HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1987-12-16 I '
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Ar
� �
Date
• TOWN OF ITHACA Clerk Lork>nl�
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
December 16 , 1987
A regular meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
was held on December 16 , 1987 in the Ithaca Town Hall , 126 East Seneca
Street , Ithaca , New York . '
PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Edward Austen , Edward King , Joan
Reuning , Town Planner Susan Beeners , Building Inspector Andrew Frost ,
and Town Attorney John C . Barney .
ALSO PRESENT : Joseph F . Salino , Joseph M . Salino , Nancy S .
Battistella , Roger Battistella , Candace Cornell , Michael Weinstein .
Chairman Aron addressed the Board as to the sudden loss of Board
Member Jack Hewett , and asked the Board to join him in a moment of
silence .
Board Member Edward King read into the record a letter of
condolence written by Chairman Aron to the Hewett family and asked
that this letter be spread over the Minutes for permanent record .
•
December 9 , 1987
Mrs . Nancy L . Hewett
1518 Slaterville Road
Ithaca , New York 14850
Dear Mrs . Hewett :
It was with a great deal of sadness that I and the members of the
Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals learned of the sudden loss of
your dear husband . We very much want you to know that Jack , who was a
member of this Board for almost fifteen years , contributed to wise
decision -making , always in the best interests of the citizens of the
Town . We will sorely miss his presence , joviality , forthrightness ,
and wisdom . .
The members of the Board join me in extending to you and to your
family our heartfelt sympathy .
Sincerely yo s ,
Henry A on , Chairman
• Zoning Board of Appeals
Zoning Board of Appeals - 2 - December 16 , 1987
The public meeting opened at 7 : 06 p . m .
r
Chairman Aron stated that all posting and publication of the
Public Hearings had been completed and that proper affidavits of same
were in order .
The first item on the agenda for consideration was as follows :
APPEAL OF John C . and Kim Klein , Appellants , Joseph Salino ,
Agent , adjourned from October 14 , 1987 , for decision of the Board
of Appeals with respect to a request for the authorization , under
Article XII , Section: 54 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance ,
for the extension of a legal non - conforming use located at 1103
Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 2 - 1 , Business
District " C " . The existing use is a gasoline station , with the
proposed extension of use being the addition of a convenience
store and laundromat replacing the existing garage service bays ,
all to be located within the perimeter of the existing building .
Chairman Aron noted that the Public Hearing on this matter was
closed on October 14 , 1987 , however , due to the seriousness of this
Appeal Chairman Aron opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone was
present to speak for or against this matter . No one spoke . Chairman
Aron closed the Public Hearing .
• Chairman Aron stated that since the time of adjournment the Board
has received a lot of information as to the proposed use , adding that
there are two phases involved in this issue - one phase being the
conditions discussed at the October 14 , 1987 Zoning Board of Appeals
meeting , which are the following :
a . Obtaining of easements or other rights - of-way so as to provide a
minimum of 12 parking spaces ( with no more than 6 spaces to be
located on the North side of the building and no more than 3
spaces to be located on the West side of the building , and all
spaces to be convenient for the intended users of the facility .
b . Approval of any final site plan by . the Planning Board .
c . The providing of information on the capacity of the existing
sewer lateral for the proposed laundromat use .
d . Submission of information establishing that the existing sewer
lateral has sufficient capacity for the proposed laundromat use .
e . Any site plan to be in accordance with Building Code
requirements , including the requirement of adequate supervision
of the gas pumps .
Chairman Aron pointed out that the other phase is whether or not
• the Zoning Board of Appeals grants a use of a laundromat as well as a
convenience store .
Mr . Salino appeared before the Board and stated that he did not
Zoning Board of Appeals - 3 - December 16 , 1987
• own the subject property at the present time , but intended to purchase
it with his father . Mr . Salino remarked that his purchase offer was
contingent upon the Zoning Board of Appeals decision . Chairman Aron
inquired as to why Mr . Salino would not purchase the property . Mr .
Salino responded that he would like to use the premises for a
laundromat and convenience store , noting that it is presently being
used as a gas station and the present owners are not doing that well
with the gas station business and mechanical work . Mr . Salino
commented that the way the building is structured it is hard to add on
employees because the space is limited . Chairman Aron asked Mr .
Salino if he were working there now , with Mr . Saliho answering , no ,
he is in no way affiliated with the business at the present time .
At this time , Chairman Aron commented on the 12 parking spaces ,
referring to a letter addressed to Susan Beeners , Town Planner , dated
December 1 , 1987 , from Consulting Engineer , Peter Novelli . [ Attached
hereto as Exhibit 1 . 1 Mr . Novelli stated in his letter that 12 spaces
can be provided if the spaces are smaller , noting that there is a
current trend toward compact cars . Chairman Aron remarked that , in
his opinion , Nr . Novelli is regulating the Town Zoning Laws , adding
that the Town has certain criteria to follow .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , stated that she reviewed the matter
with Robert Flumerfelt , Town Engineer , and considered the amount of
compact cars versus other types of vehicles , adding that the general
• concurrence was that , yes , the 12 parking spaces required can be
provided by doing such things as providing two compact vehicle spaces
on the North side of the building , five regular spaces also on the
North side , three spaces in the front and two employee spaces in the
back . Ms . Beeners stated that the above is preferred , based on a
nine - foot wide parking space . However , it was acknowledged by the
Town Engineer that a seven - foot -wide parking space would be adequate
for compact cars and that spaces be marked for compact cars on the
North side . Ms . Beeners noted that the rest of the spaces could be
taken down to an eight - foot -wide requirement instead of the ten- foot .
The Town Engineer felt it would be adequate to have two seven - foot
spaces and five eight - foot spaces on the North side . Ms . Beeners
mentioned that the spaces should be marked with the appropriate
striping and signage and that the Zoning Ordinance requirement of 12
spaces can be met by narrowing the width . [ Map of proposed parking
spaces attached hereto as Exhibit 2 . ]
Ms . Beeners asked about the number of washers and dryers . Mr .
Salino answered , 14 washers and 14 dryers . Ms . Beeners stated that ,
in summary , as far as the environmental aspects regarding parking and
the conditions that were placed in the Conditional Negative
Declaration , these conditions have generally been met , and do meet the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance , and general engineering
considerations . Ms . Beeners stated that those conditions have also
been supported by letters received from Fred Grout of the New York
State Department of Transportation stating that there is no objection
• to the proposed use , and a letter of similar concurrence from the
County Highway Department , and also a letter from Peter Novelli ,
Consulting Engineer . Ms . Beeners commented that there would be
Zoning Board of Appeals - 4 - December 16 , 1987
certain conditions that could be placed as far as striping and signage
to prohibit parking along the South side of the building which could ,
in the process of final site plan approval , be firmed up and
implemented . Ms . Beeners stated that the main question would be if it
meets the critera of the Zoning Board of Appeals as far as granting
approvals for the situation where you have gas station use , which is
non - conforming in this case , and is proposed for substantial
reduction . Ms . Beeners stated that the existing use of the gas
station , which appears to include a fairly long - standing one as a
convenience store , would ; be expanded , noting that a laundry would be
added to this , and also commenting that there would be an increased-
traffic
ncreasedtraffic load from what the existing situation is . Also , there would
be several non - conforming situations as far as the yard area is
concerned , which would include parking being within the required rear ,
front and side yards . Ms . Beeners also noted that the gas pump is
non - conforming in its location as well as being non - conforming in the
use . At this time , Ms . ; Beeners referred to Section 71 , Paragraph 2 ,
of the Zoning Ordinance , and noted that the gas pump has a 10 - foot
deficiency . Ms . Beeners commented on the side yard requirements .
There is less than 20 feet on the West side , which is between the
building and the highway . The rear yard is 18 feet in the
Southeasterly corner and narrows down to about 12 feet . On the North
side of the building the side yard is 20 feet . The Western main
section of the building is about 16 feet from the highway
right - of - way , ( the King Road side ) .
• Chairman Aron wondered , as far as parking is concerned , if it
were satisfactory to the Town Engineer and the Town Planner , with Ms .
Beeners responding , yes . 1 Chairman Aron asked about the other items on
the Conditional Negative Declaration , and wondered if they have been
corrected or will be corrected according to Mr . Novelli ' s letter . Ms .
Beeners responded that the conditions have been met adequately enough
for further pursuance .
11
Mr . King inquired as to what extent the operation of the store
has taken place . Ms . Beeners answered that the convenience store has
been in operation for some time on a limited scale . Mr . Salino stated
that he did a survey of the neighborhood regarding the proposed
laundromat , and all the people surveyed said it would be convenient to
have a laundromat in the area . Board Member Joan Reuning suggested
placing seven washers and dryers on the premises .
Chairman Aron asked the applicant what was more important to him
a laundromat or convenience store . Mr . Salino said that the
convenience store is important , adding that offering gas for sale
would help bring in convenience store shoppers , although with the size
of the building and the overhead he needed both the convenience store
and the laundromat . Chairman Aron commented that the building seems
rather small for 28 pieces of equipment . Mr . Salino referred to a map
which is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 .
At this point , Chairman Aron reopened the Public Hearing and
• asked if anyone were present who wished to speak to this issue . No
one spoke . Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 5 - December 16 , 1987
• Chairman Aron voiced a concern as to the traffic entering and
exiting on a 55 mph highway .
Town Attorney Barney noted that the Board should reaffirm the
Conditional Negative Declaration ,
A MOTION was made by " Joan Reuning as follows :
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals confirms the issuance
of the Conditional Negative Declaration issued by the Zoning Board of
Appeals on October 14 , 1987 .
The MOTION was seconded by Edward Austen .
Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
Chairman Aron asked ' for any further discussion on this matter .
Mr . King suggested that Mr . Salino find out what the minimum
usage is . Mr . King also inquired as to the hours of operation . Mr .
Salino responded , 6 : 00 a . m . - 10 : 00 p . m . for the convenience store and
6 : 00 a . m . - 9 : 00 p . m . for the laundromat .
• There being no further discussion , Chairman Aron asked for a
motion as to the Use Variance for the CONVENIENCE STORE ,
Edward King made a MOTION as follows :
WHEREAS , this Board finds as follows :
( a ) The health , safety , morals and general welfare of the community
in harmony with the general purposes of the Ordinance are
promoted .
( b ) The premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed use and such
use will fill a neighborhood or community need .
( c ) The proposed use and the location and design of the structure
are consistent with the character of the district in which it is
located .
( d ) The proposed use is not detrimental to the general amenity or
neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devaluate
neighboring property or seriously inconvenience neighboring
inhabitants .
( e ) The proposed access and egress for the structure and use are
safely designed .
• ( f ) The general effect of the proposed use upon the community as
a whole , including such items as traffic load upon public streets
Zoning Board of Appeals - 6 - December 16 , 1987
• and load upon water ; ° and sewerage systems is not detrimental to
the health , safety and general welfare of the community .
( g ) The sewer lateral deficiency has been met .
( h ) No one from the public appeared in opposition to this project .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals grant and
hereby does grant approval for the extension of the convenience store
use in the existing building upon the following conditions :
1 . That the conditions ' contained in the Resolution of Determination
of Environmental Significance , which was passed at the October
14 , 1987 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting , and reaffirmed at the
December 16 , 1987 meeting , are met .
2 . That there be a presentation to the Planning Board of the site
layout .
3 . That signage to limit the parking and restrict parking to
designated areas be put in place .
4 . That the site plan be in accordance with Building Code and
requirements , including adequate supervision of the gas pumps .
• The MOTION was seconded by Edward Austen . The voting was as
follows :
Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
A MOTION was made by Edward King as to the LAUNDROMAT as follows :
WHEREAS , this Board finds as follows :
( a ) The health , safety , morals and general welfare of the community
in harmony with the general purpose of the Ordinance are
promoted .
( b ) The premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed use and such
use will fill a neighborhood or community need .
( c ) The proposed use a;'nd the location and design of the structure
are consistent with the character of the district in which it is
located .
( d ) . The proposed use is not detrimental to the general amenity or
neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devaluate
neighboring property or seriously inconvenience inhabitants .
• ( e ) The proposed acces°s and egress for the structure and use are
safely designed .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 7 - December 16 , 1987
• ( f ) The general effect of the proposed use upon the community as a
whole , including such items as traffic load upon public streets
and load upon water and sewerage systems is not detrimental to
the health , safety , and general welfare of the community .
( g ) The sewer lateral deficiency has been met .
( h ) No one from the public appeared in opposition to this project .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals grant
and hereby does grant a Use Variance for a laundromat , to permit seven
washers and seven dryers , with the understanding that the applicant
can come back before the Zoning Board of Appeals after not less than
six months of the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy , at which
time the Board could consider a future extension or intensification of
that use .
Edward Austen seconded the MOTION . The voting was as follows :
Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
The second item on the Agenda was as follows :
• APPEAL OF Candace E . Cornell , Appellant , from the decision of the
Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer denying permission
for the operation of an antique shop , with goods and products to
be advertised for sale and to be located in an area exceeding 200
square feet , at 1456 Hanshaw Road , Town of . Ithaca Tax Parcel No .
6 - 70 - 10 - 3 . 4 , Residence District R- 15 . Permission is denied under
Article IV , Section 11 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance ,
Chairman Aron read aloud the Appeal Form , attached hereto as
Exhibit 4 .
Chairman Aron also read aloud a letter from Harrison and Audrey
Geiselman , addressed to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals ,
dated October 21 , 1987 , stating that they have no objection to this
endeavor . [ Letter attached hereto as Exhibit 5 . 1
Mrs . Cornell appeared before the Board and stated that she wished
to have a small antique shop in her barn , and conduct business by
appointment only . Mrs . Cornell said that she has antiques in her
home , but does not conduct any business from her home , adding that she
sells the antiques at antique shows .
Chairman Aron pointed out to Mrs . Cornell that she was seeking a
business in a residential district , and that this would entail a Use
Variance , Chairman Aron read aloud , from " Zoning Decisions " , a
• decision rendered by a judge concerning a Zoning Board of Appeals
decision , as follows . " Where a Use Variance is sought , the applicant
must show practical „ difficulties and unnecessary hardship .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 8 - December 16 , 1987
• Unnecessary hardship means . 1 . That the land cannot yield a
reasonable return if used only for the purpose allowed in that zone .
2 . That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not
to the general conditions in the neighborhood which may reflect the
unreasonableness of the Zoning Ordinance itself . 3 . The use to be
authorized by the variance will not alter the essential [ character ] of
the locality . A Use Variance may not be granted merely to ease a
personal difficulty of the owner . "
Mrs . Cornell commented that she has not been able to keep regular
employment because of medical problems . Chairman Aron stated that a
person ' s physical well - being is not a reason for granting a variance .
Chairman Aron asked where the antiques would be stored , with Ms .
Cornell answering , in a 400 - square - foot area in the barn .
The Public Hearing was opened . No one appeared for or against
this matter . Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing ,
Ms . Beeners inquired of Mrs . Cornell if , when the property was
purchased , she was anticipating working outside the home . Mrs .
Cornell responded , yes , but that was when her medical problems arose .
Ms . Beeners noted that the property was very interesting , but it
appears that some parking improvements would have to be made , and
wondered if the applicant considered making some improvements , such as
adding one or two paved parking spaces adjacent to the barn . Mrs .
• Cornell responded that the whole driveway needed resurfacing and it
would be extended , as shown on attached Exhibit 6 . Ms . Beeners noted
that the land immediately to the North of the house is in a later
phase of Lucente development which has not been approved at the
present time , adding that it could be expected that there might be
R- 15 lots developed behind there . The land , which is open field ,
across the street or to the South is R- 30 . The Town line is at the
Sapsucker Woods Road to the East .
Chairman Aron inquired of Mrs . Cornell if her health condition
was permanent or temporary . Mrs . Cornell stated that her leg problems
were permanent , and other problems , hopefully , were temporary .
At this time , Chairman Aron asked Ms . Beeners to speak about her
recommendation as to the Environmental Assessment , and she did so . [ A
copy of Ms . Beeners recommendation entitled " Part II - Environmental
Assessment - Candace Cornell Appeal " is attached hereto as Exhibit 7 . ]
Board Member Edward Austen referred to Article IV , Section 12 ,
Paragraph 5 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , and read as
follows :
" A customary home occupation , such as dressmaking , hair dressing ,
laundering , home cooking , carpentry , electrical , and plumbing work or
similar manual or mechanical trade ; operated solely by a resident of
the dwelling , provided that no additional persons not residing on the
• premises may be employed therein and that no goods or products are
publicly displayed or advertised for sale , that there be no outside
storage , and that no noise , dust , disorder , or objectionable odor is
Zoning Board of Appeals - 9 - December 16 , 1987
• experienced beyond the immediate property where such use is conducted .
The above mechanical trades to be conducted in the basement of the
dwelling or in a garage area not to exceed 200 square feet . "
With respect to SEQR on the Cornell Appeal , a MOTION was made by
Edward King as follows :
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals make and hereby does
make a Determination of Negative Environmental Significance ,
The MOTION was seconded by Joan Reuning , The voting was as
follows :
Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
Edward King made a MOTION as follows :
WHEREAS , this Board finds as follows :
( a ) The subject property consists of 85 / 100 of an acre and contains
an original farmhouse barn , which seems to be a magnificent old
structure suitable for preservation .
• ( b ) The property is substantially twice as large as other residential
lots in the neighborhood , judging from the Zoning Map prepared by
the Town of Ithaca Planning staff .
( c ) The impact on the neighborhood would be negligible because of the
isolation of this particular lot , as it is buffered by
vegetation .
( d ) The barn is well back from the road .
( e ) There is no development whatever to the South across the street
from the property - = that being Cornell Equine Research , which is
acres and acres of vacant fields .
( f ) The proposed use could be very attractive to the neighborhood .
( g ) No one appeared in opposition to this application .
( h ) The nearest neighbors adjacent to the West have written a letter
to the Board signifying their approval of the application .
( i ) If some revenue -producing activity were not permitted , there
would be a practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship in
maintaining the barn structure .
• THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals grant and
hereby does grant a variance to the applicant for the conduct of a
modest antique dealership in the barn from the lower floor ( the
Zoning Board of Appeals - 10 - December 16 , 1987
• southerly half of the barn ) , an area approximately 300 - 400 square feet
in size , and that this be ' granted on condition that :
( 1 ) The applicant submit a site plan to the Town of Ithaca planning
staff and that the , staff be empowered to require particular
conditions of vegetation screening along the property lines , and
sight improvement along the highway .
( 2 ) There be parking requirements on the property to ensure that no
cars are parked along the highway for this business , and that the
cars are well off the road and screened from the neighbors .
( 3 ) The Board will permit a sign not to exceed four square feet as a
home occupation , and that it could say antiques as proposed , but
if the applicant wishes to consider changing said sign , the
planning staff may approve the signage , understanding that the
Board has no objection to its saying antiques .
( 4 ) The hours of operation be limited to the daylight hours - - no
later than 9 : 00 p . m .
( 5 ) The intensity of the operation be limited so as not to generate a
lot of traffic .
( 6 ) The Board has no objection , with this particular siting , to
• displaying antiques within ten feet of the front of the barn .
The MOTION was seconded by Edward Austen . The voting was as
follows :
Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
The third item on the Agenda was as follows :
APPEAL OF Nancy and Roger Battistella , Appellants , from the
decision of the Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer
denying permission for the placement of a sign of approximately
15 . 48 square feet reading , " Welcome to Six Mile Creek Vineyard -
Wine Tasting & Sales " , at 1551 Slaterville Road , Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No . 6 - 56 - 2 - 1 . 1 , Residence District R- 15 . Permission
is denied under Section 3 . 01 ( h ) of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law
whereby a sign no greater than six square feet is permitted .
Chairman Aron read aloud the Appeal Form attached hereto as
Exhibit 8 . Chairman Aron commented that the sign is very attractive .
Chairman Aron asked where the sign will be placed , and if it were
free - standing . Mrs . Battistella responded that the sign would be
free - standing , approximately 10 - 12 feet from the roadway .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 11 - December 16 , 1987
• Chairman Aron opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone were
present to speak for or against this matter . No one spoke . Chairman
Aron closed the Public Hearing ,
Board Member Edward King asked the distance from the sign to the
pavement . Mrs . Battistella answered that it will be about 10 - 12 feet
from the roadway . Mr . King wondered if the proposal were for a sign
that is back to back .
Chairman Aron wondered if Mrs . Battistella conducted tours and
11
offered a taste of the wines . Mrs . Battistella said , yes , but it was
a very small operation .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , asked if there were a limit placed
by the Zoning Board of Appeals when the variance was granted for the
operation as to the amount of wine produced . Mrs . Battistella
responded that State legislation for home wineries limits their
production .
Ms . Beeners mentioned that when the Planning Board reviewed this
proposal they recommendedthe granting of a variance for this size
sign because of the legibility requirements at the 45 mph speed limit
along this road , and also , considering the scale of the barn , the
Board felt that this size sign was appropriate . Ms . Beeners stated
that in the same general ?area there is the Commonland sign , which is
• 17 . 8 square feet , and " the Commonland Crescent sign , which is 15 square
feet . The Video Sound sign right across from the Commonland signs is
15 - 17 square feet . Mr . King noted that none of the above signs were
obtrusive .
There being no further discussion , Chairman Aron asked for a
motion .
Edward Austen MOVED P, that the Zoning Board of Appeals grant a
variance of Section 3 . 011'( h ) for the proposed sign of 15 . 48 square
feet , to be erected as shown on the plans submitted , and as shown on
the plans and photographs submitted .
Edward King seconded 'the MOTION . The voting was as follows :
Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
The last item on the Agenda was the following :
APPEAL of Michael Weinstein , Appellant , from the decision of the
Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer denying permission
for the occupancy of a four - dwelling - unit structure located at
229 Coddington Road , ! Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 54 - 7 - 45 . 1 ,
® Residence District R9 , AND FURTHER , denying a building permit
for the presently completed conversion of two porches into
separate bedrooms , each such porch / bedroom being a part of a
Zoning Board of Appeals - 12 - December 16 , 1987
• separate existing unit in said structure . Approval of the Zoning
Board of Appeals was granted in July 7 , 1977 , for the use of then
existing three -dwelling -unit structure for occupancy by three
families or a maximum of five unrelated persons . Both the
occupancy of the four - dwelling - unit structure and the issuance of
a building permit for the conversion of porches to bedrooms are
denied under Article XIV , Sections 75 and 76 , of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , and under the terms and conditions
imposed by the Zoning Board of Appeals on July 7 , 1977 . The
conversion of the structure from three dwelling units to four
dwelling units has occurred without permission or the issuance of
a building permit , and two porches have been converted to
bedrooms without the issuance of a building permit .
Chairman Aron inquired of Mr . Weinstein how long he had been the
owner of subject property , with Mr . Weinstein answering , two years .
Mr . Weinstein stated that he acquired the property in late September
or early October of 1985 , ' noting that the property was a wreck , and he
inherited a situation where there were two couples living on the main
floor sharing one apartment . Mr . Weinstein remarked that when he
acquired the building he had it inspected for a Certificate of
Occupancy , and Mr . Lewis Cartee was the Building Inspector at that
time . Mr . Weinstein asked Mr . Cartee about the porch , which was
leaking and needed renovations . Mr . Cartee said to proceed with the
renovations . Mr . Weinstein said that what he did in good conscience
• appears to be a gross violation of the law , which he was not
disagreeing with . Mr . Weinstein stated that , technically , as the
building exists today , it is four units , and he was willing tomorrow ,
if he can get the second tenant out of the downstairs apartment , to
put it back into a three - unit use . Mr . Weinstein stated that he was
only asking for the variance just to exercise his right to see if
there were a possibility , under the present zoning laws , that the
building could be converted , adding that the building is now
completely renovated . Mr . Weinstein also noted that there were no
students living in the building , and that he was not disputing the
illegal usage of the four units . Mr . Weinstein stated that at the
time of purchase of the house he was told that the Town of Ithaca is
not as strict as the City of Ithaca , adding that the general City Code
was followed in this instance . Mr . Weinstein said that the porches
had to be completely demolished because there was nothing to salvage ,
and that the front porch was rebuilt to the exact dimensions of the
old porch . Chairman Aron asked if it was rebuilt as a porch or as a
bedroom . Mr . Weinstein responded that both porches were completely
enclosed to begin with , adding that the rear porch was rebuilt and
divided into two bedrooms .
Chairman Aron stated that Mr . Weinstein admitted in his own words
that he had been in violation of the Building and Zoning Codes , and
wondered why a letter from Andrew Frost , Building Inspector / Zoning
Enforcement Officer , dated October 26 , 1987 , addressed to Mr .
• Weinstein [ letter attached as Exhibit 9 ] had not been answered . Mr .
Weinstein responded that he , his manager , and head maintenance person
had spoken to Mr . Frost about filing the necessary applications .
Chairman Aron stated that whoever told Mr . Weinstein that the Town of
Zoning Board of Appeals - 13 - December 16 , 1987
• Ithaca is not as strict as the City of Ithaca was misinformed .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Weinstein if , when he purchased the
property from Mr . Gebauei two years ago , if he was aware that it was a
three - unit apartment , wi{ th Mr . Weinstein answering , yes . Chairman
Aron also wondered if Mr . Weinstein was aware that the occupancy was
for no more than five unrelated persons . Mr . Weinstein responded
that , in terms of occupancy , the property has always been legal .
Chairman Aron stated that he did not really understand what Mr .
Weinstein was appealing , „ and asked for an explanation . Mr . Frost ,
Building Inspector / ZoningEnforcement Officer , stated that Mr .
Weinstein , after the fact , had applied for a building permit for the
porches . Secondly , Mr . Weinstein has occupancy of a four - unit house
when the approval was only for a three - unit house . Mr . Frost stated
that , as he understood it, , Mr . Weinstein was asking for a variance to
be allowed to maintain the four -unit house , either permanently or
temporarily .
Chairman Aron opened, the Public Hearing and asked if there were
anyone present to speak ' for or against this Appeal . Chairman Aron
noted that no one appeared to speak to this matter and closed the
Public Hearing at 9 : 05 p . m .
Town Planner , Susan Beeners , stated that she wrote to Mr .
. Weinstein on December 8 , ' 1987 and requested floor plan dimensions and
amended plot plan indicating where the parking places were existing
and proposed . Ms . Beeners also had required that a Long Environmental
Assessment Form be filled out . Ms . Beeners noted that the Long
Environmental Assessment l' Form had just been received at tonight ' s
meeting , and that she , therefore , had no recommendation to make at
this time .
A MOTION was made by ' Chairman Aron as follows :
RESOLVED , that since; members of the Board have not received the
Long Environmental Assessment Form in time to study it and make a
determination , the Appeal be and hereby is adjourned to the January
13 , 1988 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals .
The MOTION was seconded by Joan Reuning , The voting was as
follows :
Aye - Aron , Austen , Reuning , King .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was carried unanimously .
Board Member King felt that it would be helpful if the Board had
pictures of the property , before Mr . Weinstein started any kind of
construction . Mr . Weinstein responded that he did not have any
interior pictures , and that the exterior was pretty much the same as
shown on the photographs distributed to the Board by Mr . Frost , Mr .
Frost stated that he did not believe there was any electrical service
to the back porches , adding that when he was in the house there were a
Zoning Board of Appeals - 14 - December 16 , 1987
• lot of exposed wires . Mr . Frost stated that he had requested an
inspection be performed by the electrical inspector and that any
violations be corrected by November 30 , 1987 . Mr . Frost noted that
Mr . Weinstein presented [ at tonight ' s meeting ] an application dated
December 16 , 1987 stating that application was made as of that date
for an electrical inspection . Mr . Frost also presented a letter ,
dated December 16 , 1987 and signed by Mr . Weinstein , stating that the
required inspection was. ', done December 16 , 1987 . Mr . Weinstein
stated that he did not attend the inspection .
Chairman Aron strongly advised Mr . Weinstein to comply with the
request of the Building Inspector , and stated that Mr . Frost will
report back to the Board within the next few days regarding the
subject property . Mr . Weinstein pointed out that since he has been in
communication with the Building Inspector he has been in the process
of correcting all the violations . [ Exhibit 9 attached hereto . ]
There being no further business to come before the Board , the
meeting was adjourned at 9 : 40 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
Mary yant ,
Recording Secretary .
iApproved :
Henry 'Araffi , Chairman
PETER D . NOVELLI , P . E .
CONSULTING ENGINEER
424 Harford Road , R . U. I a`
Brooklondale , New York 14817
• X607 ) 539-6556
December 1 , 1987
Ms . Susan Beeners , Town ;IPlanner
' Town of Ithaca
126 East Seneca Street
Ithaca , NY 14850
Re : Proposed Convenience Store / Laundromat
Route 96B . / King Road East
Dear Ms . Beeners :
At . the request of Mr . . Joseph Salino , I am submitting herewith my
analysis and recommendations for a parking scheme to serve the
proposed convenience store and laundromat on the southeast corner
of King Road and Route , 96B . I am also addressing the issue of
sewer lateral capacity . 11 The enclosed survey map shows the layout
.of the property .
The project will retain the existing gas pumps , for which
adequate paved area will be maintained as access . Three parking
spaces will . be provided ' in front of the store , while maintaining
• unblocked access to , the laundromat . The New York State
Department of Transportation has endorsed this plan .
On the King Road side , we have obtained permission from the
Tompkins County Highway Department to extend the culvert to
approximately the east property line . This will accommodate an
additional 7 spaces . In addition , there. is adequate space behind
the building for up to three employee parking spaces . Obviously ,
these spaces could be , blocked , but because of the short - term
nature of parking , access to and egress from these spaces should
not be a significant problem .
11
Based on this arrangement , Mr . Salino can provide 10 parking
spaces , plus three employee spaces , for a total of 13 spaces .
Now , the Zoning Ordinance requires one parking space for each 200
square feet of retail space . The total area of the building is
approximately 2400 square feet , which would result in a
requirement for 12 spaces . However , approximately 700 square
feet will not be used as retail area , but only for storage , It
should be noted that , in the case of the convenience store , this
storage area will not be used for coolers , etc . , thus creating
more effective retail area ; coolers will be placed in the retail
space . Therefore , it seems reasonable to allow a reduction of 3 •
or 4 parking spaces , from 12 to 8 or 9 . Mr . Salino can easily
provide 9 spaces , eve11 n without accounting for the 3 employee
• spaces .
Another - factor ' that should be considered is the current trend
toward compact cars . While the parking spaces provided have been
EXHIBIT 1
Ms . Beeners
December 1 , 1987
• Page 2
. shown as 8 x 20 feet , the standard for many years , compact cars
require only a 7 x 18 foot space : It can be shown that 60 to 80
percent of all vehicles will be compact cars . On the front of
the building , this will not have much impact ; on occasion , 4
vehicles may be accommodated instead of 3 . But on the King Road
side , the effect will be to provide one more space ; that is , 8
instead of 7 .
Considering these factors , Mr . Salino can provide 11 spaces ( plus
3 employee spaces , if these can be counted ) , while if a reduction
is allowed as a result of the 700 square feet of storage , only 8
or 9 spaces are needed .
I . have checked the capacity of the sewer lateral . It has
adequate capacity for the flows that will be generated by the
proposed laundromat . The estimated flows are close to the limit
for a 4 - inch lateral , although my calculations are somewhat
conservative . If the lateral is ever replaced , it should be
replaced with a 6 - inch pipe .
In conclusion , it is my opinion that both the parking provisions
and the sewer lateral are adequate for the proposed development .
Please call if you should have any questions or . require
• additional information .
Very truly yours ,
PETER D . NOVELLI , P . E .
Consulting Engineer
cc : Mr . Salino
/ 47 - 1202 . 87
IN
'
IN
•` • ,' : (IM 1,N. ..�• I� � :i 'IN" •� . .. :14".r ,ems` ..• • , Iy,,,•[/1�`,,•yy��7
IN NN
IN
� Aoo,OL glow p
®i
4009
r .
"• �.. •ti ^ tea p`vi- IN .ib
.. m.... �A(► .
d N :
®^ a: /vc/Q .1 // 1'� f/Al` T j►� ' .. . 1,� . � ' "Miloe►�► b'
ON
••� low
IN • • s w I
;i
ON
IN. goo
Nil
NNL 1 .
IN
4 � • ` t iji n �
� � It
3 $IN I
IN 4
� ! ti I
kk
INcd.
IN
sgo �� •. No
►� modw .
— 1.. 1046
1 • •
IN
a IN
• • . ' • a
lb d ` N4IN
1 , . • , \1 w
• , I °N A • it
~r SII •
.. 1j
�► >A
IN
dt
NNI
ivf-wl�gf k.
d IN
Wo
F 419
VA
;i •� .
: •r.. 0r r. • ;,SIM s ...•. .uWN.
.
,� •.... r
goo
No
A \
% h ' �
A 111 . N.C . • ! ON:
IN IN
1.
INN P,
A . . 11 .
NO pp.
A IN
IN
a 14 ON a
ANN a
IN 10.
400
o INV .
IN Pool
:+ . , . i 1: ,, • INN
•! i* r1� .I 111Ilie 4 t ' y►T1$ ' ! ' Y'/� ... : ,gj!IN
• I
I T b kill
_ .. •
f
Id I
f -' •
I 'Nod
. s r
' i•..... ,..,._, I .
_ i did—,:c _.
.r. :__..,_ _;:..:_ _ . . _ 1111. ..
1111._._. ._ .. _ __1111 1111_ . - . .- � 1111 .", -
..r .
_ _. . d,. _ Id , LL -.f, 1.- - _.-dd- , Idddd.
011
il IN
A.
.�. . _ . r .,.... x i 1 .+ ,rIj�
did,
V r
I
wl.
!
I ^
- I
14
,'. _ _ ..
L. _ . 1 _ 111 . _ -,,,
�. ,.
Li
ol
It
too
.� •_.��...__y. _ _ . . .-. . • \ ._,., . . . r._ ., _. _ - 1111 - .._ , • _.. 1111 _. .._ .
VS� . I tIdd. t —4 dd...,
I
rd
- C1__. .- ;3FT
a \
pe
It
1 ti
\k • I �1 Nr .1 r , I
Q.� - .. .r t ... 1111. , .. ,.- . .. - , r •. ,. _
' I fI—_. _ .. :.+. _ 1111 . • ; ,_ . . _ , ✓' . .
Id t Id . . . _ _. .
— —
it
r t
o�� _ y
', . I! ra
` ".. 4 ' 1111 ,.
Id
Alin 1 » ' t
r .
/ r !
_ } -. _. _ _ . .. -_.. „-_+ - -, ! t ” .
' -i . I _ • _ ., '. . . , .y. .._. - 1111.. `,';`sa ..- ._... I r --- ., ._ _ 1111.-
_ ,._.� , Nr -� Y
—a
i
a
r,dIdI Nd
Iddd
do
. I
-
i' •', ._1 . _. _ . - . , 1111-11. 11,
�•-F• 1111.. . . - ,. -1 _
' I , 1.111 ._ _ .. . ._. r.._r._.. _._.._
IdId
ddd�
r - »
iId
._, r
Id
1_.,_ . . ,. ,..�. .. .. ._. . _ _ ! .
4.41
P.
.0 IddNld
--- - -----
did . I
If, EXHIBIT 3 ; ;
Idde-
1 4 . lii� r i
126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED :
Ithaca, New York 14850
CASH -
2 CHECK - ('.�Tl �j
(60 7 ) 73 - 1141 lti
• ZONING : - )IV
A P P E A L For Office Use Only
to the
Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer
and the i
Zoning Board of Appeals
of the
Town of Ithaca, New York
.Hay g been denied permission to have an antique shop in the barn located next to our
due to _ the property being zoned R15
at 1456 Hanshaw Road Ithaca r Town of " Ithaca
Tax Parcel No . 564 - 735 70 - 10 - 3 . 4 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 ) IV Section( s ) 11 ,
of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance ,
the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and, in support of the
Appeal , affinns that strict observance of the Zoning Ordinance would impose PRACTICAL
DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows :
(Additional sheets may be attached as necessary . )
I would like to have a domestic - based -. oeoupation to - provide
necessary supplemental family income while allowing me to be
at home to raise our children . In the last . two years , I have
had chronic medical problems necessitating several surgeries
and making full - time employment very difficult . I also have
chronic orthopedic problems which restrict my mobility and therefore
limit my employment opportunities .
• CONTINUED ON ATTACHED SHEET
Signature of Appel lant /Agent : ��% 1�/ �Y ��KY/1 Date : l,'P/t �-3
EXHIBIT 4
• The proposed antique shop in our barn would be a small - scale
operation , open during restricted hours and by appointment .
The majority of the business would be conducted at antique shows
sponsored elsewhere . Since I will be dealing in low volume
trade , the overhead costs of rented store space elsewhere would
be prohibitive . The success of even a small part - time business
venture depends on advertising which is restricted by the present
zoning designation . I would like to be able to place occasional
advertisements in the local papers and to have addressed business
cards to present at out - of - town antique shows for future contacts .
I would like to have a small sign near our driveway which
would comply to whatever size restrictiogs were imposed by the
zoning board . There will be no outdoor displays or storage
related to the shop . The changes to the barn would be a new
roof and restoration of the structural elements and the interior .
Our property is secluded fromaour neighboors and the road
by a thick , mature ( x. 40 ' ) treeline of arbor vitae . As illustrated
in the attached survey map , we have a long circular driveway
which would afford ample parking , making on the road parking
unnecessary . Our only immediate neighbors are Mr . and Mrs .
Geiselmann who are supportive of this venture ( see attached
letter ) . The remainder of the property is bounded by empty
lots .
We have restored our circa 1850 farm house in ,fes,
period decor .
and intend to extend these efforts to the barn restoration .
We have no intention of the barn developing a commercial flavor .
I maintain numerous perennial gardens on our property and would
strive to have the shop add rather than detract from the aesthetic
value of our property .
•
l
0c;
l
Zil
-(rr afr-�a�y,
cot
v�-
� '
CL -
04� Ll--f- ^(�ac4kck I LL fU4
-cta�
GNU 4145L
I rer
A4 L(��
•
EXHIBIT 5
LUGEhITE C ¢ •o .l _.
q48 - � 9G "7o - IO - 3 , S ,
y
i
' ( FOCJNb�
' I . PIPe ( FOVAb) 11PIPE
5 $ 3`- 04 ' E 200 . 03 '
:1
O�Prrl�� C,ou U rn I CA-0 0W je C'0C1j Eta`- l
00
l l81 564 . 735 70 - 16 . 304 "'
1 . $ 4 AC ZES - - -
- - - 3G - 5US To : 5EwEt ESM1. 469 - Z7u
� 453 • G3G .
M f —1P 009:O
J w t�avED Del VE
W
OU
i ,
00,
- /
1
# 411
15' AD 1
hv�S o �� � I • • I / . ;
, I
7 � , . ' • ��� \ app
�CL
Poo . a , � N $ 3� 04 w 199 .75
500{ To I , PIPE (Fou 4D) CIO
AT WEST LINE OF N / F LUGENTE
awl
448 - G9 &
HAW ,�SNAW Z0AD
v31i&L
Zo
r1
Survey Map of 14 ,,56 Hanshaw Road - Town of lthaca -
Tompkins County - New York
NOTE : ANY REVISIONS TOTHIS MAP MUST COMPLY WITH SECTION 7209, KENNETH & BAKER
SUBDIVISION 2 O THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW. PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
TE
8SUFNEYED : S /'5 /8(�' BY BCALE : joeeao. : 8 � Z % 1118 y
I b!!re§y certify to David B . Collum do Candace orne - Collum-, and Charles
z . Currey Cll
b
that I am a licensed land surveyor, New York State License No. 049415, and that this
map correctly delineates an actual survey on the ground made by me or under m direct x
supervision,
that it was prepared in accordance with the current code of ractice for land o
title surveys adopted by the New York State Association of Professional Surveyors; s. BM'�b
and that I found no visible encroachments either way across property lines except as
shown hereon . ,
EXHIBIT 6
SIGNED : . -`� �' . . . �-- 13A'fEf7 : 5 / 9 /496
PART II - Environmental A sessmon Cornell ApnealJ :.
A . Action is Unlisted .
B . Action will receive coordinated review ( Tompkins Co .
Planning Dept . )
CCould action result in any 'ad ve ae effects on . to Qr
arisina from the following :
C1 . _ Existing_air_Qice or argundwater
quality or ciuan:U:Ly,_nQ o 1_ evels . e% isting_traff .iQ
Ratternz , ' Solid waste produ tion or dispo -ga , potentia for
eroslgM, -drains or -f loodingproblems ?
No significant adverse impact is expected .to these
factors because of the limited scope of physical development
proposed , and subject to adequate improvement of the
driveway for adequate customer parking and access .
Potential local impacts of car parking - and other activity
related to the proposed antique shop operation on the
adjacent residence to the north are mitigatible through
adequate siting of any necessary additional parking area and
through landscaping . Minor improvements at the entrance to
the site , such as the limbing up of dead branches on the
. front hedge , and possible raising of the mailbox , would
mitigate potential impacts related to sight safety .
C 2 . Aesthet.i�..ag,riaul.tural,..archeolagic a historic ,
or other natural or cultural r ss_ourc_es l *oxcommma ' v or
neightarhQod character?
No significant adverse impact is expected to these
factors , subject to mitigating measures described in this
review . The property is screened on the front and west
sides by evergreens . Additional screening should be : added
on the west side to -buffer activities frgm the backyard and
deck of the neighboring house , and a shrub / tree screen
should be planted on the rear boundary of the property to
buffer activities from potential future residences to the
north .
The property is one of several old farmhouses with
outbuildings along Hanshaw Road . No immediate plans are
known for the vacant Cornell University ( R- 30 ) lands south
of the property . If the proposed antiques operation is
strictly limited as proposed , and if additional landscaping
and circulation improvements are implemented , it is
recommended that the proposed use would be in keeping with
the historic character of the property and would pose no . .
significant adverse impact to the existing or future ''°
residential character of the area .
C3 . Vegatatigja gr_f6.auns,.fJah , shgIlfijahor wildlife
speQiezsignificant _hahit s .LQr threatened or
species]
No significant specifies or habitats exist on the site . T . .
EXHIBIT 7
v
C4 . A cnmmunyitg ' s existing glans or goals as
Officiallyadopted . or a hange in use or intensity of use
' . .Qf land or other natural resources9
Proposal does not meet the requirements for Residence
R - 15 Districts with respect to type and size of use .
Subject tc the finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals of
adequate grounds for variance , the reviewer recommends that
there would be no 'significant adverse impact to community
plans and goals as officially adopted .
If the proposed antiques business were carefully
developed and monitored and limited to low volume activity ,
no significant adverse imcrease in land use intensity is
expected . The reviewer recommends that it may be beneficial
to the community to enable renovation of the barn and
continued upgrading of the property , and that it may be
beneficial: to the applicant for health reasons to permit the.
home occupation proposed .
` �Sarowt �gilentdevel_ oo m . n . , or rel a . . d
activities likely to ba..Induced by the proposed action ?
If the proposed use is strictly limited and monitored ,
no growth or related activities are anticipated on the
subject property . While there may be similar applications
• for barn reuse for similar occupations , these would be
subject to review for their particular conditions and
characteristics . °
Cfi._14.ng term . short term ..Lcumulative , nr o .h . r
effects_not _identifiedr C1 - 05 ?
Not expected .
97 _ Other impacts Uncluding changes in.usg of either
uanti. ty or type of energy ) ?
Not expected .
D . .--. Is there , or isthere likely to }ce , contmversv related
to potentia _adverse_e_ v o nta_7 t Acts?
Not . expected dt the time of this review . Note the
letter of support submitted by the adjoining resident to the
west .
PART III
A negative determination of environmental significance
is recommended , subject to the mitigating measures described
above related to circulation and landscaping improvements , :'. *
the' full compliance of any site signage - with all pertinezit � ,� ' ;' R ;
requirements , the monitoring of the proposed use , and the
finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals of grounds for
• variance .
Lead Agency : Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
Reviewer : Susan C . Beeners , Town Planner
Review Date : December 4 , 1987
:. sy Z. IM ,
. . 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED
•.
Ithaca , New York 14850 CASH
( 607 ) 273 - 1747 CHECK
• ZONING : .
A P P E A L For Office Use Only
to the
Building Inspector
and
Zoning Board of Appeals .
of the
Town of Ithaca , New York
Having been denied permission to 2yec� �'jG, `) S
at S /01 cYV / Ak. Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No . ,� - S b 2 /, . � as shown on the accompanying appli -
cation and / or plans or other supporting documents , for the stated reason that;
Whe issuance ofsuch permit would be in violation of - -
SECTION ( S ) 3 ; 0
of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law , Local Law No . 6 - 1980 ,
the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and , in
support of the Appeal , affirms that strict observance of the Sign Law would
impose PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and / or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows .
cC'�K�wC�Lit �a-Gi/jlr'vj, � L / ,� d•,�ie � �� .�,�
o'
i0 �'� cls' -77�L •� ^ i C Ct,„D Cil. � �e✓�✓! "�
�.. .�r'�•y�- �=' �''�� i.-�t•C• ��--� .tc �-- -ri.*c; Y- (°syYw 1-t .�'i .� -'fit.. lti rJ�, . r.-�,�. .,
EXHIBIT 8
Dated : / / A? Signed �! . . . . . � . ��_ ���1%
M .ate
P
TOWN OF ITIMAGIS
• 1U W , ?MICA S
RHACq, NEW YON(
14UO
October 26 , 1987
Mr . Michael Weinstein
28 Dellwood Blvd ,
Binghamton , NY 13903 - 1302
Re : 229 Coddington Road
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 54 - 7 - 45 . 1
Dear Mr . Weinstein :
This letter serves as a tfollow - up to our recent telephone
conversation - --and my inspection of your rental property at 229
Coddington Road on October 22 , 1987 .
The building is ` an old wood - frame structure and consists of
four dwelling units - - Apartment # 1 located in the basement ,
Apartments # 2 and # 3 located on the first floor , and Apartment # 4
located on the second floor . Each unit contains a bathroom , full
kitchen , and bedrooms , offering complete living facilities .
This building was granted a variance by the Zoning Boaxd of
Appeals on July 7 , 1977 for use as a three - family home , to be
occupied by three families or a maximum of five unrelated
persons . There is one family in Apartment # 1 , a couple in
Apartment # 2 who , I believe , are unrelated , and a single
individual in each of Apartments # 3 and # 4 .
This is obviously a four -unit dwelling , therefore , the
building is in violation of the Zoning Board of Appeals variance
granted .in 1977 , as well as Article III , Section 4 , of the Town
of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance .
The building must be reduced to three dwelling units, or ,
you may go before the Zoning Board of Appeals with an appeal for
further variance . If you eliminate one dwelling unit , we must
discuss ;. how this can be accomplished to my satisfaction , but this
must be - done no later than December 31 , 1987 . I have enclosed an
application for appeal form for your convenience and would
anticipate , should 'you pursue this route , a December . 9 , 1987
hearing date .
My inspection and our telephone conversation also indicate
that the building ' s front porch was recently converted into a
bedroom serving Apartment # 2 , and the back porch was recently
converted into two bedrooms serving Apartment # 1 . You did not
recall obtaining building permits for these conversions nor is
• there any record on file in Town Hall of building permits ever
having been issued for same . This is a violation of Article XIV ,
Section 75 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and New York
State law .
EXHIBIT 9
Mr . Michael Weinstein - 2 - October 26 , 1987
C,
Furthermore , there appear to be violations to the New York
State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code , for the
following reasons :
1 . The front porch bedroom conversion ( Apartment # 2 ) has no
heat and the tenant has complained of the room being cold .
The room probably does not provide the required heating
temperature of 68 ° F .
2 . The back porch bedroom conversions ( Apartment # 1 ) have
electrical boxes without any fixtures installed and loose
wires exposed . These wires are sealed at the ends .
3 . Numerous electrical outlets and fixtures in Apartment # 1 do
not work , and - at least one electrical fixture in the kitchen
of Apartment # 4 does not work .
4 . Since there were. no building permits issued for the
porch -to - bedroom conversions , nor inspections performed by
this office , I cannot determine whether the work done is in
compliance with Building Code .
Finally , I am asking that you immediately pursue having a
New York Board of Fire Underwriter ' s electrical inspection
performed by Floyd Ferris , Electrical Inspector , who may be
reached at 272 - 8331 on Mondays , Wednesdays , and Fridays , -between
• 8 : 00 a . m . and 9 : 00 a . m . , to obtain , no later than November 30 ,
1987 , an electrical certificate ofcompliance for the entire
building . This deadline would include the correction of any
electrical defects . I am also asking that you submit to this
office , no later than November 9 , 1987 , a building permit
application for the porch -to - bedroom conversions , providing all.
the details requested on the building permit application
instruction sheet . Once I have reviewed this application , I will
contact you for any further required action by ' you . An
application is enclosed for your convenience .
Should you have any questions , please do not hesitate to
call me at 273 - 1747 . Should you dispute any of the information I
have provided in this letter , or feel that I have not accurately
represented the facts , please notify me in writing immediately .
Sincerely ,
Andrew Frost
Building Inspector /
Zoning Enforcement Officer
ASF / nf
enclosures
cc - Noel Desch
• Henry Aron
John C . Barney , Esq .
CERTIFIED MAIL
Return Receipt Requested