Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1981-06-30 MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING June 30, 1981 PRESENT: Vice-Chairperson Cummings, P. Holmes, E. Nichols, M. Sampson ALSO: Appellants, appellants ' representatives, H. M. Van Cort, other inter- ested persons, press 1 . Vice Chairperson Cummings called the meeting to order at 8:30 PM. 2. The May 1981 minutes were approved. 3. Chairman's report. None. 4. Committee reports. None. 5. Old business. None. 6. Zoning appeals. See attached sheets. 7. New business. None. 8. Miscellaneous. None. 9. Adjournment. t 2 APPEAL 1367: Appeal of BEATRICE N. DENNIS for an Interpretation of the B-4 use designatic or a .Use Variance under Sect. 30.25, Col . 2 (permitted uses) , to permit continued use of 1025 N. Tioga Street for offices for a contractor's business, in an R-2b (residential ) dis trict in which business offices are not permitted. An insurance office was housed in the building under variance, but when the contracting firm moved in to replace it, the Buildin Commissioner ruled that the new use did not fall in the same use category and issued a cease and desist order. Mrs. B. Dennis and Attorney L. Reverby were present on behalf of this appeal . Planning issues: Side effects of uses permitted by variance, specifically construction vehicles parked near the office, in on-street parking spaces. (If kept at a location separate from the office facility would make the office use relatively unobjectionable. ) Combined presence of office and vehicles violates spirit of Zoning Ordinance and affects resi- dential character of neighborhood. Neighborhood/public comment: Five neighborhood residents commented on the proposal . A majority were against proposed variance because of impact of trucks on neighborhood, although two residents spoke in favor. Staff recommendation: Approve variance for office, on condition that all other functions and evidence of the construction business, including materials storage and parking of construction vehicles, be prohibited. Use of the garage on premises should be restricted to providing required off- street parking for residential uses. Any further violation of these conditions should be cause for revocation of variance (should be checked with City Attorney) . P&D Board recommendation: P. Holmes, seconded by M. Sampson, moved for recommendation of DENIAL of variance. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1370: Appeal of MARGARET LIGUORI for Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 4 an( 11 (off-street parking and front yard setback) , and Sect. 30.49 (extension or enlargement of a non-conforming structure or use) to permit conversion of 113 Stewart -Avenue from foul apartments (seven bedrooms total ) to three apartments (sixteen bedrooms total ) . The property, in an R-3a (residential ) district, is deficient in off-street parking and front yard setback. This appeal was held over by the Planning and Development Board at its May meeting; a modified proposal may be presented. Mr. D. Liguori and Attorney D. Galbraith were present on behalf of this appeal . Planning issues: None, if revised proposal is as understood: (a) total number of bedrooms reduced from 16 to 12; (b) limited to occupancy by 12 persons; (c) 6 parking spaces across street committed to this property in a form .acceptable to City Attorney. 3 Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: Approve, per restrictions listed under planning issues above, plus removal of metal shutters from front of house. Appellant has agreed to all of the above. P&D Board recommendation: P. Holmes, seconded by M. Sampson, moved for recommendation of APPROVAL of variancg subject to recommendations of the Planning staff. (Mr. Sampson made a reluctant second to the motion because he did not feel 6 parking spaces ere adequate for 12 students. ) PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1372: Appeal of COSFIO GATTO for Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 7, 11 and 12 (lot width, front yard and side yard setbacks) to permit conversion of the existing single- family residence at 321 Hector Street toa two-family dwelling. The property, in an R-2a (residential ) district in which two-fami4 dwellings are permitted, is deficient in width, front yard and side yard setbacks. Mr. C. Gatto presented his appeal . Planning issues: None, other than availability of off-street parking and access to this parking. Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: If parking adequate per Building Commissioner, then approval . P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by E. Nichols, moved for recommendation of APPROVAL of variance assuming off-street parking adequate. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1373: Appeal of ROBERT MILLER d/b/a CASCADILLA REALTY for Use and Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 2, 4, 6, 11 and 13 (permitted uses, off-street parking, lot size, front and side yard .setbacks) and Sect. 30.49 (extension or enlargement of a non-conforming use or structure) to permit conversion of an existing five apartment house at-408-410 N. Aurora Street to seven apartments, with no change-"in the total number of bedrooms. The property is in an R-2b (residential ) district in which multiple dwellings are not permitted except as existing legal non-conforming uses, and the property has no off-street parking, and is deficient in lot area, front and side yard setbacks. Mr. R. Miller presented his appeal . Planning. issues: Neighborhood impact caused by conversion: Provision of parking spaces in side yard would alter house's character. Historic integrity of very nice old house may be affected if con- version is seen as intensification of use, putting more strain on neighborhood even though appellant states increased revenue will promote proper maintenance. Neighborhood/public comment: One neighbor spoke against the proposal because of negative impact on neighborhood of greater density and smaller uni-4s. None spoke in favor. 4 Staff recommendation: Denial , for reasons stated above. P&D Board recommendation: P. Holmes, seconded by M. Sampson, moved for recommendation of DENIAL of variance. PASSED 3-0. (Mr. Holmes commented that if we keep hacking away at old properties in the city then the city will lose its charm. ) APPEAL 1374 : Appeal of the HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET LODGE for Use and Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 2, 4, 11 , 12 and 14 (permitted use, off-street parking, required front yards, and minimum rear yard) to permit use of-401 Hancock Street for a lodge. The property, in an R-3b (residential ) district in which a lodge or private social club is not permitted, is deficient in off-street parking, front yard setbacks for two front yards, and rear yard depth. The property has been used as a legal non-conforming use as a paint store, but the proposed use would not fall under the "grandfather rights" thus established. Mr. Fred Way and Attorney R. Hines were present on behalf of the appeal of the Henry Highland Garnet Lodge. Planning issues: Possibility of reversion to residential use. Reuse of a property which it would be economically unfeasible to re- convert to residential use, or to most others permitted in zone. Acceptability/compatibility of proposed use in location. Neighborhood/public comment: Several neighbors had questions about the proposed use. Comments were divided: some mildly favorable, some skeptical about compatibility with residential character and therefore opposed. Staff recommendation: Probably would not have unacceptable impact on neighborhood, given kind of activity in building. P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by P. Holmes , moved to recommend APPROVAL of variances in view of the fact that it has been made clear that the Lodge intends to conduct an orderly social use of the property, without a liquor license, with only the usual social meetings and those of its auxiliary, and with consideration for the desires and feelings of neighborhood. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1375: Appeal of RUTH MACERA for Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Col . 13 (minimum sideyard requirement) to permit use of 422 N. Cayuga Street for four apartments. The property is located in an R-3a (residential ) district in which a multiple dwelling is permitted; however the property iscbficient in one sideyard setback, and had been changed from three apartments plus a beauty shop to four apartments without a building permit. Ms. Ruth Macera presented her appeal . Planning issues: Illegal conversion, intensifying residential use. Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: Approval . P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by E. Nichols, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED 3-0. 5 APPEAL 1376: Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Col . 11 (required front yard) and 30.49 (enlargement of a non-conforming structure) to permit addition of a storage enclosure to 701 Spencer Road (EVAPORATED METAL FILMS) . The building, in a B-5 (business) district; is deficient in front yard setback. Mr. Curtis Ufford presented the appeal on behalf of Evaporated Metal Films. Planning issues: None. Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: Approval . P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by E. Nichols, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED. 3-0. APPEAL 1377: Appeal of J. DAVID OLDS, LEON A. OLDS, and ERIS 0. KIMBLE for Area Variance! under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 4, 6, 11 , 13 and 14 (off-street parking, and front, sid, and real yard setbacks) to permit conversion of the one-family dwelling 207 E. Court Street to - office use. The property, in a B-1a (business) district where offices are permitted, is non-conforming in that it is deficient in required lot size, front, side and rear yard setbacks, and will be deficient in off-street parking for. the proposed use. (Appeals for this use were denied by BZA in January and February and a request for reconsideration based on new information was denied in, March. ) Mr. R. Mellen presented new information on behalf of the appeal . Planning issues: The P&D Board has a number of times this year recommended granting variance to permit conversion of this structure to offices. However, BZA has denied. New information: Alderman Holman made a survey of neighborhood opinion which indicated virtually no opposition to proposed use. Staff recommendation: Approval . P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by M. Sampson, stated that the Planning Board wishes to be on record as supporting conversion of this property by responsible owners for business purposes. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1378: Appeal of RICHARD P. CLARKE for an Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 4, 7 and 12 (off-street parking, lot width and sideyard setback) to permit use of 108 Albany Street for an office. The property, in a B-2a (business) district in which the office use is permitted, is deficient in off-street parking, lot width, and one sideyard setback. Mr. R. Clarke presented his appeal . 6 Planning issues: Conversion of existing residential structure with extensive area deficiencies, for a permitted use. Elimination of residential units. Neighborhood effects, including parking. Neighborhood/public comment: None. Staff recommendation: Staff divided. Would improve appearance if converted to office by new owner. Would remove housing units. P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by P. Holmes, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED 3-0. (Alderman Nichols said since Cornell is adding student housing to its stock (in large part because the City has tightened up on zoning) the Planning Board can allow a conversion of a residence such as that on S. Albany Street. ) APPEAL 1379: Appeal of HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES MANAGEMENT AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES for Area Variance under Sect. 30.26 (Special Conditions for Group Care Residences) to permit occupancy of 523 S. Albany Street by a Group Care Residence. The property is in an R-2b (residential ) district in Which a group care residence is permitted under special conditio specified by the Zoning Ordinance. The property is deficient in off-street parking and sideyard setbacks necessary to meet the Ordinance's special condition requirements. HOMES representatives including Mr. James Spiro and Mr. Ken Lenhart answered questions regarding this appeal . Ms. Ruth Pettengill was also present. Also Mr. Mack Travis, owner of the property, was present. Planning issues: Adequacy of site for group care facility. Neighborhood impact. Impact of additional facility on neighborhood in excess of number permitted by Zoning Ordinance. Note: Applicant's assertion that the ordinance limit on number of such facilities in a planning neighborhood is seemingly incorrect: By P&D staff count, 2 of 8 already in the city are in Southside (Neighborhood 9) ; and this would raise the proportion to 33% vs. 25% permitted. S. Cummings felt there was insufficient information before the Board on this appeal . Neighborhood/public comment: Many neighborhood residents spoke strongly against proposal , fearful that home would be a problem in neighborhood both because of type of use and small size of lot. A few spoke in favor. Staff recommendation: Reluctant denial as it does not meet special conditions for use. P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by M. Sampson, moved to recommend DENIAL of variance since she said the success of group homes in Ithaca has been based on welcoming group home members into a neighborhood and community and this location does not seem so fortuitous. PASSED 3-0. a � r 7 APPEAL 1380: Appeal of ROBIN AUBLE for Use and Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 2; 7, 12, 13 and 14 (permitted uses, lot width, and setbacks for side and rear yards) to pern construction of a building at 410 W. Green Street for an electrical motor repair and retail business. The property, in a B-2a business) district in which a motor repair business is not a permitted use, will be deficient in lot width, setbacks for both sideyar and yard depth if the building is constructed in the rear yard, replacing the existing bar The existing house will remain. Mr. Robin Auble and Attorney W. Seldin presented the appeal . Planning issues: Nonconforming use in residential property. Retail sales permitted, but not repair of motors. S. Cummings felt this was intensification of use in an area where there was much effort made to upgrade residences . Also, if a variance were granted it would create the potentia' for a different type of commercial use here in the future. Neighborhood/public comment: Applicant said he had received many favorable comments from neighborhood. Staff recommendation: Denial as shop building is so much in excess of area requirements and so close to property lines. Also, repair use not permitted in this zone. P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by P. Holmes , moved to recommend DENIAL. PASSED 3-0-1 (Nichols) . y MEMORANDUM TO: T. Hoard, Building Commissioner FROM: Planning & Development SUBJ: P&D BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS ON JUNE ZONING APPEALS CASES DATE: July 2, 1981 APPEAL 1367: Appeal of BEATRICE N'. DENNIS for an Interpretation of the B-4 use designation or a Use Variance under Sect: 30.25, Col . 2 (permitted uses) , to permit continued use of 1025 N. Tioga Street for offices for a contractor's business, in an R-2b (residential ) dis- trict in which business offices are not permitted. An insurance office was housed in the building under variance, but when the contracting firm moved in to replace it, the Building Commissioner ruled that the new use did not fall in the same use category and issued a cease and desist order. Planning issues: Side effects of uses permitted by variance, specifically construction vehicles parked near the office, in on-street parking spaces. (If kept at a location separate from the office facility would make the office use relatively unobjectionable. ) Combined presence of office and vehicles violates spirit of Zoning Ordinance and affects resi- dential character of neighborhood. Neighborhood/public comment: Five neighborhood residents commented on the proposal . A majority were against proposed variance because of impact of trucks on neighborhood, although two residents spoke in favor. Staff recommendation: Approve variance for office, on condition that all other functions and evidence of the construction business, including materials storage and parking of construction vehicles, be prohibited. Use of the garage on premises should be restricted to providing required off- street parking for residential uses. Any further violation of these conditions should be cause for revocation of variance (should be checked with City Attorney) . P&D Board recommendation: P. Holmes, seconded by M. Sampson, moved for recommendation of DENIAL of variance. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1370: Appeal of MARGARET LIGUORI for Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 4 and 11 (off-street parking and front yard setback) , and Sect. 30.49 (extension or enlargement of a non-conforming structure or use) to permit conversion of 113 Stewart -Avenue from four apartments (seven bedrooms total ) to three apartments (sixteen bedrooms .total ) . The property, in an R-3a (residential ) district, is deficient in off-street parking and front yard setback. This appeal was held over by the Planning and Development Board at its May meeting; a modified proposal may be presented. Planning issues: None, if revised proposal is as understood: (a) total number of bedrooms reduced from 16 to 12; (b) limited to occupancy by 12 persons; (c) 6 parking spaces across street committed to this property in a form acceptable to City Attorney. a Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: Approve, per restrictions listed under planning issues above, plus removal of metal shutters from front of house. Appellant has agreed to all of the above. P&D Board recommendation: P. Holmes, seconded by M. Sampson, moved for recommendation of APPROVAL of variance subject to recommendations of the Planning staff. (Mr. Sampson made a reluctant second to the motion because he did not feel 6 parking spaces were adequate for 12 students. ) PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1372: Appeal of COSMO GATTO for Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 7, 11 and 12 (lot width, front yard and side yard. setbacks) to permit conversion of the existing single- family residence at 321 Hector Street to a two-family dwelling. The property, in an R-2a (residential ) district in which two-family dwellings are permitted, is deficient in width, front yard and side yard setbacks. Planning issues: None, other than availability of off-street parking and access to this parking. Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: If parking adequate per Building Commissioner, then approval . P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by E. Nichols, moved for recommendation of APPROVAL of variance assuming off-street parking adequate. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1373: Appeal of ROBERT MILLER d/b/a CASCADILLA REALTY for Use and Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 2, 4, 6, 11 and 13 (permitted uses, off-street parking, lot size, front and side yard setbacks) and Sect. 30.49 (extension or enlargement of a non-conforming use or structure) to permit conversion of an existing five apartment house at-408-410 N. Aurora Street to seven apartments, with no change"in the total number of bedrooms. The property is in an R-2b (residential ) district in which multiple dwellings are not permitted except as existing legal non-conforming uses, and the property has no off-street parking, and is deficient in lot area, front and side yard setbacks. Planning issues; Neighborhood impact caused by conversion: Provision of parking spaces in side yard would alter house's character. Historic integrity of very nice old house may be affected if con- version.is seen as intensification of use, putting more strain on neighborhood even though appellant states increased revenue will promote proper maintenance. Neighborhood/public comment: One neighbor spoke against the proposal because of negative impact on neighborhood of greater density and smaller units. None spoke in favor. Staff recommendation: Denial , for reasons stated above. P&D Board recommendation: P. Holmes, seconded by M. Sampson, moved for recommendation of DENIAL of variance. PASSED 3-0. (Mr. Holmes commented that if we keep hacking away at old properties in the city then the city will lose its charm. ) s APPEAL 1374: Appeal of the HENRY HIGHLAND GARNET LODGE for Use and Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 2, 4, 11 , 12 and 14 (permitted use, off-street parking, required front yards, and minimum rear yard) to permit use of-401 Hancock Street for a lodge. The property, in an R-3b (residential ) district in which a lodge or private social club is not permitted, is deficient in off-street parking, front yard setbacks for two front yards, and rear yard depth. The property has been used as a legal non-conforming use as a paint store, but the proposed use would not fall under the "grandfather rights" thus established. Planning issues: Possibility of reversion to residential use. Reuse of a property which it would be economically unfeasible to re- convert to residential use, or to most others permitted in zone. Acceptability/compatibility of proposed use in location. Neighborhood/public comment: Several neighbors had questions about the proposed use. Comments were divided: some mildly favorable, some skeptical about compatibility with residential character and therefore opposed. Staff recommendation: Probably would not have unacceptable impact on neighborhood, given kind of activity in building. P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by P. Holmes , moved to recommend APPROVAL of variances in view of the fact that it has been made clear that the Lodge intends to conduct an orderly social use of the property, without a liquor license, with only the usual social meetings and those of its auxiliary, and with consideration for the desires and feelings of neighborhood. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1375: Appeal of RUTH MACERA for Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Col . 13 (minimum sideyard requirement) to permit use of 422 N. Cayuga Street for four apartments. The property is located in an R-3a (residential) district in which a multiple dwelling is permitted; however the property is &ficient in one sideyard setback, and had been changed from three apartments plus a beauty shop to four apartments without a building permit. Planning issues: Illegal conversion, intensifying residential use. Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: Approval . P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by E. Nichols, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 1376: Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, Col . 11 (required front yard) and 30.49 (enlargement of a non-conforming structure) to permit addition of a storage enclosure to 701 Spencer Road (EVAPORATED METAL FILMS) . The building, in a B-5 (business) district, is deficient in front yard setback. Planning issues: None. Neighborhood/public comment: None Staff recommendation: Approval . P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by E. Nichols, moved torecommend APPROVAL. PASSED, 3-0. 0 APPEAL 1377: Appeal of J. DAVID .OLDS, LEON A. OLDS, and ERIS 0. KIMBLE for Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 4, 6, 11 , 13 and 14 (off-street parking, and front, sid, and rear yard setbacks) to permit conversion of the one-family dwelling 207 E. Court Street to office use. The property, in a B-la (business) district where offices are permitted, is non-conforming in that it is deficient in required lot size, front, side and rear yard setbacks, and will be deficient in off-street parking for. the proposed use. (Appeals for this use were denied by BZA in January and February and a request for reconsideration based on new information was denied in, March. ) Planning issues: The P&D Board has a number of times this year recommended granting variance to permit conversion of this structure to offices. However, BZA has denied. New information: Alderman Holman made a survey of neighborhood opinion which indicated virtually no opposition to proposed use. Staff recommendation: Approval . P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by M. Sampson, stated that the Planning Board wishes to be on record as supporting conversion of this property by responsible owners for business purposes. PASSED 3-0. 15e APPEAL 1378: Appeal of RICHARD P. CLARKE for an Area Variance under Sect. 30.25, ols. 4, 7 and 12 (off-street parking, lot width and sideyard setback) to permit use of 108 Alban Street for an office. The property, in a B-2a (business) district in which the office use is permitted, is deficient in off-street parking, lot width, and one sideyard setback. Planning issues: Conversion of existing residential structure with extensive area deficiencies, for a permitted use. Elimination of residential units. Neighborhood effects, including parking. Neighborhood/public comment: None. Staff recommendation: Staff divided. Would improve appearance if converted to office by new owner. Would remove housing units. P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by P. Holmes, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED 3-0. (Alderman Nichols said since Cornell is adding student housing to its stock (in large part because the City has tightened up on zoning) the Planning Board can allow a conversion of a residence such as that on S. Albany Street. ) D A APPEAL 1379: Appeal of HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES MANAGEMENT AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES for Area Variance under Sect. 30.26 (Special Conditions for Group Care Residences) to permit occupancy of 523 S. Albany Street by a Group Care Residence. The property is in an R-2b (residential ) district in which a group care residence is permitted under special condition: specified by the Zoning Ordinance. The property is deficient in off-street parking and sideyard setbacks necessary to meet the Ordinance's special condition requirements. Planning issues: Adequacy of site for group care facility. Neighborhood impact. Impact of additional facility on neighborhood in excess of number permitted by Zoning Ordinance. Note: Applicant's assertion that the ordinance limit on number of such facilities in a planning neighborhood is seemingly incorrect: By P&D staff count, 2 of 8 already in the city are in Southside (Neighborhood 9); and this would raise the proportion to 33% vs. 25% permitted. S. Cummings felt there was insufficient information before the Board on this appeal . Neighborhood/public comment: Many neighborhood residents spoke strongly against proposal , fearful that home would be a problem in neighborhood both because of type of use and small size of lot. A few spoke in favor. Staff recommendation: Reluctant denial as it does not meet special conditions for use. P&D Board recommendation: E. Nichols, seconded by M. Sampson, moved to recommend DENIAL of variance since she said the success of group homes in Ithaca has been based on welcoming group home members into a neighborhood and community and this location does not seem so fortuitous. PASSED 3-0. APPEAL 138.0: Appeal of ROBIN RUBLE for Use and Area Variances under Sect. 30.25, Cols. 2, 7, 12, 13 and 14 (permitted uses, lot width, and setbacks for side and rear yards) to permi- construction of a building at 410 W. Green Street for an electrical motor repair and retail business. The property, in a B-2a (business) district in which a motor repair business is not a permitted use, will be deficient in lot width, setbacks for both sideyard! and yard depth if the building is constructed in the rear yard, replacing the existing barn The existing house will remain. Planning issues: Nonconforming use in residential property. Retail sales permitted, but not repair of motors. S. Cummings felt this was intensification of use in an area where there was much effort made to upgrade residences . Also, if a variance were granted it would create the potential for a different type of commercial use here in the future. Neighborhood/public comment: Applicant said he had received many favorable comments from neighborhood. Staff recommendation: Denial as shop building is so much in excess of area requirements and so close to property lines. Also, repair use not permitted in this zone. P&D Board recommendation: M. Sampson, seconded by P. Holmes, moved to recommend DENIAL. PASSED 3-0-1 (Nichols) .