Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1985-10-23 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OCTOBER 23 , 1985 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Wednesday , October 23 , 1985 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , ', New York , at 7 : 00 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Edward W . King , Edward N . .Austen , Jack D . Hewett [ arrived late ] , Lewis D . Cartee ( Building Inspector ) , John C . Barney ( Town Attorney ) , Peter M . Lovi ( Town Planner ) , Nancy M . Fuller ( Secretary ) . ALSO PRESENT : Nancy L . Krook , Dr . Joy Mecenas , Gladys Fendrick , Louis R . Fendrick , Joseph N . Freedman , Virginia Freedman , Sally Nation , John A . Nation , Thomas J . Kline , Attorney Anna Holmberg , Dorothy E . Zimmer , Jonathan Litt , Chairman Aron declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 03 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 October 15 , 1985 and October 18 , 1985 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by • Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties in question , upon each of the Appellants and / or Agent , as appropriate , and / or Attorney , as appropriate , and upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , on October 18 , 1985 . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM AUGUST 21 , 1985 , AND , SEPTEMBER 18 , 1985 ) , WITH CLARIFIED NOTICE , OF JAMES IACOVELLI , APPELLANT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE " BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO - FAMILY DWELLING IN RESIDENCE DISTRICT R15 ON A PORTION OF THE FOUNDATION OF AN EXISTING BARN WITH SIDE YARD AND REAR YARD DEFICIENCIES , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 41 , SAID PARCEL LOCATION BEING DESIGNATED AS " SLATERVILLE ROAD " ON 1985 TOWN OF ITHACA ASSESSMENT ROLL , HOWEVER , HAVING FRONTAGE ON BOTH SLATERVILLE ROAD AND PINE TREE ROAD , SAID PARCEL BEING LOCATED BETWEEN 1476 SLATERVILLE ROAD AND 110 PINE TREE ROAD AND BETWEEN 1476 SLATERVILLE ROAD AND 1462 SLATERVILLE ROAD . PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron informed the Board members and the public that Mr . Iacovelli ' s Attorney , Edward A . Mazza , had requested an adjournment of Mr . Iacovelli ' s Appeal until the November 20 , 1985 , meeting of the Board . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen : RESOLVED , that the Adjourned Public Hearing in the matter of the James Iacovelli Appeal with respect to Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 41 , be and hereby is further adjourned until the November f. Zoning Board of Appeals 2 October 23 , 1985 t • 20 , 1985 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals commencing at 70. 00 P . M . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , King , Austen . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron stated that those persons who had appeared in regard to the Iacovelli Appeal were most welcome to remain and listen to the other matters before the Board . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM SEPTEMBER 18 , 1985 ) OF JOSEPH FREEDMAN , APPELLANT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A SPECIAL PERMIT, FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING , IN RESIDENCE DISTRICT R91 BY FIVE UNRELATED PERSONS , AT 230 - 232 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS NO . 6 ,- 54 - 7 - 13 AND 6 - 54 - 7 - 14 ( OLD ITHACA LAND COMPANY TRACT PARCELS NO , 87 AND 88 ) , SUCH SPECIAL PERMIT BEING APPLIED FOR PURSUANT TO ARTICLE III , SECTION 4 , PARAGRAPH 21 SUB - PARAGRAPH 2b , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE III , SECTION 41 PARAGRAPH 2 , SUB - PARAGRAPH 2b , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . • Chairman Aron declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7 : 05 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Both Mr . and Mrs . Freedman were present . Mrs . Krook and Dr . Mecenas departed . Chairman Aron , noting that the Board had received and each member had before him a copy of the completed Long Environmental Assessment Form , declared the Zoning Board of Appeals the Lead Agency in regard " to SEAR and asked the Town Planner , Peter M . Lovi , to speak to this matter . ` [ For the record , the document referred to by the Chairman was completed , submitted , and signed by Joseph N . Freedman under date of September 23 , 1985 , with a Survey Map attached thereto entitled " Lands of Terry J . & Marina Hart - - 232 Pennsylvania Ave . - - Town of Ithaca - - Tomp . Co . N . Y . - - June 14 , 1977 " ; by K . A . Baker ; checked and approved by Howard R . Schlieder , N . Y . S . P . E . & L . S . 043780 , and upon which is shown two lots delineated as 54 - 7 - 14 , 50 ' x 1201 , and 54 - 7 - 13 , 50 ' x 12011 and further delineated as Old Ithaca Land Co . lots numbered 87 and 88 , and with the Freedman house with attached garage , 67 ' x 261 , also located thereon by the Appellant , as well as driveway and parking areas . On the obverse side of said Survey Map there appears a " chart " detailing the dwelling structures located on both Pennsylvania Avenue and Kendall Avenue from Hudson Street to their termini and further detailing the number of family units , the number of apartment units , the number of rental units to three or more students , 'I the number of multi -dwellings , the number of rental units and the number of vacant buildings . + Zoning Board of Appeals 3 October 23 , 1985 The Long EAF also sets forth the review and recommendation of • the Town Planner , Peter M . Lovi , under date of October 8 , 1985 , as follows : " I have reviewed the additional information provided by the applicant and I am satisfied that the project , as presented , will not present a significant adverse impact on the environment . I recommend a negative declaration of environmental significance . " ] Mr . Lovi i stated that , at the last meeting of the Board [ September 18 , 1 19851 , the Board received and reviewed a Short Environmental Assessment Form , Mr . Lovi stated that , in his review of the Short Form , he indicated that he needed some additional information from the Appellant on three matters - - ( 1 ) expected number of cars ; ( 2 ) number of similar one - family homes for precedent ; ( 3 ) the effect of the remodelling on traffic and congestion on the site . Mr . Lovi stated that he had asked the Board to -ask the Appellant to complete a Long Environmental Assessment Form , which it did and which , lhe did . Mr . Lovi stated that he has reviewed the additional information - - photographs , information attached to the Long EAF in the form of a survey and diagrams , and , on that basis , he reviewed the Long EAF and presented to the Board the brief recommendation which the Board , and Mr . Freedman , have before them which states , essentially , that after having completed his review he was satisfied that there will be no negative impact . Mr . Lovi stated that this information , again , is on the specifics of the site and represents the minimum standards of environmental review . • Mr . Hewett had arrived . Chairman Aron asked if there were any questions to Mr . Lovi . Mr . King , referring to the original diagram on a light -yellow sheet of paper in the official record , asked if this diagram is that which was attached to the Long EAF , Mr . Lovi stated that it was . Mr . Lovi stated that he , too , had prepared ' a diagram for the Board and appended to the bulletin board a full - sized copy of Tax Map No . 54 which sets forth all the properties in the Town of Ithaca from the City of Ithaca line to the north through those properties located on Pennsylvania Avenue and Coddington Road to the south . Mr . Lovi pointed out that upon this Tax Map he had taken some time this afternoon to prepare a color - coded diagram of the properties on Pennsylania and Kendall Avenues , and a section on Coddington Road . Mr . Lovi commented that he had used two sources to create this map - - a study done by the Planning and Engineering Department earlier this year in response to a somewhat similar question from the Town Supervisor to the Planning Board , as from the Zoning Board to the Appellant , and , ' information presented by the Appellant in this case . Mr . Lovi stated that what he had done , to the best of his ability , was to reconcile these sources and give the Board an impression of trends . Mr . Lovi stated that he was making no representation as to the accuracy of„ this diagram . Indicating on the colored Tax Map , Mr . • Lovi pointed out that the very large area , shaded in medium blue , running from the City line all the way down to the rear lot lines of all the propert ''ies on Kendall Avenue is zoned Light Industrial and is I + Zoning Board of Appeals 4 October 23 , 1985 • owned by Therm , Inc . Mr . Lovi pointed out on the drawing that the portions colored green represented vacant land owned by either landowners or Tompkins County , Mr . Lovi stated that the light blue areas are one - family dwellings . Mr . Lovi stated that both the brown and the orange areas are the properties which have two - family homes on them , the brown being those with no more than three unrelated persons in them , and the orange being those with more than three unrelated persons in them pursuant to the Board ' s granting of special permits and variances , some of which involved more than one lot being dedicated . Mr Lovi stated that " red " denotes four -unit dwellings and there are 'three of these - - one on Pennsylvania Avenue , one on Kendall Avenue , and one that straddles the two roads . Mr . Lovi stated that " blue " denotes the parcels which are three - family units and are non - conforming . Referring again to his diagram , Mr . Lovi stated that , once again , there very well may be errors , however , he thought it was representative of the neighborhood , although there may be specific parcels which are not totally accurate . Mr . Lovi staged that Mr . Freedman ' s parcel is shown " here " in cross - hatched red [ indicating ] on Pennsylvania Avenue and is comprised of two old Ithaca Land Company lots put together , and which has on it a single family house that straddles the two lots . Mr . Lovi stated that most of the nearby parcels are single family , but it is across from Mr . Thorpe ' s three - family . Mr . Lovi stated that it is also near a group of two - family duplexes being developed by James Iacovelli by variances • and special permits for increased occupancy from this Board . Referringlto Mr . Lovi ' s diagram on the bulletin board , Mr . King pointed out that , of the dwellings in this particular neighborhood , approximately one - half , or even more than one - half , appear to be single family occupied . Mr . Lovi stated that he believed it to be somewhat less than one - half , commenting that , for example , there may be one house on three of these " old " lots [ indicating ] . Chairman Aron thanked Mr . Lovi for a very good presentation and asked if , there were any more questions from the Board . There were none . Chairman Aron asked if there were any questions from the public . There were none . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman if he had anything else to add from the last time . Mr . Freedman responded that , other than more pictures which he had mounted on two large cardboards along with the chart , he had submitted all the information that the Board had requested last time . Mr . Freedman stated that he would also like to point out that the house directly across from him is rented to at least four , maybe more students ; it is not a single family as that drawing shows [ indicating Mr . Lovi ' s ] . Mr . Freedman presented to the Board two ' large yellow cardboards upon one of which had been mounted four photographs of his house from different angles and the " chart " that the Board had received with the Long EAF and the survey , • showing the houses , their ownership , rental aspects and numbers of rental occupants or owner- occupants on Pennsylvania Avenue and Kendall Avenue from the City line to the dead -ends of both streets . Zoning Board of Appeals 5 October 23 , 1985 • Chairman Aron noted that the garage was a double garage . Mr . Freedman stated that it is a two - and - a - half garage , adding that it is almost 28 feet square . Mr . King asked Mr . Freedman if that house right across from his is occupied by three or more students . Mr . Freedman stated that that house is occupied by more than three students , adding that there are at least four , adding that it is a single - family house . Mr . King asked if it is an old house . Mr . Freedman stated that his wife ' s aunt used to own it , so it would be over twenty years old . Mr . Freedman stated that Lawrence Iacovelli , Jr . owns this house but does not live there . Mr . King recalled that he [ Iacovelli , Jr . ] was given a special permit for four unrelated persons on three " old " lots . Mr . Freedman stated that the other cardboard has a picture of what used to be the Ithaca Bakery [ 225 Pennsylvania Avenue ] which is also across the street from him and which is now a four - unit apartment , not a three - family , owned by Ralph Thorpe who does not live there and rents to several people . Mr . Freedman pointed out that the pictures show how the parking is arranged in other rental houses in his neighborhood . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the Freedman Appeal . No one spoke . Chairman Aron closed the Adjourned Public Hearing at 7 : 20 p . m . Mr . Austen noted that it appeared that Mr . Freedman was going to add two bedrooms and not a kitchenette , so that it will be a • five -bedroom house . Mr . Freedman stated that he was not going to adde a kitchentte , , although , he might possibly add a small bathroom but he was not really sure about that . Mr . Austen asked Mr . Freedman where he proposed to put the cars . Mr . Freedman staged that the driveway is approximately 50 feet long and is 18 feet wide and , in addition to that , there is a 10 - foot by 16 - foot turn around , and , parking space beside the garage . Mr . Freedman pointed out that the matter of parking was one of the questions that Mr . Lovi asked about and one of the reasons why the Board asked him to fill out the Long EAF . Mr . Freedman , referring to the pictures of his property from all different angles on the yellow cardboard with the chart , pointed out his camper ; parked beside the garage , and stated that it is 10 feet by 12 feet'' in size itself . Chairman Aron commented to Mr . Freedman that he wanted to put five unrelated persons in there and he is moving out because it is too noisy . Chairman Aron stated that Mr . Freedman will be an absentee landlord and asked how he would control it . Mr . Freedman responded that he did not say it was too noisy , he said it was not family - oriented any more . Mr . Freedman stated that he was not planning to leave South Hill , adding that his children go to South Hill School , and further adding that his father - in - law :lives at 115 Pennsylvania Avenue , his wife ' s uncle lives at 117 Pennsylvania Avenue , Mr . Freedman stated that he has relatives on both Pennsylvania Avenue and Kendall Avenue . Mr . Freedman stated that on Kendall Avenue his wife ' s other uncle lives right next door to James • Iacovelli , and , reiterated that if he moved elsewhere it will be on South Hill . ' Zoning Board of Appeals 6 October 23 , 1985 . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman what he would do if he saw on - street parking . Mr . Freedman stated that he would make them move . Chairman Aron stated that Mr . Freedman will have at least five cars there . Mr . Freedman stated that he did not know if they will have five cars because it is so close to the College , and added that there could be more , but there could be less . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman how he would regulate how the cars would be parked , and stated , let us assume an ambulance has to get in there . Mr . Freedman stated that cars can be parked in the turn -around . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman if he were going to put white lines in the driveway and parking area and stripe it . Mr . Freedman responded that he had not planned to nor had he thought of that because none of the other rental houses , or the apartments , in the area have any such thing . Mr . Freedman pointed out that other rental houses in the area have more people and each has less parking [ indicating on the yellow cardboard ] than he does . Chairman Aron noted that under the Zoning Ordinance , Section 77 , it says , in effect , that the proposed use shall not be detrimental to the neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devaluate property or seriously damage the neighbors . [ Section 77 , Paragraph 7 , Sub - paragraph d . ] Chairman Aron noted that Section 77 also says that access and egress of all structures shall be safely designed . [ Section 77 , Paragraph 7 , Sub - paragraph e . ] Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman how he was going to do that . Mr . Freedman stated that there is sufficient area for an emergency vehicle to get in there . Mr . Freedman stated that he has a truck of his own that is 15 feet long , and , he can park three trucks , one behind each other , and two cars , and leave a sufficient section 9 feet wide for access . Mr . Freedman noted that the driveway is 18 feet wide and that leaves 9 or 10 feet for an emergency vehicle . Chairman Aron commented that Mr . Freedman would have to ;instruct the tenants so that this area is available . Mr . Freedman replied , absolutely . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman if he thought he would be able to control that with his father , etc . , up there . Mr . ; Freedman stated that he saw no problem . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Freedman what made him move out of there . Mr . Freedman , commenting that he had not moved out , stated that he has one boy who is active in hunting and fishing and he does not have enough room to let him go out and hunt and fish , but , he did not want to leave the South Hill area . Mr . Freedman stated that he has one boy at ;South Hill School and one boy at Boynton Middle School and he did not want to move them around to different schools . Chairman Aron read from the Appeal Form submitted by Mr . Freedman on September 5 , 1985 , as follows : " The area has become increasingly busy with traffic and we would like to move to a more family oriented area . " Chairman Aron stated that he thought that area was family - oriented . Mr . Freedman stated that it is not any more . Mr . Freedman described the houses and the occupants and the rentals . Mr . Freedman stated that the house next door is a single • family , but all the others are rentals and include Thorpe ' s four - unit , Iacovelli ' s two rented duplexes and a new duplex with more than four students . ' Zoning Board of Appeals 7 October 23 , 1985 Mr . Austen asked Mr . Freedman what the chances would be of making the turn - around larger for parking . Mr . Freedman stated that that could certainly be done if necessary , reiterating that he could do that , and adding that he could not go out the one way with the turn - around because of the next door property line . Mr . Austen wondered if there could be any widening of the turn - around . Mr . Freedman stated that he really thought he has enough parking now , but he thought that could be done . Mr . Freedman referred the Board to the picture on ' the yellow cardboard of Mr . Thorpe ' s rental property and stated that there are four apartments there with a great number of occupants and he [ Thorpe ] has substantially less parking area than he [ Freedman ] does . Mr . Freedman noted that the houses on the opposite side of the street are very close to the road - - maybe only 20 feet - - and the houses on his side are considerably farther back . Mr . Freedman pointed out that his house sits back 50 feet from the right of way and 75 feet from the center of the road . Mr . King queried about Mr . Freedman ' s statement that Thorpe ' s property was the old Ithaca Bakery , and Mr . Freedman responded , yes , according to his father - in - law . Chairman Aron asked if there were any further questions . There were none . Chairman Aron noted that the Board had before it the completed Long Form EAF with a recommendation from the Town Planner for a negative ' declaration of environmental significance . • Mr . King stated that he would speak to the EAF with a comment first . Mr . King stated that he had some trouble with ,just what an adverse environmental impact is because , frankly , he was a little bit disturbed with this application and with the way this neighborhood is going , largely by actions of this Board , piece by piece . Mr . King stated that it was a good idea in unitizing these lots while permitting , in some cases , greatly increased occupancy , for good quality construction , that is good . Referring to Mr . Lovi ' s diagram , Mr . King stated that the other aspect is that 40 % of the area is residential , meaning single family homes , and applications are tending to down - grade that neighborhood in the sense of removing the family and replacing it with students . Mr . King stated that this is the same kind o?f problem experienced in Collegetown . Mr . King stated that Bryant Park , in the City , is begging the City to do something . Mr . King stated'' that owners steady and ameliorate students . Mr . King stated that other people have rights , and , remembering a few - - more than a few - - years ago when he was a student , there was no single building that he could recall which was totally occupied by students and absentee landlords . Mr . King described how he resided in one room in a home and was always aware of the owners ' needs and , if he were not aware'. , he was made aware , recalling a physician living nearby and a pharmacist , too . Mr . King stated that he saw this thing going the other way - - by Mr . Freedman ' s own admission - - traffic , etc . - - economics . Mr . King stated that there is no question that Mr . Freedman is permitted to build two bedrooms ; that is not a • problem , but all the families living in the neighborhood is a problem . Mr . King stated that , looking at the EAF , the Board could not say that this proposal would totally change the neighborhood - - • Zoning Board of Appeals 8 October 23 , 1985 • it is not that drastic a change in and of itself and .it meets the minimum standards set by SEQR , and so he would MOVE that there is no negative impact . Mr . Lovi pointed out that in his review of the Short EAF [ Part II ] on page 2 . letter C6 , he had stated - - " If many Special Permits of this type were granted , the cumulative effect would be to erode the occupancy ,standards established by the Zoning Ordinance . This outcome could have a significant effect on community character . " Mr . Lovi stated that both of these forms , the Long and the Short , should be read concurrently . Mr . Edward Austen SECONDED Mr . King ' s MOTION . Chairman Aron asked for discussion ; there was none . Chairman Aron called for a vote on the negative declaration of environmental significance . Aye - Aron ,, King , Austen . Nay None a Abstain - Hewett . The MOTION was declared to be carried . Mr . Hewett stated that he abstained because he arrived late and had not heard all of the presentation . • Mr . Austen stated that in other cases the Board took more land into this increased occupancy . Mr . Freedman described other lots which are smaller and which have increased occupancy and less parking . Mr . Freedman pointed out that his parcel is comprised of two lots . Mr . King stated that there is no question that Mr . Freedman ' s is a beautiful home and is nicely situated on the lot . Mr . King commented to Mr . Freedman that he understood he had not moved out , with Mr . Freedman responding , no , he still lives there . Mr . King stated that it was his opinion that Mr . Freedman should be encouraged to stay or to rent within the terms of the ordinance , adding that a family and two others would be fine , and further adding that he has seen no economic hardship . MOTION by Mr . Edward King : RESOLVED , that the requested variance be denied . It was noted that the request was for Special Permit pursuant to Section 41 sub -paragraph 2b , of the ordinance . MOTION by Mr . Edward King : • RESOLVED , by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals , that the Joseph N . Freedman request for Special Permit with respect to 40 Zoning Board of Appeals 9 October 23 , 1985 • increased occupancy at 230 - 232 Pennsylvania Avenue , be and hereby is denied . The MOTION was seconded by Mr . Edward Austen . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron ,' King , Austen . Nay - None .' Abstain - Hewett . The MOTION was declared to be carried . Mr . Hewett stated that he abstained for the same reason as with the Motion on the EAF . Mr . Freedman asked permission of the Chair to speak and was granted same . Mr . Freedman stated that his house is the most expensive house on the street ; there is no question about it . Mr . Freedman stated that he bought the property five and a half years ago and put a lot of money into it and , now , he is getting nothing out of this place , nothing aesthetic . Mr . Freedman stated that he has apartments all around him and that is not the way he wants his children to live . Mr . Freedman stated that when you say that 50 % of the houses are • residential , that is not a fact ; if 30o is residential it might be a little closer . Mr . Freedman stated that it is true that all of those people who rent do not have four or five unrelated persons , some of them have more , some have the three that is permitted by the ordinance without special permit , but the area is still primarily student housing . Mr . Freedman stated that for him to put all that money into his house to make it a nice place when he has students all around him and 'apartments all around him just does not make sense any more . Mr . Freedman stated that he did not see how it could be for him , as one person , as Mr . King suggests , to maintain that " residential " status or not . Mr . Freedman stated that he cannot do that , he simply cannot do that , therefore , the only economic benefit he can get is to move and even that is being closed off . Mr . Freedman stated that he has not been in the area long enough to build equity ; he has not owned that house long enough , even though his wife ' s family has all been there for years . Mr . Freedman stated that having the best house , on that street , is not beneficial to selling in that area . Mr . Freedman stated that now he cannot move so he is caught in the middle between all the variances and special permits granted before him , and after him but not to him . Mr . Freedman stated that because he is squeezed in the middle he cannot , as one person , make that area residential again . Mr . Freedman stated the houses all around him are for sale ; they will be bought and there will be more rentals and more absentee landlords , all legal . Mr . Freedman stated that others are leaving , but they have equity ; they • have no mortgages . Mr . Freedman stated that he does not have enough equity to make 'up the difference between sale price for the area and the house cost . Mr . Freedman stated that when he moved there it was ' Zoning Board of Appeals 10 October 23 , 1985 • primarily residential ; now , it is not . Mr . Freedman stated that he cannot tell Mr . Iacovelli not to build apartments ; he cannot tell the Schultzes not to build apartments , and so on . Mr . Freedman stated that the area is inundated and he is stuck in the middle of it and he is just not able to turn it around . Mrs . Virginia Freedman stated that they have , small children and they have students walking through their lawn every day - - some days it may be 8 , and some days it may be 15 . Mrs . Freedman stated that someone from Mr . Thorpe ' s apartments was recently arrested for sodomy of a young boy . Mrs . Freedman stated that the neighbors , the Kelly ' s , put up a fence and the students just tore down the fence . Mrs . Freedman stated that there is a house full of students across the street and they play loud music and shoot moons . Mrs . Freedman stated that the area is two dead - end streets primarily occupied by students . Mrs . Freedman stated that the Iacovellis own most of the land and he has so many student rentals . Mr . Freedman continued and stated that the " residential " character is gone . Mr . Freedman stated that his wife ' s family , his father - in - law , her uncles , etc , go way back as South Hill residents . Mr . Freedman stated that he did not build up his property , the way he has , to give it up , and having the best house on a street like that is not helping him at all . Mr . Freedman stated that he wanted his family to live in a residential area . Mr . Freedman stated that he knows everyone up there and he also knows what a lousy neighborhood is because he grew up in one and he wanted a nice place for his kids . Mr . Freedman stated that his kids want to • play and they are subjected to incidents of sodomy , indecent exposure and so on . Mr . Freedman stated that Thorpe ' s apartments have no parking for the numbers of tenants ; he has a large double lot with a multitude of parking . Mr . Freedman stated that he has a double and a half garage and plenty of parking . Mr . Freedman stated that he keeps his home and property up , adding that the garage is better than most of the houses . Mr . Freedman stated that the neighborhood is being changed from residential - - whatever that means - - to student housing and he is not able to change that . Mr . Freedman stated that he was a student , he went to College , and there are good and bad students , and he has children . Mr . Freedman stated that he probably will sell the house and what '; will happen is that he will not get fair market value because he cannot get that for a single family house on those streets , and someone will buy it and they will put students in there but they will not come to the Zoning Board right up front like he did . Town Attorney Barney pointed out to Chairman Aron that the Board had three more public hearings before it and , unless the Board were considering re - hearing Mr . Freedman ' s appeal , he would suggest that the Board move on to those hearings . Mr . King stated that the Board was not considering a re - hearing at this time . APPEAL OF MICHAEL VAN ORMAN , APPELLANT , THOMAS KLINE , AGENT , ANNA HOLMBERG , ATTORNEY , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH • THE GARAGE ATTACHED THERETO HAVING A SOUTHERLY SIDE YARD DEFICIENCY OF TWO FEET , LOCATED IN RESIDENCE DISTRICT R15 AT 145 RIDGECREST ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 45 - 2 - 20 . CERTIFICATE IS DENIED Zoning Board of Appeals 11 October 23 , 1985 • UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 76 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 55 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Chairman Aron read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and completed by Dirk A . Galbraith , attorney - in - fact for Michael Van Orman , and also signed by Thomas J . Kline , under date of October 9 , 1985 , as follows : " . . . Having been denied permission to obtain a certificate of occupancy for premises at 145 Ridgecrest Road . . . The undersigned owner ( Michael Van Orman ) and contract vendee ( Thomas Kline ) have just discovered that the garage on the above premises , believed to have been built in 1959 when the house was built , or shortly thereafter , does not comply with Article IV , Section 14 . The garage is 8 ' from the southerly side boundary instead of the required 101 . See map attached . It is believed that the garage was inadvertently set too close to the side line . The garage was on the premises when purchased by the Van Ormans in 1971 . The contract vendees , Thomas Kline and Janet Souter - Kline , must show compliance with Article IV , Section 14 to receive mortgage financing . There would be practical difficulties , unnecessary hardship and expense in requiring strict compliance with the ordinance . A variance would be in the spirit of the ordinance . " [ Attachment : " Survey Map " of a dwelling at 145 Ridgecrest Road , Town of Ithaca , Tompkins Co . , New York , prepared and • sealed by Howard R . Schlieder , N . Y . S . P . E . & L . S . , and dated September 26 , 1985 . ] Attorney Anna Holmberg was present , as well as Mr . Thomas Kline . Attorney . Holmberg appeared before the Board and stated that she was representing Mr . Thomas J . Kline who has purchased the property . Attorney Holmberg stated that the property has been closed contingent upon the Board of Appeals ' action . Attorney Holmberg stated that she really did not have anything to add from what is in the application , since the problem is clear from the Survey Map attached . Attorney Holmberg stated that she could find no records at the Town of Ithaca Office with respect to the time of the construction of this house , although the Assessment Department records indicate it was sometime around 1959 . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the matter of the Kline Appeal . No one spoke . Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 00 p . m . Mr . Austen asked if the next door neighbors , the Niederhofers , had responded . Mr . Kline stated that he had talked with them and they have no problem with the variance . Mr . Kline stated that their house is very similar in construction to the Niederhofers ' which was built in 1954 . The Secretary stated that the Niederhofers and several other neighbors were notified and no letters or telephone calls had been received . Mr . Austen asked for clarification of some • markings shown on the Survey and Attorney Holmberg explained that it was a hedgerow . Zoning Board of Appeals 12 October 23 , 1985 • Speaking to Mr . Cartee , Chairman Aron verified that the matter is about a shortage of two feet . Mr . Cartee stated that that was correct , according to the Survey . Chairman Aron asked Mr. . Kline how long he has been in possession of the house , with Mr . Kline responding , about a week or two . Mr . King noted that the southeasterly corner of the garage is the only part that is lacking and not the whole garage , commenting that he could not see any harm in this . Chairman Aron noted that Mr . Kline had talked with his neighbor . Mr . Austen stated that it would just not be practical to move the garage . MOTION by Mr . Edward Austen , seconded by Mr . Jack Hewett : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant a variance for the two- foot deficiency on the southeasterly side of the garage in place at 145 Ridgecrest Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 45 - 2 - 20 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , King , Austen , Hewett . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . • Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Van Orman / Kline Appeal duly closed at 8 : 04 p . m . APPEAL OF JOHN A . NATION , APPELLANT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A CARPORT IN AN R15 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT , WITH A SIDE YARD OF LESS THAN 15 FEET AT 1041 HANSHAW ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 71 - 7 - 9 . PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 05 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . With Chairman Aron having difficulty reading the applicant ' s writing , Mr . King read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by John A . Nation under date of October 13 , 1985 , as follows : it been denied permission to construct a car port at 1041 Hanshaw Road . . . Variancep allowing us to locate car port seven feet closer to road than the required 25 feet would substantially enhance lot appearance from house and cause minimal effect on road appearance . %The location of the large tree shown on the plan is also a contributing factor in our request . % The car port will have a dark stain finish to make it fit into the rural appearance of the area . " [ Attachment : Plot Plan prepared by John A . Nation , Landowner , showing the existing Nation house , with attached garage ,, . located at • the corner of Hanshaw Road and Blackstone Avenue , proposed 616 " x 4 ' 6 " enclosed porch addition to enclose entry , and proposed 12 ' x 24 ' open carport . ] Both Dr . and Mrs . Nation were present . Zoning Board of Appeals 13 October 23 , 1985 • Mr . Cartee stated that he would like to say that he thought , in his discussion with Professor Nation on the site , he omitted the fact that this property fronts on Hanshaw Road with a side yard on Blackstone Avenue , Mr . Cartee stated that Dr . Nation has as much frontage on Hanshaw Road as on Blackstone Avenue , Professor Nation stated that his house has access from Blackstone Avenue , a minor road . Professor Nation stated that he had spoken with all of the neighbors of the house and they have no objection . Professor Nation stated that Bill Hansel , the next door neighbor , tried to call but he gathered he did not get through . Professor Nation distributed to each of the Board members a copy of the floor plan he had drawn for the 12 ' x 24 ' carport , as well as a drawing showing both its western face and its eastern face . Professor Nation described how the carport would be enclosed on the north side and the west side and pointed out vertical slats , angled . Professor Nation stated that the back portion of the carport would be used to store lawn mowers and so on , adding that it will be 7 feet high , and further adding that his intent is to stain it dark brown . Professor Nation distributed among the Board members three colored polaroid photographs showing ( 1 ) his back yard ; ( 2 ) his house and attached garages ( 3 ) a view of a nearby white garage . Professor Nation stated that one of the very good points of the house is its back patio and the view , commenting that to place the carport elsewhere would be deleterious to that view . Professor Nation stated • that the carport in . its proposed location would present no obstruction to the views of others , nor to motorists , and pointed out on the polaroid photograph a white garage which , he stated , is 100 yards away and for which a variance was granted for a two - car garage considerably more intrusive . A lengthy discussion followed with respect to whether a partially enclosed carport should be considered as an accessory building or as a garage . The Board members indicated that , in their opinion , a carport is a garage . Professor Nation , noting that the carport has a two - fold purpose , stated that they have two large cars at the present time and they want to have sufficient room in " here " [ indicating the proposed enclosed area ] to be able to store equipment and put a car in " here " [ indicating the " open " area ] with some cover for the second car . Reiterating the purpose of the carport , Professor Nation stated that it is to be used as ( 1 ) a storage area particularly to free up the other garage and ( 2 ) as a carport for their second car . Mr . King asked how high the existing hedge is that is shown on the plot plan . Professor Nation stated that the spiraea is probably about 6 feet high which is about one foot shorter than the proposed carport . Mr . King wondered if he were correct in assuming that if you were driving south on Blackstone Avenue , you would see the spiraea . Professor Nation stated that you would also see the carport • at the back because it is 10 feet high there . Chairman Aron noted that , according to the elevation drawing , the proposed carport is 3 feet higher at the back than it is at the front . Zoning Board of Appeals 14 October 23 , 1985 • Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the matter of the Nation Appeal . No one spoke . Mr . King asked Mr . Cartee if he had looked at this site . Mr . Cartee stated that he had . Professor Nation commented that , as a matter of fact , Mr . Cartee suggested the site . Mr . Cartee stated that what the Board does not see is a U - shaped driveway . Mr . Cartee stated that this location would be the least offensive . Mr . King wondered if Mr . Cartee believed that placing the carport closer to Blackstone Avenue would not impede the view of anyone driving down Blackstone Avenue , Mr . Cartee responded that he saw no problem . Professor Nation stated that he had talked to all the neighbors . Mr . King asked Professor Nation if he had an opinion whether siting this proposed structure 18 feet west of the pavement of Blackstone Avenue would present an undue traffic hazard . Professor Nation stated that , in his opinion , it would not . The Secretary stated that the. record should show that a telephone call was received by the Building Inspector , Mr . Cartee , on October 22 , 1985 , from Professor Wesley Gunkel , 1101 Hanshaw Road , who stated that he recommended the variance be granted . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant • and hereby does grant a variance , such that the applicant , John A . Nation , the owner of premises known as 1041 Hanshaw Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 71 - 7 - 9 , may site a carport , as he proposes , at least 18 feet west of the westerly edge of the pavement on Blackstone Avenue . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , King , Austen , Hewett . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the public hearing in and the matter of the Nation Appeal duly closed at 8 : 21 p . m . APPEAL OF LOUIS AND GLADYS FENDRICK , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TWO -CAR GARAGE IN AN R30 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH A SIDE YARD OF LESS THAN 15 FEET , AT 1481 TRUMANSBURG ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 23 - 1 - 6 . PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE V , SECTION 21 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 8 : 22 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Chairman • Aron read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Louis R . Fendrick , under date of September 16 , 1985 , as follows : " . . . Having been denied permission to construct a 24 x 24 foot 2 car Zoning Board of Appeals 15 October 23 , 1985 • garage at 1481 Trumansburg Road . . . The existing stone wall foundation at the end of the black top driveway lends itself to an ideal spot for a proposed two car garage which is sorely needed . Because of the lay of the land , very little need be done to start construction and in - as -much [ sic . ] as there is no other practical location on the lot , it would constitute a hardship in the storage of a passenger car , the pickup truck , tractor and snow plow and I have the assurance of Mr . Jack Hagaman my neighbor on the adjoining line , that he voices no objection to the construction of said garage . TBecause both my wife and I have suffered major illness and find it most necessary for our vehicles to start in cold weather on frequent trips to the doctor and to the hospital as an out - patient , we feel that denial of a building permit to build a garage would be a source of a definite hardship on both of us . " [ Attachments : ( 1 ) Plot Plan showing the Fendrick house on a 200 - foot by approximately 450 - foot lot , the driveway , and the proposed 24 ' x 24 ' garage to be located 5 feet from the side lot line ; ( 2 ) Letter to Mr . Cartee , signed by Jack Hagaman , 1485 Trumansburg Road , dated September 16 , 1985 . 1 Both Mr . and Mrs . Fendrick were present . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Fendrick if he had anything to add , with Mr . Fendrick responding , no , it is pretty well covered on the Appeal Form , Chairman Aron read aloud the letter from Mr . Hagaman , as follows : " I have talked with Lou Fendrick regarding the building of a two car garage alongside our adjoining property line . I have • indicated to Mr . Fendrick that I have no objection to the proposed construction and I would like your office to be aware of my position on this matter . Thank you . " Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the matter of the Fendrick Appeal . No one spoke . Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 25 p . m . Chairman Aron noted that Mr . Fendrick had presented a drawing showing the proposed location of the garage close to the Hagaman property . Mr . King noted that it appears to be 5 feet east of the east line which is 10 feet short of the requirement . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Fendrick if there were any other place he could put this garage , with Mr . Fendrick responding , no , not on that land . Chairman Aron noted that Mr . Fendrick ' s property is next to Dr . McCarthy on Woolf Lane , Mr . Fendrick stated that that was correct , adding that he is a neighbor . Chairman Aron commented that he knew that , adding that he was a neighbor too . Chairman Aron noted that another neighbor , Mrs . Zimmer , was present . Mrs . Zimmer indicated that she did not wish to comment . Chairman Aron noted that the area is flat there and Mr . Fendrick ' s lot is quite large . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Fendrick what • made him decide to build the garage there . Mr . Fendrick stated that there is an existing foundation there and everything lends itself to a two - car garage there , adding that the foundation dates from around Zoning Board of Appeals 16 October 23 , 1985 • 1978 . Mr . King wondered if the foundation were from an old building . Mr . Fendrick stated that it was not from an old building ; it is a slab put in for the end of the driveway . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Fendrick if it were his intention to build on that foundation , with Mr . Fendrick responding , yes . Mr . King asked Mr . Fendrick how close this would be to a building on the Hagaman property . Mr . Fendrick stated that it is more than 60 feet to Mr . Hagaman ' s garage , adding that his house is farther west toward the highway . Mr . Austen noted that the foundation has been there , and asked again how far away the nearest house , or nearest building , is . Mr . Fendrick responded , 60 feet . Chairman Aron noted that there was a 10 - foot deficiency . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Fendrick if the garage was to be a one - car garage . Mr . Fendrick stated that it was not , adding that it has to be big enough for his truck , his car , his John Deere tractor , and his snow plow . Chairman Aron asked if there were any further questions . There were none . MOTION by Mr . Edward Austen , seconded by Mr . Jack Hewett : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant • and hereby does grant a variance of 10 feet on the northwesterly side of the proposed garage as proposed by Louis R . Fendrick to be located at 1481 Trumansburg Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 23 - 1 - 6 , as long as Mr . Jack Hagaman has no difficulty with this and , as long as there is at least 50 feet or 60 feet to the next building , there is no difficulty with safety . Mr . Cartee asked Mr . Fendrick if the overhang of the garage roof will intrude onto the five feet . Mr . Fendrick stated that it would not , adding that there is actually 5110 " . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , King , Austen , Hewett . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Fendrick Appeal duly closed at 8 : 32 p . m . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman Aron declared the October 23 , 1985 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly adjourned at 8 : 33 p . m . • ¢ ` Zoning Board of Appeals 17 October 23 , 1985 s • Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals , Henry Aron , Chairman • •