ; there will be a 30 - car parking area set back as far Zoning Board of Appeals 14 November 17 , 1982 as the building and westerly from the building . He noted that there will be two stories exposed on the east because of the slope on the back , adding that it is really a basement . He described two means of egress . Mr . Aron asked if the parking area were going to be blacktopped . Mr . Bagnardi stated that he assumed so . Mr . Aron asked if there were going to be landscaping . Mr . Bagnardi stated that he assumed there will be , adding that he would recommend that as the architect . Mr . Aron asked if Mr . Zazzara would approach the Boards Mr . Aron asked Mr . Zazzara to tell the Board about all the lodge ' s activities during the year and if he did not know it all , could he please send to the Board in written form what activities are going to be inside and outside . Mr . Aron asked if there were going to be any lighting . Mr . Zazzara stated that there will be what is recommended by the architect . Mr . Aron asked what type and Mr . Bagnardi stated that it will probably be mercury vapor , direct lighting . Mr . Aron asked if there will be any on - premises liquor sales . Mr . Zazzara stated that there will not be , adding that he could not say " forever " , but as long as he is president there will not be any liquor sales . Mr . Aron asked if in the summer there would be barbeques . Mr . Zazzara stated that there would be . Mr . Aron asked if there would be a barbeque pit such as the one at Stewart Park , Mr . Zazzara said that it would not be like that , there would be a • barbeque on the patio . Mr . Aron asked if there would be any fund raising activities outside . Mr . Zazzara said there would not be . Mr . Aron asked if Mr . Zazzara anticipated any more members such that they might have to add to the building . Mr . Zazzara said he did not know . Mr . Bagnardi noted that the building could not be added to and still be kept within the 150 ' requirement . Mr . Aron commented on the statement of no future addition with Mr . King noting that there may be no addition without a variance . Mr . Aron stated that it was his opinion that the plan presented is not a complete site plan and he would recommend that the appellant go to the Planning Board for site plan approval and the Planning Board can specify requirements . Mr . King stated that he did not think that the appellant has to make an actual application to the Planning Board and suggested that the Zoning Board ask the Planning Board for an opinion . Mrs . Reuning commented that it would be helpful to the people to have information as to the meetings ' activities . Mr . Loran Marion , Burtt Place , spoke from the floor and stated that he owns property immediately adjacent to this proposed area . Mr . Marion stated that a statement was made that indicated the possibility of turning the club into a bar room and that could be overnight . Mr . Marion stated that he is strictly opposed to a bar room of any type in their neighborhood . Mr . Al Becker , 661 Five Mile Drive , spoke from the floor and • stated that the neighbors are 100 % inopposition and so is he . Mr . Becker asked if Mr . Zazzara would feel comfortable moving into a neighborhood so opposed . Mr . Becker stated to Mr . Zazzara Zoning Board of Appeals 15 November 17 , 1982 that he is building on a swamp to start with and commented on the fill from the County Barns , mud , and quick sand . Mr . Becker stated that there are too many questions . Mr . John Cook , 209 Coy Glen Road , spoke from the floor and asked if there could be something written into the contract that would make it impossible to ever open a bar . Mr . Aron stated that something to that effect might be a condition if approval were to be granted . Mrs . Edith Becker , 661 Five Mile Drive , spoke from the floor and stated that something was said about back land and she wanted to point out that he cannot use it ; it was given to the Town and taken off the taxes . Mr . William Jenks , 655 Five Mile Drive , spoke from the floor and stated that several years ago they got the County Barns , then the School Bus Garage . He stated that he was against anything else . Mr . Ralph Bacon , 704 Five Mile Drive , spoke from the floor and stated that he had several things to say , one of which was with reference to postponing any decision until later . Mr . Bacon stated that , as he reads the zoning ordinance , it states that a lodge may be permitted by permission of the Zoning Board of • Appeals . Mr . Bacon stated that he believed every person is opposed except one and with everybody objecting , how could the Board give them permission to build . Mr , Bacon stated that he did not think it was fair to the Lodge either to postpone decision . Mr . Bacon stated that the costs of this building could mean 85 members of the club , adding that the residents do not need 40 or 50 more cars in the area . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing duly closed at 9 : 00 P . M . The Board agreed that Mr . Zazzara should present his plans to the Planning Board for review and request that the Planning Board make a recommendation to the Board of Appeals . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Zazzara Appeal adjourned to a later date . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM OCTOBER 13 , 1982 ) OF DAVID Be BOWLSBY , APPELLANT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF A TWO - FAMILY DWELLING BY FIVE UNRELATED PERSONS AT 829 TAUGHANNOCK BLVD . , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 25 - 2 - 38 , ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Aron declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 9 : 01 p . m , and read aloud the Notice as published and as noted above . • Mr . Bowlsby appeared before the Board and presented one lease for the main house ( 3 - bedroom house ) dated October 1 , 1982 between Bowlsby , Eric Rassmussen , Martin Moynihan , and Anthony Zoning Board of Appeals 16 November 17 , 1982 Allyn , to expire August 14 , 1983 . It was noted that the lease was actually signed by only two persons . Mr . Bowlsby indicated that he could not find the other lease . Mr . Aron asked Mr . Bowlsby how long he had owned the property in question , to which Mr . Bowlsby responded - about 1z years . Mr . Aron asked Mr . Bowlsby if he purchased the house to live there . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he wants to live there as soon as he can . Mr . Bowlsby stated that there are all kinds, of people up there on Taughannock Blvd . who have apartments and tenants . He commented that he is the Roto - Rooter Man and he has been in many homes up there . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he wanted a three - year extension of the lease expiration date in order to take care of his note . He stated that he did not know he was in violation . Mr . Bowlsby stated that the house costs him $ 1 , 000 . 00 a month right now . Mrs . Reuning stated that this request is no different from many of the appeals this Board hears . Mrs . Reuning stated that the only thing pending in this matter was checking the lease and deciding on an extension or denying it . Mr . Bowlsby stated that the man who came in to see him said there would be no problem in getting an extension . He stated that there are three people downstairs and two upstairs . Mr . • Aron pointed out that that is two too many . Mrs . Reuning commented that the Board has a problem with people thinking they can just get an extension . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he did not take that for granted , he was told it . Mr . Aron asked if the tenants were employed . Ms . Stanton stated that four of them are employed , one is unemployed . Mr . Cartee stated that Mr . Rassmussen is a student - teacher at DeWitt Junior High School , Mr . Austen stated that the Board had asked at the October 13th meeting that Mr . Bowlsby present the leases involved . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he has no problem in bringing in the lease for the upstairs , adding that one of the guys is leaving anyway so he needs to make a new lease . He stated that the upstairs lease expires in July of 1983 . Chairman Aron asked if there were any comments from the public . There were none . Chairman Aron asked for Board comment . Mr . Austen stated that the Board has been more than lenient in the past in allowing for the expiration of a lease , however , in this case with a request for a three - year extension he felt the Board had to hold the line . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he would imagine that seriousness would be a consideration . Mr . Austen stated that he looked at it as a matter of whether or not the • hardship is self - imposed , commenting that a person knows the costs involved and knows he will have to put more people in the house . Mr . Bowlsby stated that his hardship is his ignorance of Zoning Board of Appeals 17 November 17 , 1982 . the law . He stated that from what he knew , two apartments would be no problem . He noted again that he is a service man and he has been up and down that Lake . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he did not buy that place to say to heck with the zoning which is being implied here ; he did not know . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he assumed that two apartments were okay and he simply could not imagine any problems , adding that if he had had any doubts , he would have checked . He stated that he never anticipated what he is running into ; his intentions were to live there and rent upstairs . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he is not making any money , he is losing $ 100 . 00 a month . Mrs . Reuning stated that the Board ' s problem is to decide whether to allow the lease to run out , to extend the time for compliance until the end of May , to grant the requested three - year extension , or to deny the appeal and order compliance . Mr . Aron noted that the upstairs lease expires in July 1983 and the Board has not seen that lease . Mr . Bowlsby stated that he could bring it in . Mrs . Reuning pointed out that in July of 1983 the upstairs lease with two persons expires and then the house would be in compliance with three persons downstairs and the upstairs empty . MOTION by Mrs . Joan Reuning , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen . . RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals adjourn and hereby does adjourn the matter of the Appeal of David B . Bowlsby from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy of a two - family dwelling by five unrelated persons at 829 Taughannock Blvd . , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 25 - 2 - 38 , until the first meeting of said Board of Appeals in August 1983 at which time the occupancy of said two - family dwelling shall be in compliance with the requirements of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and shall remain in such compliance , with the clear understanding that there shall be no more unrelated persons occupying said dwelling in the meantime than the five presently tenanted . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Bowlsby Appeal duly adjourned . APPEAL OF JAMES G . BENNETT SR . ET AL , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING BY FIVE UNRELATED PERSONS AT 1115 DANBY ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 43 - 2 - 13 , ITHACA , N . Y . PERMISSION IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR Zoning Board of Appeals 18 November 17 , 1982 • UNDER ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 , PARAGRAPH 1 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 9 : 25 p . m . and read aloud the Notice as published and as noted above . Mr . Bennett was present and Mr . Aron noted that each Board member had received a copy of Mr . . Bennett ' s documentation in support of his appeal . Mr . Bennett asked if he could show pictures of his house and surrounding area and was given permission to do so . Mr . Bennett pointed out the size of the parcel - 100 ' x 500 ' - noting that it is a very deep lot with the house set back 120 ' from the street . Mr . Bennett pointed out the existence of a commercial area two doors down . He stated that the house is a very large home containing five bedrooms and the economics are just not there to maintain it for only three unrelated persons . Mr . Bennett stated , as set forth in his petition , that the house was originally purchased for his father and his sister ; unfortunately , his sister died at age 36 and his father would not consider living there then . Mr . Bennett stated that he has rented the house to anywhere from three to five unrelated persons since August 30 , 1980 . Mr . Aron asked if the students presently occupying the house • are graduate students . Mr . Bennett stated that they are all graduate students - two at Cornell and three at Ithaca College . He stated that he prefers graduate students ; they are serious students who need a quiet place and this house is conducive to that with room enough for everyone to have a quiet spot . Mr . Bennett stated that he has no trouble renting the house ; it rents on the basis of word of mouth ; it is a classy house , well kept , with considerable time having been spent fixing it up . Mr . Aron commented that one would have to do that anyway . Mr . Bennett indicated that that was not necessarily so , if Mr . Aron were generalizing , adding that he has tried to make it a credit to the neighborhood . Mr . Bennett stated that he had a letter from his realtor which he could submit to the Board . He stated that it would be a hardship for him to rent to only three people ; it would put him in a negative cash flow situation and the house would be under - utilized . He commented that three tenants could not afford the overhead , adding again that it is a very large house . Mr . Bennett stated that it would also cause him a hardship to sell the house with interest up to about 5 points . Mr . Bennett stated that realtor Bob VanDermark has indicated that the market is not there ; people are looking for smaller houses . Mr . Bennett stated that he might be able to sell the house if he were willing to hold the mortgage . Mr . Bennett stated that they have tried to turn a bad situation into a good one , adding that they provide a good , clean place for select students to live in . . Mr . Aron noted that Figure 1 of Mr . Bennett ' s documentation shows that there would be a loss of $ 171 . 11 a month if the house were in compliance with the occupancy regulations . Mr . Aron Zoning Board of Appeals 19 November 17 , 1982 stated that it appeared that Mr . Bennett had not considered the appreciation of the house in his documents . Mr . Bennett stated that there is little appreciation in today ' s market . Mr . Aron indicated that there would be appreciation on such a beautiful house . Mr . Aron asked Mr . Bennett if he intended to sell the house . Mr . Bennett stated that that would depend on what his children want to do , noting that he has three children , and adding that homeownership may be very difficult to come by in the future . He commented that if they stay here , they would have a home . Mr . Bennett noted that appreciation does not come into play until one sells . Mr . Aron noted that Mr . Bennett lives on Hanshaw Road and asked if he owned that home . Mr . Bennett stated that he did . Mr . Aron asked Mr . Bennett if he felt his home is appreciating , to which Mr . Bennett responded - not as it used to , adding that it used to be around 7 % . Mr . Aron commented that it is now around 5 % . Mr . Bennett agreed . Mr . Bennett stated that , according to the realtor , when he bought the Danby Road house in 1980 , it was assessed for $ 70 , 000 . 00 ; he bought it for $ 48 , 000 . 00 , so the house did not appreciate . Mr . Austen noted that Mr . Bennett gets a tax write - off of about $ 4 , 000 . 00 . Mr . Bennett stated that he did not know that it is $ 4 , 000 . 00 . It was noted that there are two houses to the North and three houses to the South . . Mr . Richard Wurzel , 1119 Danby Road , asked to speak and was asked if he were opposing this application . Mr . Wurzel responded that he was not . Mr . Wurzel stated that he and Mrs . Wurzel moved to their home in 1959 . He stated that they wanted peace and quiet and it was that way for a while . Mr . Wurzel stated that they have had people on both sides that were very unpleasant neighbors . He stated that one time there was a man and wife and seven children and on the other side , husband and wife and four children . Mr . Wurzel stated that with the students Mr . Bennett has there is no noise - they study all the time and he does not have to pick up pieces of wood and debris before he can mow the lawn . Mr . Wurzel stated that they have had peace and contentment since Mr . Bennett has rented to graduate students . Mr . Wurzel stated that they have been very pleased with the arrangement . Mrs . Ethel Wurzel , 1119 Danby Road , spoke from the floor and asked if she could know who is objecting to this use and what the objection is . Mrs . Wurzel stated that she wanted to know how the occupation of the house is disturbing anyone . Mr . Aron stated that it was not relevant who was objecting . Mr . King stated that he thought it would be appropriate to ask the Zoning Enforcement Officer if he has had many complaints . Mr . Cartee stated that he had one complaint as to the number of occupants being more than permitted . Mr . Cartee stated that he has had no complaints as to noise or anything else . • Mr . Aron asked about parking facilities . Mr . Bennett stated that all parking is off - street . Zoning Board of Appeals 20 November 17 , 1982 Mr . King stated that the record should show that the lease is very particular in the way the property is kept up , e . g . , no nails without permission , no waterbeds in there , no pets , and it is obvious from the pictures that it is very well kept up . Chairman Aron asked if there were any other questions from the Board . There were none . Chairman Aron asked if there were any further comments from the public . Mr . Peter Cholakis , resident of 1115 Danby Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he is a Physical Therapy student at Ithaca College and Erin O ' Connor , another resident , is a Speech Pathology graduate student at Ithaca College . Mr . Cholakis urged the Board to permit their continued residency in the house . Ms . O ' Connor stated that she , personally , did not see how the house could not be rented to more than three persons ; it is very large and each resident has privacy . She stated that they have had no problems at all , and if they have any questions , Dr . Bennett is right there to help . Ms . O ' Connor presented the following letter to the Board signed by Margaret B . Ullmann and Andrew H . Paterson : " As graduate students of Cornell University we feel that the students residing in the Town of Ithaca would be done a great disservice if Dr . Bennett were not permitted to continue renting the house at 1115 Danby Rd . , Ithaca N . Y . to more than three unrelated people . The house is very well kept , well built and is well maintained by Dr . Bennett . With the lack of availability of student housing in as good condition as the above -mentioned house , it would be a shame to limit the use of these facilities to merely three unrelated persons when the facilities are clearly more than adequate for greater numbers . JDr . Bennett is a conscientious landlord and community member and would not accept as tenants a group of irresponsible people . JIn the past three months there have been no troubles within the house , or as far as we know , with the neighbors . IlWe hope that this board will decide in favor of permission for the occupancy of 1115 Danby Rd . by five unrelated persons . " Mr . King stated that the Board of Appeals has asked the Town Board for three years to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance to reflect needs just like this - very large existing homes which were built for large occupancy by a family which has grown up and the owner can 'no longer maintain it . Mr . King stated that all the Board ' s appeals to the Town Board to change the Statute have not borne fruit to date ; the zoning ordinance remains permitting only three unrelated persons . Mr . King stated that he saw no way to permit increased occupancy . Mr . Bennett stated that he thought a variance could be • granted for a particular cause . Mr . Bennett stated that he serves on the Board of the Village of Cayuga Heights and they Zoning Board of Appeals 21 November 17 , 1982 have granted variances for just cause . Mr . Bennett stated that he was asking for a variance , not that the ordinance be changed . Chairman Aron stated that there is a revised zoning law being written at this point wherein an increase in the number of occupants would be permitted . Mr . Aron stated that the Board felt very much for Mr . Bennett ' s situation , adding that his documentation and comments were well presented . The Board suggested that Mr . Bennett take up the matter of the passage of the revised zoning law with the Town Board himself . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mr . Edward King : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals adjourn and hereby does adjourn the matter of the Appeal of James G . Bennett .from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy of a single family dwelling by five unrelated persons at 1115 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 2 - 13 , until the first meeting of said Board of Appeals in May 1983 , in hopes that the revised Town of Ithaca Zoning Law will have been enacted by then . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Bennett Appeal duly adjourned . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman Aron declared the November 17 , 1982 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly adjourned at 10 : 10 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals . Henry Aron , Chairman