Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Special Approval 10/12/1994 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY, -OCTOBER 12, 1994 7:00 P.H. By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday, October 12, 1994, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, (FIRST Floor, REAR Entrance, WEST Side) , Ithaca, N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7:00 P.M. , on the following matters: Appeal.of Ralph Varn, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Sections 14 and 16 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and Section 280-A of New York State Town Law, to be permitted to create a parcel of land (through subdivision) which does not have frontage on a Town, County, or State highway, at 1598 Slaterville Road, on a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56-3-14.2, Residence District R-15. Appeal Christine A. Smith, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 21 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a 24' x 27' garage with a second story living area having a proposed side yard building setback of 19' (40' setback required) at 6 Schickel Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-2-13, Residence District R-30. Appeal, of Elsie McMillan, Owner, Historic Ithaca, Appellant, requesting an extension of a time-limited use variance granted by the Zoning.Board of Appeals on April 10, 1991, to be permitted to use a barn as an architectural parts recycling warehouse at 812 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33-1-7.2, Residence District R-30. Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance does not permit an architectural parts recycling warehouse in Residential District R-30 zones. Appeal of the First Assembly of God, Reverends Robert Lovelace and Barry Shepps, Agents, requesting a Special-Approval under Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a multi-purpose religion building at Lot #2 of the Tomlinson subdivision at 197 Bostwick Road, on a. portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-4-1.2, Residence District R-30. A variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 18, Paragraph 10 is also requested to construct a sanctuary with a building height of 44 + feet (30' maximum building height permitted) . Appeal of William Kellner and Camille Tischler, Appellants, requesting a time-limited variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to maintain a single-family residence by four unrelated persons at 124 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 58-2-18, Residence District R-15. Said Ordinance limits such occupancy to no more than three unrelated persons. Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7:00 p.m. , and said place, hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Andrew S. Frost Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer 273-1783 Dated: October 4, 1994 Publish: October 7, 1994 , Town of Ithaca 16 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 It was noted that the plans presented with this appeal are identified as follows: Barden Commercial Division, Drawing No. B17.94 (Sheet 1 is dated 6/27/94 and Sheets 2 and 3 are dated 6/24/94) with a revision date of 8/25/94 on all three sheets. With no further discussion, Chairman Austen then asked for a vote on the motion which resulted as follows: AYES - Austen, Ellsworth, King, Scala. NAYS - None. The motion was carried unanimously. Chairman Austen read into the minutes a letter dated September 20, 1994 from the Tompkins County Department of Planning by James Hanson, Jr. , Commissioner of Planning. Chairman Austen asked what the schedule is for the church to be built and Mr. Myers said they have no actual schedule as far as a ground breaking at any certain time. Once they get the special permit, they'll begin fund raising and put the building they presently occupy and own up for sale. A large portion of the seed money they'll need to break ground and beginning work will come from the sale of the building. Mr. Scala asked, roughly, what are the numbers in terms of finished cost and Mr. Myers said Phase 1 was between the $600,000 and the $800,000 range. With no further discussion required, Chairman Austen asked that a motion be made on the appeal. MOTION By Mr. Pete Scala, seconded by Mr. Edward King. RESOLVED, that the Board grant a Special Approval for the appeal of the First Assembly of God, Reverends Robert Lovelace and Barry Shepps, Agents, under Article V, Section 18, Paragraph 3, Subparagraph a of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a multi-purpose religion building at Lot #2 of the Tomlinson subdivision at 197 Bostwick Road, on a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31-4-1.2, Residence District R-30, with the following findings: 1. This Special Approval is in compliance with Section 77, Paragraph 7, Subpara- graphs a-f of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. 2. There may be a subsequent requirement for a spire considerably higher which would require an additional appeal. 3. Construction of the building is permitted substantially in accordance with the plans which have been presented, with one phase of it going up as high as 44' and the other phase somewhat lower (36' to 37' ) but, nevertheless, in excess of the 30' as shown on these plans. Maximum footage of the structure will be approximately 21,500 square feet. 4. The site plan approval is based on the drawing submitted with the appeal so, if there is any significant deviation, approval would be denied. The final location and details are to be worked out as part of the final site plan approval with the Planning Board. Town or .itnaca 17 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 Chairman Austen noted that the Planning Board did not place any restrictions on this case that he saw and Attorney Barney said there were about four conditions which really related to submission of additional documentation or planning, or both. Mr. Scala suggested that a time limit be placed on the variance and Mr. Frost noted that is already a set period of 18 months. With no further discussion, Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion which resulted as follows: AYES - Austen, Ellsworth, King, Scala. NAYS - None. The motion was carried unanimously. The last appeal to be heard by the Board was as follows: APPEAL of William Kellner and Camille Tischler, Appellants, requesting a time- limited variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to maintain a single-family residence by four unrelated persons at 124 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 58-2-18, Residence District R-15. Said Ordinance limits such occupancy to no more than three unrelated persons. Camille Tischler stepped to the microphone and Chairman Austen requested that she tell the Board the circumstances of the appeal with regard to the four unrelated persons. Ms. Tischler said she was renting the house last spring and these four men requested that they be able to rent it. She said she was concerned about the fact that they were four men who wanted to rent the house and subsequently spoke to them about it and voiced her own concerns about cleanliness, noise, and also about the reputation the college students have. They said they were really looking for a place that was quiet, that they were very concerned about their studies, that they'd been very unhappy with the dwellings they'd had in Ithaca previously because there had been so much noise, and that they didn't want to live in the Collegetown setting. Ms. Tischler got references from their landlords. She called them and they had good references; they looked and seemed responsible; and she was unaware of the ordinance and it never occurred to her that there would be an ordinance against it. Ms. Tischler said she is not an experienced landlord and they don't have any other properties. The only thing that did occur to her was about discrimination laws and she wondered how she was going to explain to them that they couldn't rent it and what excuse could she give them for telling them no. It seemed to her that she should rent it to them, so she did. Chairman Austen said the excuse is that the Town of Ithaca has an ordinance against it. Ms. Tischler said, at the time, she was unaware of that and she would have preferred to rent the house to a family herself. Mr. Frost said he believes this came to their attention because they had a complaint; just because of time constraints, he did not do one of the violation letters often seen. However, his office did receive a complaint, they investigated and discovered the occupancy was exceeded, and Ms. Tischler chose to come before the Board to request a time-limited variance. Ms. Tischler noted that she is just requesting a variance until their lease runs out which is July 31, 1995 -- this is a one-year lease which began August 1, 1994. Mr. Frost said (just for the benefit of some of the newer members on the Board) in past years, when they discovered these kinds of violations, if there is a lease or no lease and they can achieve compliance within a 90-day period, he generally does so without bringing it to the Board. When he has a situation such as a lease that goes well beyond what he's comfortable allowing without any Zoning Board involvement, he refers it to the Zoning Board. Town of Ithaca 18 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 Ms. Tischler noted they have put alot of money into the house as the Board can probably see from the material she had submitted. They put in a new roof and took care of the drainage problem, did the floors, painted the outside, and have really done alot to keep the house up and to have it looking good. Mr. King asked how they had come to buy the house since they had never lived in it and Ms. Tischler said it was a personal story and she would really rather not tell it. Mr. King said it wasn't required that she tell them and said her list indicates about $14,500 of improvements made in the past two years, then asked to whom did she rent the property two years ago? Ms. Tischler said she rented it to a retired couple who moved up from Long Island (the Cramers) . They lived there for a year, and then she rented it to two women -- one was a graduate student at Cornell and the other was a teacher of special education at BOCES (they were there for a year, also) . Mr. Scala asked if Ms. Tischler lives there as well and she responded, no. Mr. King asked if Ms. Tischler knew how many automobiles her tenants own and she said she believed they have one apiece but doesn't know for sure. Mr. King then asked if the automobiles are parked on the premises and Ms. Tischler said yes, there's plenty of space there for four cars. Mr. King said it's probably not the prettiest sight to see four cars parked there and asked if there is a garage. Ms. Tischler said there is a garage but there are glass doors in front of it; it was used as a playroom by the people who owned it years ago, so it's not really useable as a garage at the present time. Mr. Ellsworth stated he lives in that neighborhood and the garage door is still there but the glass doors are on the outside so, as far as you can tell from the outside, it's living space. Mr. Frost said they went in and it's basically a storage area. When they investigated the complaint, that area is being used for storage right now. Mr. Frost said he didn't know if the Board has any interest, but it appears that Ms. Tischler's tenants are in the audience right now and the Board may wish to direct some questions to the tenants. Ms. Tischler said she wanted to say 'one other thing about the garage. She did attempt to have a structural estimate done on it, and it would have cost thousands of dollars to determine if the garage is actually strong enough to have a car in there. That's why she hasn't taken the garage doors down because she doesn't know whether or not the garage is structurally sound enough to hold a car. Mr. Frost asked if there is living space underneath the garage and Ms. Tischler said yes, there is. It was built to have cars in there and she believes there' are other houses in the neighborhood built at the same time and in the same style that still have cars in their garages. However, this was a question she didn't know how to answer so that's why it's not being used as a garage. Mr. King asked if she didn't know if it was ever used and Ms. Tischler said it was definitely used as a garage at one time. Mr. Frost said, not to take a position on this appeal but, as Building Inspector, he would certainly be concerned where they get building permits and have cars being parked over living space below and he believes that is a legitimate concern. For the minutes, Chairman Austen noted that there had been two letters received concerning this appeal: 1) Letter dated October 5, 1994 from Leland E. and Mary Margaret Carmichael of 122 Pine Tree Road, Ithaca, New York. 2) Letter dated October 11, 1994 from (Mrs. ) Nancy L. Kr'ook, 113 Pine Tree Road, Ithaca, New York. With regard to the letter from Nancy Krook, Mr. Frost said he felt it should be made clear that this letter makes reference to a re-zoning and this appeal is not a re-zoning issue. Town of Ithaca 19 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 Mr. King wanted to point out that, as an attorney, he has represented both the Carmichael's and the Fleischmann's. They being owners of the property adjacent to that which this appeal concerns so, therefore, he will not take part in any voting. However, he does feel it's proper that he be allowed to ask questions. Chairman Austen opened the public hearing. Mr. Roy Colle, residing at 121 Pine Tree Road, said he had a statement he'd like to submit which has been signed by thirty (30) people, some of whom are in the meeting room tonight. The statement was addressed to ,Chairman Austen and read as follows: "We, the undersigned, are homeowners residing in our own homes on Pine Tree Road. We do not wish to have any change in the present zoning law or any variances granted regarding the number of occupants per home. If more than three unrelated people were permitted to occupy one housing unit, the family character of the neighborhood would be eroded, quality of life would be diminished, and property values would go down. We request that this letter be read into the minutes." Mr. Albert George of 119 Pine Tree Road then stepped to the microphone. He said the applicants have been renting this house for two plus years and it seems to him that ignorance of the law is never an excuse; certainly, someone who has been renting for that long should know what the rules are about renting. Mr. George said he thinks any extension of non-compliance is just encouraging other people to rent with the idea that they can do the same thing for a year and make a little more money than they would have otherwise. This would be detrimental to their neighborhood which is a neighborhood of families and older couples and he doesn't see any reason why there should be an extension of this because the housing market in Ithaca right now is such that there wouldn't be any hardship to the men who are renting. The owners of the house could then perhaps rent to others, perhaps with not as high of a rental but that, of course, is the idea why things are zoned differently because land values depend on the usage allowed to them and you might want to invest differently in different areas. They don't want their area to be an area which is used for housing large numbers of people. They'd like to stay zoned the way it is and allow that zoning to be enforced. Mr. Hans Fleischmann of 126 Pine Tree Road stated he is the next door neighbor to this property. Initially, he thought, for a short time, maybe this isn't so bad but he really thinks, with all the cars around and so on, it really can be a serious headache. He frankly would like to know why the applicants didn't know this was not allowed by the zoning ordinance and said to Ms. Tischler that he understood someone with her same last name in this area is a realtor. Chairman Austen reminded Mr. Fleischmann that he was to address the Board members only. Mr. Fleischman said he doesn't quite understand if it happens to be a coincidence as far as the same last name or, if the realtor is really a relative, why Ms. Tischler wouldn't be aware what the ordinances are as far as not renting to four unrelated persons and, therefore, would not be in favor of any time- limited variance. Mr. James Munson stated he was one of the four members of the household and was a second year graduate student at the Hotel School at Cornell University. He is originally from Virginia and came up last year and said he would be happy to testify that he had no idea as to the zoning law at all. He is only here for two years (this is his second year) and was completely unaware of it, as were his other three housemates. They're all graduate students and, at this stage of the process in their second year, they're extremely busy and actually spend very little time in the house 'as it is. As their letters to the Board indicated, they really do believe it would be quite a hardship for them to take the time aside right now that it would require to find alternative places to live and move into them. Mr. Munson said he has a job as well as Town of Ithaca 20 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 a full-time position as a graduate student and his time is very precious to him. As the Board members might have noticed, most of them have been studying while they've been at the meeting. Mr. Munson said he's missing a class as it is and has to give some sort of a reason to his professor. He again said his time is very valuable to him and they're very focused on their studies, they're all paying for this program themselves which is a great deal of money and, right now, their goal is to simply finish their studies and graduate. Mr. Munson said they would like to ask the Board to please let them finish out the year at their residence and complete their studies, and he's sure this would not have to happen again. Mr. Munson said he doesn't like this any more than anybody else does, they do not mean to cause any trouble, but they sincerely didn't know about the ordinance. This works out economically for them and is a good situation, so they decided to do it and there's no complicity or malice involved in any of the actions which have taken place. Especially since they've heard about this, Mr. Munson said they've been very careful about their noise levels and would be more than happy to pledge whatever kind of behavior the Board would like to have from them in order to make people comfortable in the neighborhood. They haven't had parties before, they don't intend to have any, they're not big noise makers, and certainly, if there are any problems, they'd be happy to address them and do whatever the neighborhood would feel comfortable with. They do feel it would be a considerable hardship at this time for them to have to relocate. Mr. King asked if each of the renters own a car and Mr. Munson said yes, they each own a car and there are four total. They're all parked very comfortably in the driveway and certainly don't cause them any trouble getting in and out so they're not badly packed in there. The driveway is certainly large enough for all four and none of them are eyesores by any stretch of the imagination. None of the cars are new, but they're not eyesores either. Mr. Frost said, in his travels as a Zoning Officer, he frequently sees cars parked on the shoulder of the road on Pine Tree Road. He asked Mr. Munson if they, or their visitors, have ever had occasion to park on the shoulder. Mr. Munson said never has anyone visiting their house ever parked on the shoulder of that road. He said he'd be happy to see that never happens; alot of people do park on the shoulder of that road but, in all honesty, they do not frequent their house. They're very busy and don't have alot of people over. When there are one or two extra people, they can all park right behind them. Two cars could park behind the four there, effectively blocking them in but being able to _stay off the street and leave after they visited. Mr. King asked if they each used their cars every day and Mr. Munson said three of them commute to school daily. Mr. King asked if this was in three separate cars and Mr. Munson said yes, his job requires him to be on campus from 9:00 AM to at least 6:00 PM in the evening five nights per week. From there, he does studies and projects and what - not so he doesn't have the flexibility to be able to go with other people. Attorney Barney asked what rent they're paying and Mr. Munson said it's $1,600 plus utilities. Ms. Tischler corrected him, saying the rent they're paying is $950 plus utilities (Ms. Tischler said it's the same rent she had been getting, she didn't charge them any more because there were four of them) . Mr. Munson said he found the rent to be a very fair price and, obviously, at $950 per month, she was not jacking the price up on them. He said the reason he had brought up $1,600 was, when they were house hunting to begin with last spring, they decided that $400 per person would be as much as they'd want to spend so their limit was $1,600 and this fell well within it so they were quite happy to find it. Town of Ithaca 21 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 Attorney Barney asked what the utilities run and Mr. Munson (and Ms. Tischler) said they were about $200 and then there was water and garbage, not more than $300 altogether. Chairman Austen asked if this was the first year of their lease there and Mr. Munson said yes, they just moved in on August 1st. Attorney Barney then asked how long a lease it is and Mr. Munson said it's for one year. Attorney Barney asked if it's a signed, written lease and Mr. Munson said yes, and all four of them signed the lease as far as July 31st. Mr. King asked if they all planned to stay until July 31st and Mr. Munson said, most likely, no. Two of them graduate Memorial Day (at the end of May) and then they have one Ph.D. student who will find a place to live elsewhere over the course of the summer. Mr. Frost asked if he was saying, effectively, that three of them would be out May 31, 1995 then and Mr. Munson said, yes. Ms. Tischler said she would attempt to rent it to someone before that to help them out if she can and Mr. Munson said, quite honestly, they'd be happy to see the lease end earlier. The only reason they signed the lease for a year is because that's the standard lease in this town. Ideally for them, they would have taken a 10-month lease but it's impossible; so, basically, they had to carry the other two months. Mr. Munson said, as far as he's concerned, he'll be leaving by early June. Attorney Barney asked, when they were renting to the elderly couple mentioned earlier, what the rent they paid was and Ms. Tischler said they bought the house in July and then were not able to rent it at that point. The elderly couple didn't come until November -- she had the rent at $900 per month, but they couldn't pay more than $650 so that's what they paid. That didn't even pay the mortgage, and they have been losing money on this house like crazy. Attorney Barney asked if they were under a lease at $650 per month and Ms. Tischler said she believed they did have a lease and that it ended in the summer but couldn't say exactly for sure. The next people moved in during August and paid $900 per month plus the utilities. Ms. Tischler said it really has been alot of cash out of their pocket ever since they bought the house and, actually, it's been a real trial. Mr. John Schultzel then stepped to the microphone and stated he's also one of the gentleman living at 124 Pine Tree Road. He asked to make some additional comments and said Ms. Tischler already voiced some of the sentiments they were expressing to her when they looked at the place and decided to lease it. One of these was the actual location and nature of the neighborhood. That was actually their choice, and it's not at all in their invested interest to change the dynamics or the environment of that neighborhood. The parking of the cars aside, Mr. Schultzel said he thinks anybody who has driven by has seen that they've maintained the exterior of the building very neatly; there's never been garbage strewn in the driveway, they've maintained the lawn and the hedges, and they keep their outdoor lights on in the evening and turn them off in the daytime. It really is their main concern that they keep the environment in the neighborhood as it is; that's why they chose to live there. Collegetown, as most of the Board knows, is a zoo and is poorly maintained and not a condition for any student to live in. Mr. Schultzel said they also do not mean to establish a trend by moving there. It is difficult for them to get another spot to live and they'd just like to quietly and peacefully keep the terms of the lease until they're over and, by all means, not inform others of the possibilities of living arrangements in this area. Mr. Schultzel said they understand why all the neighbors like it, they like it themselves, and please rest assured that they'll do everything in their power to maintain the element that's there. `1VW11 VL 1L11dGd 22 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 Ms. Susanna Colle of 121 Pine Tree Road was the next to speak. She said they have nothing against students but would like the zoning laws to be respected. They had a similar case a few years ago. Her husband and the rest of her family was sent on assignment to the South Pacific. Her son was at Cornell and stayed in their house (121 Pine Tree is a much larger house than this one) . He invited three other Cornell students to live with him; there was a complaint like this, and one student moved out. That left three, and they stayed within compliance. That's what they would like in this case, they're not asking major things but that the applicants stay within the law. The issue isn't that the renters are students but that there are more people than is legal ,and Ms. Colle said they think everybody should live by those laws and someone's business interests shouldn't be an excuse for not staying within the rules. Marty Turnbull of 118 Pine Tree Road said she would like to echo what a number of her neighbors have said about the character of their neighborhood. With all due respect to these students (they don't have anything personally against any of these students) , but she wanted to point out that the nature of their neighborhood is important and they do understand the characteristics that develop in Collegetown, South Hill, and other areas and they don't want to see this happen to their neighborhood. Ms. Turnbull said she also wanted to mention that it's not a pretty sight seeing four to six cars in the driveway; that may not be something that's noticeable to them, but it is noticeable to the neighbors. Lastly, Ms. Turnbull wanted to mention to the Board -- if they were to question Ms. Tischler on her background -- it is her understanding that Ms. Tischler does have experience in real estate. If that indeed is the case, it seems to her that, as the renters mentioned, it's taken time for them to come to the meeting tonight and she thinks this should be rather a straight forward matter. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse and, in her particular case, Ms. Tischler certainly should have been aware of what this ordinance involves. Mr. King asked Ms. Turnbull if she had said six cars and Ms. Turnbull said, yes, four to six cars; it's not unusual to see the driveway filled with cars. Mr. Paul Pedersen then stepped to the microphone and stated he is one of the tenants at 124 Pine Tree Road. He thought both of his roommates had previously stated to the Board what had to be said in terms of their position, but he just wanted to respond to a couple of the remarks that were made after his roommates spoke. First of all and just to emphasize, there were four people who were looking for a place where all four of them could live. The property was inspected and there's ample room for four people there, and it's not as if they're cramped in by any means. It's a big house that's well maintained, there's ample room for all of them, and the price was not raised for the sake of four people. They decided to rent this property because of the location, price, and because there was ample space. To respond to the statement that there are four to six cars; occasionally, when somebody comes by to visit, they park in their driveway but that's already been pointed out. There's plenty of room in their driveway for people to park and it doesn't happen every day; it's not as if they have visitors every moment of the day. Mr. Pedersen said he also wants to emphasize that it would be an incredible hardship at this point in the year to move in terms of interfering with their studies; all of them are very busy; they're all graduate students, are responsible, and not into partying. Had they been aware of the ordinance in the first place, they would never have rented the property. They were trying to find a place where all four of them could live comfortably and, indeed, they did find it. In closing and as has already been pointed out, Mr. Pedersen said they are all responsible people, are graduate students, and intend to keep the property well maintained (it is maintained now and the lawn has been mowed and everything has been well taken care of) . He can understand some of the Town of Ithaca 23 • Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 concerns that people have in terms of this starting a trend but, in terms of their particular situation, he doesn't think they should be made sort of the sacrificial lamb. To force one of them to leave at this point would be unduly harsh to everybody concerned, especially since they went in not intending to do anything wrong, they were just trying to find a place to live. Mr. Frost asked if all four of them use the address of 124 Pine Tree Road as a permanent address or if they have legal addresses elsewhere outside of Ithaca. Mr. Pedersen said they do have legal addresses elsewhere. Chairman Austen said he took it ,that Mr. Pedersen is the one who stays longer and the other three are the ones who will be graduating in Hay and Mr. Pedersen agreed and said he'll be at Cornell for awhile. Mr. King asked Mr. Pedersen if he, or any of his roommates, received any complaints personally about noise. Mr. Pedersen said none at all and, if there ever was a problem, they would be happy to comply. He said their landlord did point out the fact that this is a family neighborhood and environment, and they began to rent knowing it was this type of environment and that's why they chose to live in this type of environment, because it's conducive to helping them maintain a serious level of study on their part. Mr. Scala asked if they all had their own rooms and Mr. Pedersen said yes, they converted one den into a bedroom so they all have their own room and there's plenty of space. Mr. Frost said this was perhaps a procedural question for their attorney and asked if a hardship was solely on the part of the landlord or do the occupants have a role in the hardship. Attorney Barney said it's really the landowner where the test is directed as to whether it's possible to make an economic return. Mr. Kanter said he didn't want to pretend he's an attorney but, in the recent recodified state enabling laws dealing with use variances, there's a provision dealing with self-created hardship which basically says that -- where self-created hardship was shown in a case, the use variance should not be granted -- and lack of knowledge or not having read the zoning ordinance in a town cannot be argued as hardship. Basically, you'd be in a situation where you have created hardship on yourself by not having read the zoning ordinance. Mr. Kanter said that's just something they need to consider in terms of procedures and law. Attorney Barney said he realizes Ms. Tischler didn't want to get into her personal reasons for the history of the house but, when she bought it, did she buy it with the intention of moving into it herself? Ms. Tischler replied yes, she did. Attorney Barney said her intention had then changed, obviously, and Ms. Tischler agreed. Mr. King asked Mr. Frost, as the Zoning Officer, about the nature of the complaint they had received. Mr. Frost said, to his recollection, there was just one complaint that occupancy was being exceeded. They actually had taken several similar complaints that day and not just for Pine Tree Road. Chairman Austen asked if there have been any other calls that Mr. Frost knew of on this property for any other reason and Mr. Frost said none that he was aware of. Mr. Elmer Phillip of 131 Pine Tree Road then introduced himself and said he had not intended to speak at all, partly because he hadn't been able to hear only about one- tenth of what was being done at the meeting tonight. He is hard of hearing, his eyes are not good either (he's had two implants and can see alot better than he can hear) . Mr. Phillip said he thinks that's something that might be looked into in the future . . . that, if they're going to include the audience, they might also include them in some of their discussions; not all, but some. Chairman Austen said they hope they spoke loud Town of Ithaca 24 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 enough so that everyone can hear and Mr. Phillip said, from his viewpoint, they did not. He could never hear one word Chairman Austen said. Mr. Phillip said, having sat on this same Board, he realizes there are four good looking fellows behind him and one of them from Virginia is quite persuasive. However, he does not know any reason in the world why the applicant would rent other than living in the house unless she bought it for an investment. Mr. Phillip said that, he couldn't comment on, because he didn't hear it and couldn't hear the comments that were made. However, all he wanted to say was, from the Board's viewpoint, they need the wisdom of Solomon because they're going to hurt somebody and they can't help it but he also wanted to say that variances are the breakdown of zoning . . . always. Mr. Albert George of 119 Pine Tree Road said there was some implication in the previous conversation that the zoning office had only gotten one complaint about this case. That's because everyone on the road knew there had been a complaint made and knew something was going to happen; therefore, they didn't all write letters. Mr. George said he believed they also had some letters in addition to the one complaint from other people. Mr. King explained that the question was in regard to the nature of the complaints; whether the renters were being rowdy, etc. Mr. George said there's going to be some hardship on one side or the other either way but he would suggest that January is the time between terms when there aren't classes, there's a turnover in housing, and we're talking about one person of the three to make this a legal arrangement. Certainly from his viewpoint (he didn't know about the other people on his road) ; if it was January, they wouldn't feel quite as badly as if it was a one year thing that went on like this. Mr. James Munson (one of the renters) asked if he could say one more thing and Chairman Austen granted permission. Mr. Munson said, in the interest of negotiation, maybe they could all leave in June when they graduate and meet the community halfway. He suggested that they could all vacate June 1, 1995 and end the lease upon graduation and perhaps that would be a reasonable compromise for everyone. Mr. King asked Mr. Munson, in light of what the previous gentleman had said, is there some period (like January) between terms when it would be easiest for one of them to move out so that the occupancy would be legal. Mr. Munson said they have 2-1/2 to 3 weeks (he wasn't exactly sure) after the Christmas holiday and before they have to return to school. For himself (and he was sure for the other two graduating tenants), he has a number of interviews lined up with companies in January during that period of time so that he can get a job and cover his student loans. That is the time he's allotted to himself to do his interviewing outside of the Ithaca area. Moving could be done then, but it's a time when he was certainly hoping to have to further his career and his situation. Mr. Paul Pedersen said the fact there are four of them sharing the rent as it is, even if one of them moves out and finds another place, everybody will lose. Everybody will have to pay more rent, that would be a hardship on all of them financially. The remaining three renters will still have to pay $950 per month and whoever finds another place will have to incur that amount of cost. The hassle 'and time of moving to find a decent place will be great. They chose this location for certain criteria and, to find another place that meets this criteria, would be very difficult to do, especially in mid-semester, that's the worst time to find a decent place in Ithaca let alone the beginning of the year. Mr. Roy Colle of 121 Pine Tree Road wished to make some additional comments. The hardship issue is important, obviously, but he thought he had heard early in tonight's discussion that the persons renting the property were willing to pay up to $1,600; and, if he is figuring correctly and using those figures, three people would be willing to pay $1,200. Chairman Austen noted that the Board is aware of that and Mr. Colle said he just wanted to point out that it's not the hardship that it's made out to be. Town of Ithaca 25 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 Ms. Tischler then said she just wanted to say that she's in complete sympathy with the people who live in the neighborhood. She really understands their concerns completely with keeping the neighborhood intact and nice and that's one of the reasons why they put so much money into the house. She totally supports them on that level, but the house isn't paying its expenses as it is. There's no way they're going to be able to continue to keep it up; they're not even breaking even. The house looks so much better than it did two years ago and it's in better condition on the inside and on the outside. Ms. Tischler said she's totally wanting to go along with this ordinance after this lease is up, but it would be really helpful to them if they could just come close to breaking even and it's going to be really hard if they can't. Attorney Barney asked Ms. Tischler where they lived and she said on West Hill, on Taylor Place. Attorney Barney asked if that was in the city or the town and Ms. Tischler said in the city. Mr. King asked if she had tried to sell the property and Ms. Tischler said yes, they did try to sell it. Hr. King asked how long it was on the market and Ms. Tischler said it was on the market in the spring of 1993 and she couldn't say for how long that was, she didn't remember. They did have one offer on it, they accepted the offer and it was signed, then they broke the deal the next day. Mr. Frost asked if there was a "For Sale" sign on the front yard and Ms. Tischler said she believed so. She does have a sister who's a realtor (that had come up previously) ; she doesn't know about this ordinance; maybe she should, but she doesn't, and she didn't tell her about it. Chairman Austen asked if she had a copy of the lease and Ms. Tischler said no, not with her. Mr. Frost asked if Marie Tischler was her sister and Ms. Tischler said yes. Chairman Austen then closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen read Parts II and III of the environmental assessment form reviewed by JoAnn Cornish, Planner II dated September 23, 1994. With no discussion required, Chairman Austen asked for a motion. MOTION By Mr. Harry Ellsworth, seconded by Mr. Pete Scala. RESOLVED, that the Board adopt the recommendations of JoAnn Cornish, Planner II dated September 23, 1994 and find a negative determination of environmental significance for the appeal by William Kellner and Camille Tischler for the property at 124 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 58-2-18, Residence District R- 15, and noting that this is for a temporary variance. With no further discussion, Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion which resulted as follows: AYES - Austen, Ellsworth, Scala. NAYS - None. ABSTAIN - King. The motion was carried. Attorney Barney said he had a question he'd like to address to the neighbors if he could. Under the zoning ordinance as it's presently constituted, this is an illegal or improper occupancy. However, if this variance is denied and if Ms. Tischler were to • come to him as a private attorney (which he couldn't be because he's the Town Attorney) Town of Ithaca 26 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 and she wanted to ask how she could accommodate these four gentlemen, the answer would probably be to shut off one room and put in a kitchen. Then you've created a second dwelling unit and you're allowed to have two unrelated persons in each dwelling unit for a total of four in the building. Therefore, the question he wanted to address to the neighbors is: Do you really want to force somebody to make that kind of an accommoda- tion or is it better to go with the temporary variance for the period of a year or until the lease expires with the hope that it would then revert back to a three unrelated persons situation? Mr. Colle said this is a very hypothetical question, she would have to invest several thousand dollars to do that. He thought the logical solution to this would be much more along the lines of when are these people moving and can some other arrangement be worked out between the students and them. Attorney Barney then asked if it would be Mr. Colle's preference to go ahead and deny the variance and see what chips fall. Mr. Colle said he was just one person present at the meeting and Mr. Fleischmann asked if the variance being granted would prevent anything of that type happening. Attorney Barney said no, but there's a situation now where we have a commitment that it would revert back to three unrelated persons renting the house next year. Mr. King noted that it would be a temporary variance and such a variance would expire and not be permanent for the property. Attorney Barney said he was just trying to think, if he were a neighbor, which way he would want them to proceed. Mr. Scala said there are two options right now. One is to go ahead with the 90 days and somebody has to move out in January and the other one is to wait till May, 1995 to have someone leave. He said there is a difference of four months and it's obvious what's being invited is a third option (as Attorney Barney pointed out) and where the owner can proceed to make it a two-family residence which will guarantee four unrelated persons can live there and there's nothing you can do about that. It doesn't require anything other than whatever investment is involved. Mr. Scala then suggested they proceed with the motion and Chairman Austen agreed and asked him to proceed. MOTION By Mr. Pete Scala, seconded by Mr. Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that the Board grant the applicants, William Kellner and Camille Tischler, a time-limited variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to maintain a single-family residence by four unrelated persons at 124 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 58-2- 18, Residence District R-15, with the following findings and condition: 1. That one of the present renters must vacate the premises on or before January 15, 1995 such that the occupancy will be in compliance by consisting of only three unrelated persons after that time. 2. That the variance be granted for a period ending January 15, 1995 and, thereafter, the property must revert to compliance with the zoning ordinance. 3. That, if the ordinance were enforced now, it would create a situation where the ability to make any income (for at least a limited period of time) would be severely damaged because of the phases here in Ithaca of rental seasons. 4. That it's a hardship upon these tenants to move out at this particular point in time given that it's basically the beginning of their semester and they don't have the time to devote to finding an alternate residence. Town of Ithaca 27 Zoning Board of Appeals October 12, 1994 5. That housing options for one of the students to find a new place of residence would be more ideal during the Christmas holiday break and assuming the students would have more time during the semester break which is what the January 15, 1995 date is aimed at. 6. That, without the income created by this particular tenancy, this will create a severe economic hardship with respect to carrying the cost of the house for this period of time. The three month period of time would allow for an opportunity to re-rent to someone else with (hopefully) a more favorable economic situation than would be available if they were forced to rent at the present time. Mr. Scala said, if Ms. Tischler can't change the lease, then she's trapped with the lease until June. Attorney Barney said both the owner of the house and the tenants are trapped with the lease because both are in violation so it would be up to them to work out the details. With no further discussion, Chairman Austen asked for a vote on the motion which resulted as follows: AYES - Austen, Ellsworth, Scala. NAYS - None. ABSTAIN - King. The motion was carried. Chairman Austen advised Ms. Tischler that she must have one tenant move by January 15, 1995 and said, hopefully, he can find something suitable. Ms. Tischler responded by saying that she knows this is a long-term process but is wondering if some changes in their procedures might not be helpful in these cases. She wondered, if she and the neighbors had an opportunity to talk to each other ahead of time, if it would have come out this way. She said she thought the amount of money they've put into the house makes it clear that their intentions in the neighborhood are good and that they've done what the could to keep the neighborhood up, much more than anyone else who has lived there in the last ten years. She said she's really sorry that it's turned out this way and that the neighbors are so antagonistic. Chairman Austen pointed out that they do have an ordinance that they do have to uphold and that it's primarily a single family neighborhood as such. Ms. Tischler said she understood and was really speaking to the tenor of the exchange. Mr. Frost pointed out that there was nothing that would have prevented her from approaching the neighbors prior to tonight's meeting and Ms. Tischler said she did try to, actually. She went around from house to house but didn't have time to go to every house, it's difficult that way but easier in a forum. Chairman"Austen adjourned the meeting at 10:05 PM. ° Jjt ��1 (��^ 0 ll �l r.Gt .l n � Q1n AN Y ��1C� anda M. McLaughlin Recording Secretary and Austen, ChEm‘421-t-47/1k.-- • 2 ` TOWN OF ITHACA FEE: $80.00 ' 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED: C 11G (Q 14 Ithaca, New York 14850 CASH - ( (607) 273-1783 � p CHECK - (\5 Q U o l0 ) APPEAL ZONING: to the Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer For Office Use Only and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca, New York Having been denied permission to: rev + O -lvclr 14.ktre 674E4 el (4_.c at 12. 4 P sot—nee£.—ea AO , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. -8 as shown on the accompanying application and/or plans or other supporting documents, for the stated reason that the issuance of such permit would be in violation of: Article(s)_ 15T , Section(s) // , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and, in support of the Appeal, affirms that strict observance of the Zoning Ordinance would impose PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows: (Additional sheets may be attached as necessary. ) PLE As Ira ATrActj ED. By filing this application, I grant permission for members of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals or staff to enter my property to inspect in connection with my application. Signature of Owner/Appellant: C� ` t�t Date: ( 11) 1yA1/41 Q444 --e4 �Jls Q:��U�fiLJ Signature of Appellant/Agent: - Date: Home Telephone Number: et 13 - .2 61 6 5 Work Telephone Number: NOTE: If construction of work in accordance with any variances given does not commence within 18 months_ the vari anr_c. wi 11 emi re_ COMPLAINT - INVESTIGATION 8_ a` I g '6) • /eave mes5,,Ge_co-air) t D.,-73-0.g55 Date: aq q a \o c ace Owner/Defendant: C_, f'61° l Ie. `?.sc, h`:\_e S p I Icio m C L° i I l e c Address of Owner/Defendant: kiX-14----ci?-(\ Address of Property (if different) : , 4 P?C\ P ' cee Qra If there is a Complainant:- Name: P a fl `e e (A) p a h i)D r- Address: Telephone Number: \ _ 3,e(14-6 IATURE OF COMPLAINT: 4� \p -Ca m9 U) Li 4--(.1 • • Complainant Notified: RESULTS/ACTION/DATES: 8-a9 1DDes ye 7 f/ /Gr7ed !ec —' ulna'I L /!Ol- Sr J Qln 4/ I Lr 'a 1 i'c1 e) 5�7� /IGrtie— ore-person /YJ01/P ou '///65n t= « 7-6 Assc5P,n 9-9 fl2 sscc i 9- is %ees U) Ni,A ?,„1 `t s/ VenvarP— 4r- o t - /1 Zee- 911 '70 rn M-/Z Mee-L 1:S 'nspector: Date: II . I I I I I ( Town Assigned Project ID Number ' Rev. 10/90 1 Tovn of Ithaca Environmental Review - • SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM. For UNLISTED ACTIONS Located in the Tovn of Ithaca, Tompkins County ONLY PART I — Project information (To be.completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 1. Applicant/Sponsor: 2. Project Name: I l l a ram £l�`!F r Ai ?/�c /�s<,yLt� i� .� /44/£ /,e6E tea, I 3. Precise Location,(Street Address and Road Intersections,prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map): I214 1'/NE.n'E 2..D1 -7-awh 6 "MA«,/t/ - Tax Parcel Number: - 4. is Proposed Action: Q NEW El EXPANSION IZt MODIFICATION/ALTERATION 5. Describe Project Briefl (Include projectpurpose, y p j present land use, current and future construction plans, and other I relevant items): -s-,` ile •Pa.�iI1 � ©ccCr a-„1cy 6/ 1.71 0-44.rflail. 4 ( 7 s I"o cw.s6rutzf i uv. . /Lec.PSSa/' 1 . (Attach separate sheet(s) if necessary to adequately describe the proposed project.) - 6. Amount of Land Affected: Initially,(0-5 yrs) Acres (6-10 yrs) Acres (>10 yrs) Acres 7. How is.the Land Zoned Presently? -ss I DEuTtAc._.. • 8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? YES El NO Q If no, describe'conflict briefly: / - Occur?-14cy _ -6) S wi r e Caa0C._ .1---1-t 6 9. Will proposed action lead to a request for new: Public Road? YESEi N0,J Public Water? YES NO,© Public Sewer? YES Q - NO E 10. What is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project? J Residential El Commercial Q Industrial ElAgriculture El Park/Forest/Open Space El Other Please describe: - 1 1. Does proposed action involve a permit,approval;or funding, now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal, State, Local)? YES 0 NO Igl if yes,list agency-name and permit/approval/funding: - 12. Does any aspect of the proposed action have a currentlu valid permit or approval? YES 0 NO 2 if yes, list agency name and permit/approval. Also,state whether that permit/approval will require modification. I i • I I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUETO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE 1 Applicant/Sponsor Name (Print or Type): j ; l l artw,„ 'e.,line.line. r 1 dam ; I L� I i 5 Ch _ I Signature: �L�%lU. ,,[_ _ I �'��G�j/ qii,..„:45_e_...t, Date: !cT'�✓ I PART II - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by the Town; Use attachments as necessary.) A. Does proposed action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12 or Town Environmental Local Law? YES NO X If yes, coordinate.the review process and use the full EAF. 8. Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6? YES NO if no. a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any. C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: (Answers may be handwritten, If legible) C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production and disposal; potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: See attached. C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources? Community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: r See attached. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish, or wildlife species, significant habitats, unique natural areas, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: See attached. - C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: See attached. CS. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: See attached. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1 - CS? Explain briefly: See attached. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: See attached. D. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? YES NO x If yes, explain briefly: See attached. E. Comments of staff , CAC , other attached. (Check as applicable.) PART Ill - DETERMINA ON OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca) + Instructions: For each adverse effect Identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important, or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed In connection with Its (a) setting (ie. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been Identified and adequately addressed. _ Check here if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the full EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. Check here if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attachments as necessary the reasons supporting this determination. Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals C )l/j AI y, - (Qf pJ Name of Lead Agency P arer's Signature (If different from Responsible Officer) Edward Austen, Chairman Name f Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Contributing Preparer Al i1CP ��r.1 Date: Q� / ,, /l'�y • ignature of Res onsitlfe Officer inLead Ag ency p L a Ag ncy 1 f 1 PART II-Environmental Assessment William Kellner, Camille Tischler 124 Pine Tree Road Town of Ithaca September 23, 1994 Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals - Occupancy Variance A. Action is Unlisted B. Action will not receive coordinated review C. Could action result in any adverse effects on, to or arising from the following: Cl. Existing air quality,surface or groundwater quality or quantity,noise levels,existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? No significant adverse impacts to air quality, water quality, noise levels, traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal are anticipated as a result of this project. Proposed action is the granting of a variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow 4 unrelated adults to reside in a single family home at 124 Pine Tree Road where the occupancy is limited to 3 unrelated adults. C2. Aesthetic,agricultural,archeological,historic,or other natural or cultural resources,or community or neighborhood character? No significant adverse impacts to agricultural, archeological, historic, natural or cultural resources are anticipated. Community and neighborhood character will not be significantly adversely impacted. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? No significant adverse impacts anticipated. No new construction,removal of vegetation,or other changes to the site are proposed C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted,or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Grant of the variance as requested would be contrary to certain community goals and plans as officially adopted. The subject parcel is located in a R-15 Residence District and the neighborhood consists of single family dwellings. The Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan (9/21/93) Chapter III, Goals, Objectives and Recommended Actions, A 2-3,recommends: "Establish zoning standards(e.g.,occupancy and usage limits)to minimize the negative effects of dwelling units occupied by students." However, there is attached supporting evidence stating hardship on both the part of the owners and on the part of the renters. The four adults who are renting are graduate students and have stated that they are serious students who require quiet and afforadable housing. They have further expressed the serious financial burden that moving would place on them at this time. The owners,William Kellner and Camille Tischler, have stated that to break the lease at this time would cause them loss of income and would present a financial hardship to them as well. The owners have stated that they were unaware of the occupancy ordinance at the time they rented the property to the current tennants and have indicated that they will comply with the ordinance when it is time to renew the lease, and so are asking for a temporary variance. ZBA-EAF- 124 Pine Tree Road, Occupancy Variance, Kellner/Tischler Page 2 Under the recently recodified state law (Town Law, section 267-b (2) (b)),a use variance cannot be granted where the unnecessary hardship complained of has been created by the applicant. It has been well established in New York's courts that the self-created hardship rule applies whether the applicant purchased the land with actual or constructive knowledge that the desired use was prohibited,and whether the knowledge was available to the applicant through a reading of the zoning regulations. With the above limitation in mind, the Zoning Board of Appeals could grant a temporary variance to expire at the same time as the current lease in question expires,as long as it is made clear that any future lease(s)must comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and that no time extension of the temporary variance will be considered. CS. Growth,subsequent development,or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Given the small scale and temporary nature for which the proposed variance is requested, no significant adverse impacts with respect to the above factors are anticipated. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in Cl-05? Grant of the requested variance may set a precedent resulting in similar requests for relief from zoning restrictions elsewhere in the Town of Ithaca. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? None anticipated. D. Is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? No controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts is anticipated. PART III - Staff Recommendation, Determination of Significance Based on review of the materials submitted for the proposed action, the proposed scale of it, and the information above, a negative determination of environmental significance is recommended for the action as proposed, as long as the variance is temporary, as outlined above. It must be noted that the grant of anything beyond a temporary variance may result in the establishment of a precedent which may facilitate similar requests for variances elsewhere in the Town of Ithaca, and which may result in a cumulatively significant adverse impact on community land use plans and goals as officially adopted. Lead Agency: Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Reviewer: JoAnn Cornish -Planner 11 Review Date: September 23, 1994 William Kellner/Camille Tischler ' Tax Parcel No. 58-2-18 Background- ' William Kellner and I purchased the property at 124 Pine Tree Road in July,1992. It is the only rental property that we own or that we have ever owned. During the time that we have owned the property, it has been rented to 1) a retired couple and 2) a Cornell graduate student and a teacher at BOCES. There have been no conflicts between our tenants and their' neighbors. ., We took over the property af ter:it had been neglected by the previous owner. In two years we have put a great .deal of time and money into it and • have made the following improvements: . Family Room L • ' •Moisture problem in walls $ 3,800.00 . New electric wiring 700.00 ' New baseboard heat. - , .. 650.00 Eater i or house paint 4,000.00 Living Room,floor, sanded and refinished - . 450.00 • New Roof 4,000.00 • Upstairs bathroom ret i led ' 950.00 Total $14,550.00 Plus new-downspouts, plumbing and appliance repairs Current Situation ' • Presently the property is rented to four Cornell graduate students. ' When we were looking for new tenants last spring we were unaware of the zoning ordinance that prohibits four unrelated people from living together. When these four men made it clear to me that they wanted to rent the house we were reluctant because we had our own concerns. It was my idea that about the last thing a male student wanted to do was pay attention to the things that need to be done to keep up a house., We were also concerned that being good neighbors might not be a high priority for them. I presented our concerns to them in a very straightforward (some might say blunt) manner. 1 ' - . '. ; William Kellner/Camille Tischler ' Tax Parcel-No. 58=2-18 They, didn't take offense but'instead said they knew that these things were problem and in fact were some'Of the'things they were trying to get away - from themselves. .They wanted a quiet'place where they could focus on their studies. They said that with-Work as wet,' as graduate studies they needed a ' place that felt like-a real home where they could rest and recoup. To prove 'their good faith they offered an extra $200 security deposit. So while I - 'woul.d have much preferred to rent to a;.family, and perhaps get more than a one year. lease, I felt that I would be 'discriminating against them to say no. _', ,- I agree,d,'that if their references checked out,-I would rent to them. , , Practical Difficulties and Unnecessary Hardship ' " . ' - It Will cause serious financial hardship for us-and for our tenants if we .. `.,,. are f orced,to comply with the ordinance., In order to comply we will have to ' -,- ask one of the tenants to leave which meansbreaking the lease. This is a serious legal problem. ' . ' - = . , The tenants carefully worked,out their finances when they were looking for housing. None of them feels able to'pay more nor do' they have the time - to find=comparable, affordable housing., Renegotiating the lease will = : probabiy,cost us (at minimum),one quarter of the,rent plus utilities and other expensed (lawn care, etc.). „At Worst, they may all decide to leave. We borrowed $95,000 to,buy,the ho'use. .The money for improvements 'came out of our savings. The rent does not allow us to break even on the i . - monthly expenses. We have been 'in a continuous deficit situation with the , ' 'house'since we bought it and have little reason to believe that we will, _, recoup our losses when we sell its- Additional loss of income at this time will have a detrimental effect on our family. , . - Conclision , ' __., ' . . . , , - -We,rented the property in good faith without knowledge of the ' , ' ' ordinance: All four of the men living at the house are engaged in serious ' . pursuits. Three of-them will graduate With advanced degrees in the spring, ' , ' , the fourth is a second year Ph. D. student in Philosophy. . , ' - , Because of the disruption and financial difficulties complying with the Ordinance will cause all of us; we respectfully request a temporary waiver. -We understand and respect the concerns of the;Board and of the residents of the neighborhood., We have demonstrated our own"com'mitment to maintaining the neighborhood by improving the property. We assure the . Board that we will comply with the ordinance in the future. ♦- 124 Pine Tree Road Improvements made in the two years since purchase in July 1992 Moisture problem in family room-Hann Construction - $ 4,000.00 Painted entire outside of house - 4,OOO.00 Living Room floor sanded and refinished - 500.00 New Roof - 4.000.00 Upstairs bathroom ret i led - 950.00 New electric wiring in family room - 750.00 Total $14,200.00 Plus new downspouts, plumbing and appliance repairs Paul Pedersen 124 Pine Tree Road Ithaca, New York 14850 September 13, 1994 To Whom It May Concern, My landlord, Camille Tischler, informed me yesterday that there is a problem regarding the number of people living in the household, something of which I and my roommates were unaware. I am writing this letter to explain why it would be a serious hardship for me to be\asked to move from these premises. To introduce myself, I am a third-year graduate student at Cornell in the Ph.D. program in Philosophy. I chose to live here at 124 Pine Tree Road this year with three other mature graduate students essentially for a couple reasons. First, I wanted to live in an environment that is conducive to studying. That meant an area of Ithaca that is quiet, which this location is; and it meant living with other graduate students who are serious about their studies, which my current roommates are. Second, I needed an affordable place to live. My income is very limited. I receive a small salary from Cornell for being a Teaching Assistant which is just enough to make ends meet each month. The amount of rent I am paying for these premises — since it is divided by four people — is quite reasonable, and has made-my financial situation a bit more manageable. To be asked to move at this time would be exceedingly difficult. I do not think that I could find a location — especially at this time of the year — that fulfilled the two aforementioned criteria as well as this place; that is, in terms of a quiet location, with roommates who were also serious graduate students, and that was as affordable as this place. Further, I simply cann t afford the expense required to move for what would be the second time in one month. In addition, the time and effort required to find a new place and move for a second time would greatly interfere with my studies, my teaching, and my very busy schedule. Moreover, I would also point out that if one of us were asked to leave, that would mean that the remaining three would have a dramatic increase in their rent and monthly expenses that they were not anticipating. That would also be quite difficult. Lastly, I would like to emphasize that my roommates and I are all mature people, responsible tenants, and we get along well together. To be asked to leave would be very disappointing. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, (17ca cIeL---____ Paul Pedersen September 13,. 1994 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in regards-to our residence at 124 Pine Tree Road, Ithaca, New York. Yesterday my landlord, Camille Tischler, informed me that . their exists a problem with the number of individuals-residing here'. I would like to express some of the serious thoughts I have regarding this matter. - - In my second year of graduate school at Cornell I have become familiar with the difficulties associate with obtaining reasonable housing in Ithaca for the,school_year. At this time, this process is even more difficult. As a student I have a very constrained budget and affordable housing is a must. Furthermore, in my final year of graduate school my time is stretched extremely thin. I would find it extremely difficult to devote the weeks necessary for finding and moving into a new house. In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that my roommates and myself are responsible tenants. We have respect for both our house and our neighborhood. - Sincerely, -7',j- 4- -/ - Sean Livingston September 13, 1994 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing with regards to the residence at 124 Pine Tree Road, Ithaca, New York. It has come to my attention, via the owner, Camille Tishler, that there may be too many residents at this property. I would like to highlight some of the pressing concerns I have with possible vacation of this house. As a graduate student at Cornell University, it is imperative that I live closely to campus. As any Ithaca resident knows, acquiring housing like this at this time of the year is extremely difficult. Availabiltiy is limited to spaces which are undesirable or significantly overpriced. Once again, as a student, I have a rather strict budget. I simply cannot afford a more expensive living situation. Furthermore, the semester's responsibilities do not permit me to spend weeks searching for and moving to a new home. To conclude, I would like to add that the each of us has been either companions or colleagues for more than a year. We are responsible, and we care for this house and the neighborhood. Leaving the house would be distressing and disappointing. Sincerely, ' 411— J-f-Lt4 John Schultzel CORNELL . UNIVER SIT Y School of Hotel Administration Career Services Office Telephone:607-255-9794 Statler Hall Facsimile:607-255-9540 Ithaca,New York 14853-6902 James H. Munson 124 Pine Tree Road Ithaca, NY 14850 September 14, 1994 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing concerning the complaint filed regarding the number of residents at 124 Pine Tree Road. As a 34 year old, second year graduate student, I am currently going to school full time and holding down two jobs to help defray some of the enormous costs involved in pursuing my educational goals. My house mates and I rented the property unaware of the restrictions and because of the need for a quiet environment in which to finish our studies. I would like to point out the tremendous hardship that being forced to vacate the property would cause. At this time of year I am committed to work and school at least 12 hours per day and at least • six days per week. The effort required to find and move to a new residence is extraordinary under the time constraints involved. Additionally, in light of my finite financial abilities, the cost of housing elsewhere would._ undoubtedly increase dramatically and . - thus place undue hardship on me financially. In closing I would like to submit that as adult, graduate students we shall continue to demonstrate consideration to our neighbors and focus on our school and professional work. We gladly recognize the desire of the neighborhood to remain family oriented and will respect our living situation as such. incerely, n James Munson RE- SURVEY FOR • . WILLIA)4 lei. KEU,MEr-. TOWN OF ITHACA COUNTY OF TOMPKINS STATE OF NEW YORK LOT 98 •(AX PARCEL SO-2.-IB t7EED 2CE, L.09/'.113E • LEGEND: ( ) PER REFERENCE MAP. MAP OF LOTS FOR JOHN MAR/ON, OCT/0,/I60, BY J.C.MC CURDY, FILED DRAWER A,SHEET#2M/ CA UTILITY POLE FENCE LINE nEw.ctimmi„R.O.y L LLI/ +,`[Y I I83 ' 0 _ NQ, �196.70' To tp-R ' I ,,, \ < O • . BLACKTOP T Cr I d t� -, f.LJ ? s ° --------`� r. - LS O HOUSE J N 0 K resat, ,u M 124 w : E 7 PIN I Y P C NJ La) •AS W r p '•' ALVE a Mg.0'To .im- C G'=e a V .0 ""A Pi w } mg s ' LELANMAR'? CARMICHAEL R.' ec ia fIt° l!r W 1�- M, d II" ' -- • hEE 0R14UAL hdriVEY Y3Y LIED.LjcNLEGHY Y?E ,L S, JOYS))D. 81-167 bp1 E2 6-30-1981 I ALa LA',Y' SGRLEGItf RE st7RVEY JD'13 AD. EX,L(,4.,bAYEb 1.-30-(98(.g Y;thu>zVEcEb B( M P..8lA)tl !•RfA4A)1, LA1t0 hMS,401ii7 r Ay hUGGEF".DoYZS Yo A80.Se•IALEGitli Leo. MANUINI a REAGAN,fAND SuRYEYOR5 MOTE NW RrVISIDMs TO THIS MA,MUST COMPLY WIM SECTION 7209 SUOD114SIDM 213,THE NEW TOOK STATE EDUGTIOM LAW ALL CIRT,ICAWNS KREON ARE MUD Kit%LS YAP NO P.O OR I1N MOM KW TIOIK 1]067 (WI) COPES TIEREOE ONLY If SAID AR SAID P DR CORES W TIE EYOOSSSED SEAL d TIE LOUSED WAN lOAO SLEWEY01 WHOSE%MATURE APPEARS IEAEQI DA, YED II.tin 3 DeYRA'r' tu.1.4E SCALE I. - 40' 1 xrin 93-31,8 NC.IJJ r4AISE'f uIANLE 1AL. rYh hn l-E.�,OR'Altp b1L Axl4WWo I•" rIEEO� I hereby certlry to: MOIW.% (rri.E I re3uKA L.terAVo10 fIDt.1 'I jpW � . • that I am a licensed land surveyor,New York State License No 049692 and that this �' "i 16:1Y map correctly delineates an actual survey on the ground made by me or under my direct i • supervision.that Is was prepared in accordance with the current code of practice for land title surveys adopted by the New York State Association of Professional Land Surveyors,and that I Mo n1 *die • encroachments no die encroachments either way across roperty lines except as shown hereon I .` 4,,..V0 r rgo sell SIGHED: �sE-✓ DATED. 11-IL-1993. I.,L . fff>s apM.aI 1993 .MEdyrr...L.r , RECEIVED OCT 121994 TOWN OF ITHACA BUILDING/ZONING 113 Pine Tree Road Ithaca, New York 14850 October 11, 1994 Ithaca Town Board of Zoning Appeals East Seneca Street Town Offices Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear members of the Board: I cannot attend the public hearing about the re-zoning of 122 Pine Tree Road to student housing but I hope you will consider this letter in your deliberations . We have student housing on our street already that has started us down the slippery slope to seediness . Garbage cans are left out for weeks at a time, as are recycle materials not packaged or presented properly. The houses have no landscaping; they do not have the grass cut; so many cars are parked outside for tenants and their friends that the snow cannot be cleared in the winter. Most are absentee landlords . Many are out of compliance to the present zoning ordinance. Once the properties are out of compliance they are never back within the ordinance. When we moved to this street 30 years ago we were attracted to the school district and the number of children on the street . Many of us have bought extra land between PIne Tree Road and Eastern Heights and have signed a document keeping it for recreation and wildlife for 25 years . Things have changed drastically for us, just as we approach old age and just when we need the support and attention of caring neighbors - they won' t be there. With more and more absentee landlords, the stable neighborhood disappears . Families will sell before -the -prices- drop -any- more -than they have -already-!- - -- — ----- It doesn' t seem fair that one neighborhood should take such a hit, with zoning infractions, unending traffic from 5AM to 3AM, almost no police protection, the Cornell development of all the property near East Hill Plaza with lots of it open all night, the threat of Cornell to bring Elmira Road to our lovely neighborhood with McDonalds, the ove'-development of the shopping center which was zoned for "small neighborhood convenience center. " Meantime, our taxes are as high as if we lived on a rural cul-de-sac. Please protect us from any further deterioration. Yours sincerely, ft-M,rz (Mrs . ) Nanc4 Krook RECEIVED 122 Plne Tree Road Ithaca, NY 14850 OCT 71994 October 5, 1994 TOWN OF ITHACA Mr. Edward Austen BUILDING/ZONING Chairman; Zoning Board of Appeals 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Mr. Austen, ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _We_ar_e.writing-concerning-the-Use Variance-proposed-for-124-Pine-Tree- ___ __ ___ - Road, Ithaca, NY, a property owned by William Kellner-and Camille T i sch I er. We understand that they are requesting-that four unrelated persons be - permitted to live in this single family residence. This house is next to our home. We urge you and the Board to deny this request-for the following reasons: • This is a residential neighborhood. We have owned and lived in our house for 32 years. _ • We not only own our house to the southeast of 124 Pine Tree, but we also own the field behind both houses. Therefore, we own property on two of the three sides of 124 Pine Tree. Please consider,this in weighing our request. • We wish the neighborhood:to be maintained as a residential neighborhood and not one of multiple dwellings. • The owners of 124 Pine Tree, William Kellner and Camille Tischier, have - never lived at this residence. They have always been landlords here and rented the property. Since they bought the property for rental, we assume - ----that-they-knew-the-Town-regulati-ons-orrrenting-and-were-aware they were - - - _ in violation of regulations when they rented to four persons. We do not think a variation should be granted to landlords whom we can surmise - " were aware they were in violation of zoning regulations. Thank you for your consideration. ��'l erg Leland E. and Mary Margaret Carmichael RECEIVED ` SEP 2 21994 To�mp Erns County \\ TOWN OF ITHACA DEPARTIV�IE. T)•OF§P= ANqNING �r 32 BUILDING/ZONING a east w,ouct�St�eet thaca,N�ia Yortkj4850 James W.Hanson,Jr. Telephone(607)274-5560 Commissioner of Planning FAX(607)274-5578 • September 20, 1994 Mr.Andy Frost Town of Ithaca 126 E. Seneca Street Ithaca,NY 14850 Re: Zoning Review Pursuant to §239-1 and-m of the New York State General Municipal Law Action: Use variance: Kellner and Tischler, 124 Pine Tree Road Dear Mr.Frost: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department pursuant to§239-1 and-m of the New York State General Municipal Law. The proposal,as submitted,will have no significant deleterious impact on intercommunity, County,or State interests. Therefore,np recommendation is indicated by the Tompkins County Planning Department,and you are free to act without prejudice. Please inform us of your decision so that we can make it a part of the record. Sincerely, 9amt.e4 110A/1-faein (if James Hanson, Jr. Commissioner of Planning t� a Recycled paper