HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1980-07-01 i,
I
!(I
li
i
E TABLE OF CONTENTS
;MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, ITHACA,
!NEW YORK = JULY 1, 1980
Page
APPEAL NO. 1309 Richard T. Cutia 2
206i Second Street
`APPEAL NO. 1309 Executive Session 24
J
I
APPEAL NO. 2-2-80 JVRC Enterprises (Joe' s Rest. ) 26
602 West Buffalo Street
!APPEAL NO. 2-2-80 Executive Session 29
�I
ii
APPEAL NO. 5-2-80 William T. Pritchard .(no one showed) 30
304-306 S. Cayuga Street
'APPEAL NO. 6-3-80 Albert $ Myrtle Johns 30
409 West Seneca Street
APPEAL NO. 6-3-80 Executive Session 31
i
�iAPPEAL N0. 6-4-80 Dewart, Peterson & Creighton 32
(Pine Tavern)
201 North Aurora Street
!APPEAL NO. 6-4-80 Executive Session 33
I
I
APPEAL NO. 7-1-80 Niagara Frontier Services 34
(Tops Market)
j 614 South Meadow Street
;APPEAL NO. 7-1-80 Executive Session 37
i
L
111APPEAL NO. 7-2-80 Evans Products Company 38
(Grossman' s Lumber)
I
505 Third Street
i1APPEAL NO. 7-2-80 Executive Session 40
Ii
APPEAL NO. 7-3-80 William Dillon Properties , Inc. 41
127 West State Street
i
APPEAL NO. 7-3-80 Executive Session 45
I
APPEAL NO. 1305 Normand & Laura Mainville 46
309 East Lincoln Street
Ii
((APPEAL NO. 1305 Executive Session 51
! APPEAL NO. 1306 Charles A. Fritschler (no one appeared) 52
I; 801 East State Street
ii
i
f�
li
{
i
j TABLE OF CONTENTS - JULY 1 , 1980 (continued)
i Page
�{ APPEAL NO. 1307 John Novarr & Martin Shapiro 52
�I 118 Eddy Street
I I
APPEAL NO. 1307 Executive Session 54
R
APPEAL NO. 1308 Ellen S. Baer 55
E
306-308 South Corn Street
APPEAL NO. 1308 Executive session 57
I
APPEAL NO. 1309 Richard Cutia 2
APPEAL NO. 1309 Executive Session 24
APPEAL NO. 1310 Ethel Harrell 58
611 West Green Street
APPEAL NO. 1310 Executive Session 61
APPEAL NO. 1311 Norton Electric Company, Inc. 62
316 Third Street
I
APPEAL NO. 1311 Executive Session 76
l
CERTIFICATION BY RECORDING SECRETARY 77
I
I'
i!
i
s
{
,I
I
i
i
I'
I!
i{
li
i!
s
i'
i'
I
I'
�I
II
IIf
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
�I CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
�i
JULY 1 , 1980
it
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I 'd like to call the July session of the Ithaca
it Board of Zoning Appeals to order. The Zoning Board operates under
i
jj the City Charter of the City of Ithaca and the Zoning Ordinance
I� and the Sign Ordinance of Ithaca. Tonight we have five of the
six members of the Zoning Board present:
li Dr. Martin Greenberg
I) Mr . Morris Angell
Mr. Joseph Gainey, Jr.
i' Mr. William Wilcox
Mr. Alfred Aman, Chairman
Mr. Thomas Hoard, Building Commis-
sioner & Secy to the Bd.
Mrs . Barbara Ruane, Recording Secy
i
ABSENT: Ms. Natalie DeCombray
ai
For those of you who may not be familiar with the proceedings of
�i
I the Board I ' ll briefly summarize them. We do not operate under r les
it of strict evidence, however, we do compile a record here and we d
take evidence and we ask that when you come forward to speak that
you do so only at the podium, here that is where our recording
devices are and if you have anything to say, you have to say it
from up here. Our usual approach is that the person moving for
;( the variance will speak first. We ask that you briefly state you
i
case and all the relevant facts that you feel necessary. After
j you state your case , the members of the Board may have questions
for you. When the Board is finished with their questions and you
I are finished saying what you have to say we will then ask other
f
members of the audience who have something to say on your behalf
i
to speak first and then those who wash to speak against the pro-
f
� posed variance will have their opportunity to speak and then we
move on to the next case. We take the cases upin order as they
j are listed on our agenda. Mr. Secretary may we have the first
i
i case?
i
I
I
i
i
r!
II
II
i
l
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
i
i JULY 1 , 1980
I
i
I
,! SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is appeal number 1309 :
Appeal of Richard T. Cutia for a use and
area variance under Section 30. 25 , Columns
2 , 3, 4 , 6, 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 and 14 to
permit continued operation of a produce
business at 206% Second Street (Cayuga
Foods, Inc. ) . The property is located in
an R-3b (residential) use district in
which a produce business is not permitted,
and the property is also deficient in
required off-street parking, minimum lot
size, minimum street frontage, maximum
(' lot coverage and front, side and rear yard
�i set backs . A previous appeal for this
property (Appeal No. 1302) was denied; the
appellants are requesting reconsideration
of their appeal based on new information
to be presented to the Board.
,' Now there is an error in this announcement they are not asking
l.
for permission on the addition to the existing structure.
e
, MR. CUTIA: I am Richard T. Cutia of Cayuga Foods Company and I
I
reside at 465 Main Street, Etna, New York. In my original appli-
cation to this Board questions were raised by the Board in regard
' to whether the denial of my application would result in a hardship
i
Ion me. Although my request was originally denied, this Board did
igi I ve me the opportunity to again be heard in regard to the ques-
, tion of hardship and I make this statement to supplement the recor
l
in this regard and to answer other matters and questions raised at
i
lithe present hearing. Hardship - it is clear that if my request is
; denied, I will not be able to operate my produce business at this
! location and I must then either 1) relocate or 2) close my busines .
i
; May I first say that this is my only location of any produce busi-
ness . I own no other location for my business and I have no inter
est of any sort in any other produce business at any location. Th
hardship which would be worked upon me if my request is denied is
I
two-fold: First, the value of my property would be greatly re-
, duced or my property would be rendered worthless if my request is
, denied. Second, the cost of relocating would be prohibitive in
11
lithat it is beyond my means. I could not afford to pay rent or buy
Ila new place of business . First , the value of my property would be
it
I
I' - -
li 2
�i
I;
greatly reduced. I have employed the services of a real estate
! broker to determine the present value of my property assuming that
i
; the variance were granted. Mr. Richard Shulman of Village Real
" Estate has prepared an appraisal under this assumption and that
i
appraisal is attached hereto and marked Exhibit B. The value of
my property under this appraisal is $15 ,000 . 00. I also asked Mr.
Shulman to appraise my property under the assumption that the
(variance is denied and his appraisal indicates that under this
' assumption the property is of no value to any person who wishes to
i!use the same for commercial purposes . If my request is denied, the
'i
!property can only be used for residential purposes and the building
!which is without water or plumbing and which is a barn, would have
%to be totally reconstructed for residential purposes . Mr. Shulman
i
;does find that the property would have a value to Mr. Gangl , the
Downer of the property at 206 Second Street in that the same could
li
'(be used as a barn or garage in connection with his property and
�Ithis value assuming a sale could be made would be $5 , 000 . 00. As-
�jsuming I could negotiate a sale to Mr. Gangl for $5 ,000. 00, an
i;assumption which is most unlikely, I would still lose $10, 000. 00.
IMr. Shulman is prepared to answer any question which you might have
in regard to his appraisal . Second, the cost of relocating would
4be prohibitive and beyond my means . I could not afford to pay rent
ii
,!or to buy a new place of business. I have submitted to the Board
ias Exhibit C, Schedule C for my 1974 through 1979 income tax returns
and I have prepared a summary for these years , entitled Exhibit C-1 .
(!I have also submitted a chart marked Exhibit D which shows my net
1profit from the operation of my business during these years . You
must remember that during these years , I have not had any expense
for rent or for mortgage payments . I have determined from talking
with respective landlords and commercial real estate brokers that
i
`rental costs of similar facilities is $1 . 50 per square feet per
1ear. I have 1 ,140 square feet on the first floor and 1 ,140 square
4y
feet on the second floor. In preparing my calculations I have used
I
(only the square footage on the first floor because of the inconven-
ience of the use of the second floor. 1,140 square feet x 1 . 50 per
Ii
I
I��
i'.
3 -
1sgEare feet equals $1 ,710. 00 per year divided by 12 months equals
1 $141 . 50 per month, which I might expect to pay for similar rental
i
jspace. I might add that I have been unable to find in the short t me
I have been looking, comparable space and I have included as Exhib t
F the places which I have found (both of which I might add are at
present non-conforming) . When I look at desirable commercially zoned
properties , I have found none who are talking about the small area
i
! which I need. In any event $1 . 50 per square foot is apparently th
given rate for rentals . Exhibit E indicates what my net profit fol
! the years 1974-1979 would have been had I been required to pay a
I
; rental of $1 , 710. 00 per year. An examination of this Exhibit
; indicates that I would have lost money many years if T were requir d
to pay rent. Obviously if my request is denied, I would be forced
to close my business. Exhibit G is a statement from R. W. Lomber
Refrigeration of 457 Main Street, Etna, New York which indicates
that moving my coolers would cost me the sum of $2 ,377 . 00. This
dextra moving expense would make a great hardship on me . At the
last hearing the Board questioned whether my business has expanded
(greatly since it was established. In this regard, I would state
lthat when we purchased the business in 1962 Jessie Snyder had about
146 accounts. We took over Mr. Snyder' s accounts and attached
i
hereto as Exhibit H is a photocopy of my original account book
which lists the accounts which we took over from Mr. Snyder. The
accounts indicated are about 36 in number and Mr. Snyder and sub-
sequently I , had about ten cash customers . In 1979 I had about 39
accounts and about ten cash customers. In addition thereto Exhibit
I is a copy of my accounts in a comparable period in 1979. These
Exhibits show that the number of customers in 1979 has not greatly
i�increased since 1962 . Exhibit J is a graph which indicates my
gross sales since 1974 and I believe also show that my gross sales
i
(have not substantially increased over this period. I should also
point out that between 1974 and 1979, the cost of a crate of lettuc
!has increased from $4. 00 to $8 . 00 and the increased cost g
oods
of
accounts for what increase in gross sales is shown. Exhibit K is a
1 lgrap h show-Ingthe relationship of my gross profits over the period
1
11974-1979. All of these Exhibits clearly indicate that there has n t
I
- 4 -
i
been a great increase in the volume of business from the time I
started until the present time. Regarding off street parking -
i
since the last hearing, I have torn down the shed which was in
I
front of my barn and removed the cooler which was under the shed.
II did this upon the advice of my attorney that the same was con-
;
Istructed too close to Mr. Gangl ' s rear line and for the additional
jpUrpose of adding more off street parking. With this structure
Iremoved, I can now park all of my trucks in a northerly direction
' on the area in front of my barn which was formerly occupied by
the cooler. Regarding traffic in the area - we have not increased
the number of trucks used in the business or their frequency of en
, trance and exits which averaged four times a day. This Board has
before it a petition signed by almost every resident in the area
lindicating that they have no objection to the continuation of the
business . We believe that the Board should give consideration to
the residents of the area in regard to this matter. Regarding
trespass or any damage to the property in front 206 Second Street -
there is pending in Supreme Court an action by the owner of the
1property in front against me alleging damage. I deny that I am
causing or have caused any damage to this man and ask that you
consider the affidavit of peter Levatich. and Joseph Cash attached
las Exhibit L as evidence of this fact. In any event this matter
will be resolved by the Supreme Court.
IMR. GAINEY: Do you have a copy of the petition that was submitted
ISECRETARY HOARD; For the last meeting?
i
SMR. GAINEY; Yes,
CHAIRMAN AMAN: While he is looking for that, do you have afigure
Ifor what it might cost if you were to convert this barn into a res -
Idential dwelling?
MR. CUTIA: No, I don' t but it doesn' t have plumbing or water and
it i,s just a barn - that 's all it is , it has no insulation, just
i
Ithe bottom floor.
SMR. ANGELL; What is the only way that you could get plumbing or
lj
sewage in there?,
! MR. CUTIA: Well, I talked with Mr. Hull who is a plumber and it
I I'
i
I'
i
; would come right down the driveway - right down the right-of-way
ilfrom Second Street.
I
iMR. ANGELL: Is that possible?
SMR. CUTIA: I haven' t pursued that yet but we are having a lot of
! trouble over the right-of-way and it really isn't settled yet - what
�; is the right-of-way. As far as I am concerned, I know what it is ,
but it has to be settled in court.
I
MR. ANGELL: Well , what I am getting at is do you have a legal rig1t
! to go down through that right-of-way with your plumbing and sewer?
! MR. CUTIA: I don' t know.
I!I
RRYAN: May T answer that? Probably not. The deed that origin-
! ally
ri in! ally
created the easement contained the following language that th
�isaid parties of the first part hereby convey to the parties of the
second part the perpetual right of a driveway for horses and wagon
along the southside of the premises convey to the parties of the
! first part by the heirs of Stephen Rice . That is a driveway for -
jwe maintain that that can be expanded into a driveway for motor
i
vehicles at this time and that we have gained a prescriptive right
Ito do so by twenty-five years of use . But the Courts are - I thin
� it is quite clear that it is very difficult for us to expand that
+right without the permission of the owner of the house in front
206 .
MR. ANGELL: That' s what I am getting at you have . , .
,MR. RYAN: Water.
I
�MR. ANGELL: Something going to the State, right? That you have t
have water and sewer - sanitary facilities in there?
MR. GUTTA: No, we do not.
MR. ANGELL: I thought I recalled that from the last. . .
IDR. GREENBERG: We were given to believe that you were not conform-
Ming with the Code of the Department of Health of the State of New
York.
MR. CUTIA: No, they have no jurisdiction over my business whatsoever.
DR. GREENBERG; Well , it' s not the department of Health, then, it
Itis some department of the State
i
SMR. CUTIA: Well it ' s the Department of Agricul ture that has the
i
�i
I'
6 -
i
I;
jurisdiction over me and I passed their examinations and their -
!1any of their requirements and for the Federal. Yes , it is inspect( d
,: yearly by both Departments .
i,
DR. GREENBERG: Well , as I say, I - we both clearly remember that
I
ewe were told, whether it was fact or not - we heard it from other
sources - that you were given direction to have facilities of wate
land sewage.
( MR. CUTIA: No, that was by the city - the city inspector and the
` Health Department of the City, not the State or Federal .
DR. GREENBERG: Whatever it is , you have been directed by an agenc
ito have water and sewage on your facility?
MR. CUTIA: Well , it was through the Building Department, right.
i
JDR. GREENBERG: So, you are in violation in that respect?
IMR. CUTIA: No, I am pursuing other avenues on that. I have Mr.
Hull and myself working together trying to bring this water and
jsewer in from another street.
1DR. GREENBERG: So the question that was answered about a residenc
which you replied was impossible because it didn't have water and
; sewage, actually that obstacle has to be solved regardless of
; whether you have a residence or . . .
MR. CUTIA: Right, but the logical way would be to come down the
I
i
right-of-way in going to another street I have to - I would then
( have to . . .
SDR. GREENBERG: I am not arguing that - I am just asking because the
i
question was asked of you fairly directly about pursuing the ques-
tion of a residence and you replied that because it doesn't have
I
Iwater and sewage a residence would be difficult and now you are
telling us that as a matter of fact you have to consider getting
Iwater and sewage in there.
, MR. CUTIA: Well, that would be for my own convenience, I believe .
I
I
' DR. GREENBERG: I think you are a little evasive in the . . .
IMR. GAINEY; Wait a minute - weren' t you directed - didn't you jus
i
tell us that you were directed by the City?
MR. CUTIA - I was written up by the City but . . .
IMR. GAINEY: Okay, what did they - let's clear the air here were
s
i
�f
- 7 -
Ij
i'
is
Ii
you directed to put water and sewer in there by the city?
IIMR. CUTIA: No, it was just written up that we did not have water
' or sewer in there.
MR. GAINEY: Okay, now where does it go from there?
i
MR. CUTIA: That ' s it.
SECRETARY HOARD: Maybe I can clarify that a little bit. Because
i
�ithis existed before 1958 - before the State Building Construction
! Code was adopted - it is grandfathered as far as the Building Con-
I
'Istruction Code goes . . .
IMR. GAINEY: So there is nothing pending against . . .
SECRETARY HOARD: We cited it as not having it - enforcement is
janother question.
SMR. CUTIA: But if it is not possible to get the water through the
,i
fright-of-way I do have another avenue to take - I do want water
and sewer.
IDR. GREENBERG: Is there any other agencies Tom, besides yours , that
I
' finds this lack of water and sewage in violation? Besides the
Building Department? Does the Health Department of the City or the
jCounty find it in violation?
ii SECRETARY HOARD: Well I have received no notification from the
( Health Department that this is in violation. Normally they send
,
Mme a copy of violations .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: In any event, as T understand it though, aside from
possible violation of the Health Code or whatever, the issue is what
about that piece of property solely the property - it doesn't hae
i� any value without this variance or , alternatively, are we or are y u
i
put in such a position as to have to invest such an enormous sum t ),
in effect , build a residence where one doesn' t exist or convert a
barn into a residence. That constitutes undue hardship. That is
what I see the issue in this case just a piece of property wha
there
can it be used for can we get- is / a rate of return that you
can get from that property which will be at least useful to provid
something to the owner and if not , has a hardship been shown?
MR. SHULMAN: I 'd like to speak to that question. My name is Dick
Shulman, I am the principal broker for Village Real Estate in
i
l
8 -
li
;;Tompkins County and have been a licensed real estate broker for
'lover ten years. I was hired to do an appraisal , independent appraisal
of this property under a two-fold guideline - what would it be wort
cif this variance were denied - it would have absolutely no value at
fall. But as a commercial use it has a value and if you want to talk
about rate of return - if an investor spent $15 ,000 on this building -
!he would want a rate of return of an average of, say, 120 , okay? -
Isomething greater than he could get from a lending institution. If
i
you take 12% as the rate of return you would come up with $1. 50
jsquare foot rental for this property. This is one of the ways that
i
W ve reached the valuation that I did. It is a very modest building
it' s my opinion that given the location of that building and its
i
;!restrictions because of the tight land situation that I couldn' t
recommend to Mr. Cutia or any owner to convert that building to
!residential use - I think the cost would be greater than one could
lever expect to get out of that property being a residential use. I
does however have a value as a garage and whether the owner in the
front , you know, he would be the obvious user - but I presume it
could be rented for car storage. I can tell this committee that the
�javerage square foot rental for dead storage space - that ' s unheated,
4
good, dry, space - is a minimum of $1 . 50 a square foot. If you are
( talking a new structure or something certainly more modern than this
iit would not be unusual to pay $2 . 50 for a storage space. Does any-
one have any, questions they would like to ask? Thank you.
I
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions from the Board? (none) Any-
!one to speak in favor of this requested variance? (no one) Anyone
�to speak against this requested variance?
l
MR. GANGL: I 'm Leo Gangl, I 'm the attorney of record for my son,
�lWalter Gangi , who owns the property in front of this barn that we
are talking about where the produce business is run from. I have
i
an attorney of counsel , Martin Luster, who is supposed to be here
�Itonight but he isn't here yet and, due to ill health, I had re
'quested his assistance to be here and resent our side of this be
� p
!cause our son couldn' t be here either. However, I believe the Boar
I�has before it the affidavit of my son with many exhibits that we will
i
is
I!
ii
9 -
present at this time? And I think that these are again very appro o ,
; showing that this is nothing but a rehash of the old appeal the or' -
Iginal appeal , to the Board which was denied. It has been in court
!! they have been heard and what is presented here today - I was just
ihanded the paper here the position of Mr. Cutia and also the affi -
davit of Mr. Shulman and I don't think it adds anything whatsoev r.
The main thing to consider here are the arguments given in Walter'
affidavit and previously presented - we did request that all pap rs
The before you - and had been submitted before . In addition we hav
many new exhibits and if you look at the actual survey made before
IMr. Cutia got the ownership -- that was made by Carl Crandall who was
I
the dean of all surveyors so considered by all attorneys around lerE
` and that was made many years before Mr. Cutia got the ownership an
, it shows right-o£-ways , etc. You heard Mr. Cutia describe how he
I
! bulldozed out the entire back yard in back of the house and since
I
then that he had used - you also saw that he used two trucks side
, by side which he couldn' t do before - he now has a new survey,
Ian additional the exact same survey showing the position of those
I
; two trucks - parked there and since the hearing at that time - t ey
continued to be parked there and also prior to the bulldozing this
I
! was impossible. There were big trees there - there was one very
I
big I believe it was a hickory tree and maple trees , willow trees ,
etc. that he could not possibly have parked his cars there. He went
ahead and , he described to this Board - and he would have us believe
that he had only requested the bulldozer to bulldoze out the piece
there to put that additional shed for another cooler - in front of
This own property, but he went to the line of my son' s property and -
Iby mistake that bulldozer had bulldozed the whole thing out - right
lto the edge of the house.. Today we have an indication that Mr.
IiCutia would like to go across that right-of-way because for horses
! and wagons way back and still is - they have obtained no prescrip-
I
hive right through any court whatsoever and that is quite misleadi g
i
' gentlemen R that is not true, that is for the courts to decide , t1lat
lis not for them to bring up here and argue they have a prescriptiv
i
fright -- they do not. And the matter of use of the driveway for
Ii
I'
10 -
I I
i'
'; parking other than for loading or unloading purposes - is a court
i
I; order - a court order that was affirmed by the appellate division
I;
!'land that they can't do and if you go out there I 'm sure right now
'; that same red truck is still parked there and it continues to be
parked there over nights , etc. and Mr. Cutia has made an appeal to
•l
�jthis Board here that he has off-street parking for his trucks . He
I
does not. Tonight he says he can park them northerly - the other
,way because he removed the shed and he cannot park his two trucks
i
! there - just look at the width of the property that he has in front
I
' of his barn and the width of those trucks they show ten feet and
i
Ii_f you add the width of the mirrors you can't possibly park two trucks
I
Ithat way either - so we are being mislead here gentlemen. Again a d
again we've got this , we've got that , etc. - let ' s give us a var" -
iance here to continue truck operation and deprive his business such
has has been done here. Now it' s very misleading. I don't know abcut
i
' the figures about his predecessor about Mr. Snyder 's business -
lbut I do know this - that Mr. Snyder didn' t use any trucks - the size
of these trucks that he has been using. He didn't do the kind of
i
lbusiness that Mr. Cutia started doing in 1973 when he bulldozed this
I
out . He didn't have the great big tractor trailer trucks come in
�Ithere, etc. that Mr. Cutia has. The thing is 'gentlemen that we are
trying to mislead the issue the real issues here the real laws
I
Ithat the rules of variance that apply here and they do not permit this
type of damages to ones neighbor to his property and they bring out
about thesetwoengineers or, whoever they were, about the basemen
,
damage - that isn' t before you, we 've haven't argued it at all h
i
tried to throw that in - see Gangl has no damage at all his shad
trees were knocked out - his whole property was taken over and con-
i
tinually in violation of court orders that he not trespass across
i
i
Ithe back yard of Walter Gangl, that he not park his trucks on the
!driveway for any except legitimate loading and unloading purposes
and also the spreading of this garbage there is rotten garbage
i
fall over and you know how he made the big appeal about how this
'i
lisn't being done and we exaggerated all these things - since the last
time you gentlemen heard this you have that beautiful color here -
!i
is
ii
II
I�
�1
-
I
fall the different types of color in one box - I think you've got
! about seven colors of vegetables of all kinds in open containers -
li
' violation of an order - violation of sanitary codes , etc. and toma
! toes spread over my son' s property, etc. - it ' s a continuing situa
i
Ition gentlemen, it was something that Mr. Snyder never did and it
has nothing to do but prescriptive rights has nothing whatsoever t
i
Ido before this Board nor do any of the court - the court matters
` that are before the Board - it has nothing to do here . . .
; CHAIRMAN AMAN: I understand Mr. Gangl - that ' s my understanding o
I'
this case - that those issues would not be relevant so it shouldn' t . . .
i
MR. GANGL: Well they were raised by opposition . . .
1CHAIRMAN AMAN: I understand but I think the focus is what could
this property be used for . . .
MR. GANGL: Well , I think that' s only one matter that might come
before this Board properly - I think the big matters are changing
!the character of the community and, of course , being in violation cf
1
orders and property owners and so on, you know, other property
,owners , and so on are predominate, I believe more important than
I
the issue as to what can it be used for - I think that long ago if
Mr. Cutia had been in a position that he would have even talked with
i�us, you know, and it isn' t the other wary around like they claim, you
i
(know, we have tried to talk with them, I did, my son did and so on,
Iwe have no rights , we have to be content with the so-so rental of
the property that it would bring much more .
IMR. GAINEY: Excuse me let' s not carry this on forever. Do you
have any neighbors?
MR. GANGL: I didn' t know I was carrying it on forever - I didn' t
know who was chairman here. . .
MR. GAINEY: Well I have been trying to get your attention . . .
GANGL: I didn' t see you, I am sorry - I was looking at . . . I
apologize
i
iMR. GAINEY: Go through the chairman like you are supposed to I
don't want to do something here
�MR. GANGL; Please.
I
CHAIRMAN AMAN; Mr. Gainey, ask your question.
I�
�I
�i
12 -
i
i!
SMR. GAINEY: Are you ready now?
fMR. GANGL: Yes.
�IMR. GAINEY: Okay. We have a petition from Mr. Cutia with neighbors
iJn favor. Do you have anything - with any neighbors against?
i
IMR. GANGL: No, I think we could - we could obtain more than he has .
�jMR. GAINEY: Because you were just speaking that the neighbors are
concerned about the welfare of their property.
IMR. GANGL: I never said such a thing.
IMR. GAINEY: You just now did - I think we could play the tape back . .
MR. GANGL: I said my son' s property.
IMR. GAINEY: No, you said that the neighborhood . . .
DR. GREENBERG: Can you address the question that was raised in
regard to conversion of the property to residential use and the
I
first question was , was there is it possible to bring in water an
(sewer lanes and then somehow it got off the track. Apparently I
think it was part of your son' s affidavit - there were violations i
regard to health codes . . .
i
�R. GANGL: That is correct that came from t . .
r
R. GREENBERG: Could you elaborate on this or do you know the par-
lliculars?
(( R. GANGL: Well I don' t have any of our papers here because I relied
bn the -• Mr. Luster being here tonight, however, I do recall - I was
i
ere last time - because of ill health my son presented it then and
do remember that he had presented to you exhibits . . .
R. GREENBERG: If it were in fact offered to convert to a residenc ,
I
would you permit the water and sewer lines?
R. GANGL: Ah, definitely not.
R. GREENBERG; What?
R. GANGL: Definitely not because we would only make our condition
i
orse, you know, if he had water and sewer, you know, he would ex-
and even more .
R. GREENBERG: No, if he were no longer permitted to use the facility
commercially but wanted to make a residence out of it , would you
hen permit the water and sewer lines to cross your right-of-way?
s
R. GANGL: Well , I would put it this way, sir, that if initially
I
i
I
I;
13 -
; when we tried to talk with - but we couldn' t because the sidewalks
li
(` were destroyed and the back lots knocked out and now as far as
' making it into residential for the same person that we have now ha
h
is struggle with for many years and for many years we 've complained
�! to this department, to the City Building Commissioner, etc. about
i
( the violations and it has been a long struggle and much has happenEd
jsince then and we are now very close , of course , to court decision -
�Ithere are matters pending before the court right now as to his bei g
I
in contempt of court for violations of the court order and very so n
II expect there is going to be a decision on the damages on the
�ibalance of the things that have to be decided - including his final
! counter-claim that he made which. is in there that they have a pre-
Iscriptive right that will have to be determined. But these
�I
( matters I don' t think have any bearing in this thing but as far as
I
(giving him a right to if he had asked at that time, can we convert
to a residential and so on, I think we would have been most happy
Ito oblige him. At this time, under the circumstances you have so
much to weigh because of our experiences with him on so many other
I
things that what would happen then you know what I mean you might
(still take the whole back yard for all the parking for how ever many
units he might put in there and so on, you know, we would be very
jhesitant. We are very in other words - not very trusting,
lMR. GAINEY: Mr, Chairman? Are you willing, if restrictions were
set as to the size of vehicles to be driven in this so called right-
of-way, if it i,s clarified as a right-of-way, would you be willing
Ito go along with restrictions as to the size of the vehicles that
i
could be driven up and down this driveway or . . . ?
MR, GANGL You mean, to give them permission to do so?
IMR. GAINEY: Yes.
MR. GANGL; No, we wouldn' t. You see this is a point to be decided
by the court as to whether they have the right to use any motor
vehicles whatsoever and we are going to go by that,
MR. GAINEY; Qkay, how long have you owned the property?
IMR. GANGL; My son?
IMR. GAINEY: Yes
I
- 14 -
� MR. GANGL: I don' t know exactly - I think . . .
; CHAIRMAN AMAN: I think it was 73.
i
lMR. GANGL: No it was before 73. 71 perhaps because it was several
1'
l! years after he owned it that the bulldozing took place, I remember
i
that.
SMR. GAINEY: And Mr. Cutia has owned it since 62? Your son bought
! the property in 70 , 71 or 72 somewheres around there?
MR. GANGL: Well at least 71 , I believe, or possibly earlier, I
don' t know. Mr. Cutia owned it with relatives at first but still
i
he had ownership at that time . . .
MR. GAINEY: Okay, so you only had to deal with Mr. Cutia - you've
never dealt with the previous owners?
i
MR. GANGL: My son didn' t, no. I 've had some dealings with the
,
prior owners, yes .
! MR. GAINEY: Not this location though?
, MR. GANGL: No.
SECRETARY HOARD: A couple of things - Mr. Luster did send some paler
but they arrived too late to distribute to the Board members .
iMR. GANGL: When did you receive them?
,
; SECRETARY HOARD: Yesterday. Everything is distributed the week
jbefore and your son knew that.
I
MR. GANGL: Well , may I ask how come Mr. Cutia presented these
;; papers tonight?
fSECRETARY HOARD; You can present anything at the meeting but to e -
lpect the city to distribute things like this on short notice - we
' just can' t do it and your son knew that. The last time we did it
' for him we went ahead and did it but we had time to do it so this
! time we didn' t do it because it arrived after things - several day
, after things had been distributed, But the point I wanted to bring
jup there is much discussion about converting this building to
I
liresidential. It cannot be converted to residential under the
�ibuilding code i,t ` is too close to existing property - you do not have
Ilth.e separation distance separation for fire purposes and fresh-
lair
reshlair and light, and other purposes that are required. So the exist
i
ling building cannot be converted without moving the walls back.
I
i
,
i
I;
I
I�
I11 - 15 -
I
ii
iMR. ANGELL: In other words the property is worth zero.
G?
!ISECRETARY HOARD: Well I 'm not qualified to say what the property
�I
his worth but as the building code enforcer of the city I would say
that . . .
MR. GANGL: Mr. Chairman, could I use that paper that was submitte ?
SECRETARY HOARD: Certainly.
! MR. GANGL: And use it here for my presentation. It is our claim
I
,,, that this second appeal is legally insufficient and improper and f ils
to give any valid reason for a new appeal. The applicant had his
; appeal dated April 18 , 1980 with arguments before both the Ithaca
! Board of Planning and Development and before the City of Ithaca
; Board of Zoning Appeals which both denied his same request for a
i
jvariance. This attempted new appeal was merely a rehash of that
' old appeal without evidentuary proof and is again based on false,
lIsham, frivolous , misleading and irrelevant statements that cannot
ljorm the basis for granting any variance. We incorporate by
I�
, reference all the papers, materials and proceedings heretofore had
, on said first appeal dated April 18 , 1980 by claimant Richard T.
a
Cutia. This Board has a statutorily limited to the powers given ii
1! by law and it is not a general court of equity - the only issue bef re
I,
!; the Board is undue hardship which must be established by evidence
I
i
land proof and must meet the following three tests : a) applicant
must negate any reasonable return from a permitted use ; b) appli-
cant must show characteristics of the land that make it unique and
i
unsuited to a permitted use and c) applicant must show that the
�i
'; requested use will not change the essential character of the neigh
jborhood. Applicant has utterly and completely failed to meet any
�f
�lof those three tests. Applicant ' s appeal claims both strict appli
i
' cation of the Ordinance would produce great hardship on the appli-
licant that he would have to close his business . That is not relevant.
; Applicant' s self inflicted hardship fails to meet any of the tests
ii
! to constitute undue hardship within the applicable law - it is irr -
i
' levant to the issue.
'11I
MR. WILCOX: Sir? Could you explain to me in your thinking why th t
could not be relevant? How somebody who loses his business - that
I!
i!
i'
(i
- 16 -
: is not relevant or a hardship?
SMR. GANGL - Well because he has created this business over a period
of years by making it many times - increasing the size of it many
' times over - since 1973 it has expanded many, many times what it
was before then. And, therefore , it is his self - if he now has
; this kind of a business he is trying to salvage here - it ' s his ow
i
I
self inflicted condition and we don't think that we should be held
to let him park now on this lot that he bulldozed out and take ove
`' that and now take over maybe with water and sewer over our propert ,
too.
I
SMR. WILCOX: Could I ask one more question?
MR. GANGL: Yes.
MR. WILCOX: You said that he does not have prescriptive right i
that your opinion or is that the judgement of the court who is try-
ing the case?
IMR. GANGL: I thought I made it clear that that is to be decided b
!the court. That is only an allegation by them at this point - it
has not been decided that part of it hasn' t . .
IMR. WILCOX: Okay, it hasn' t been decided.
MR. GANGL: But the court order with- the injunctions - that' s . . .
MR. WILCOX; Yes , I understand that part.
SMR. GANGL: May I continue? The claimant ignores the fact that he
4has damaged and continues to damage Walter Gangl ' s property by the
i
loperation of his business. That is relevant. He ignores the fact
Hthat his business operation has increased many times since he
I
lacquired ownership, that also is relevant. He ignores the fact that
Ihis operation expanded for the use of mammoth tractor trailer truck
i
and large nine ton produce trucks F- that is relevant. He ignores the
{fact that he bulldozed the entire back yard of Walter Gangl and
I
Chas and continues to trespass over and park thereon - that is
!relevant. He ignores the fact that his heavy truck traffic des-
Itroyed the concrete sidewalk by pounding it into the ground and that
�he continues to create chuck holesin the driveway to collect puddles
lof water - those are relevant. He ignores the fact that the pressure
of his illegal truck traffic over Walter Gangl ' s driveway has damag d
I!
�i
is
j - 17 -
ii
and continues to damage the basement wall of that house - that would
! be relevant. He ignores the fact that the pressure his illegal truck
i
( traffic over the driveway has damaged and continues to damage the
i
IIhouse itself - that is relevant. He ignores the fact that his gar
I
lbage and produce waste has been and continues to spread over the
i
( land - that is relevant . He ignores the fact that he keeps produc
i
�Iwaste and garbage in open containers - that is relevant. He ignor s
the fact that his illegally built cooler shed added further surfac
(water on the back lawn - he still continues to do so in spite of
i
, taking down the top structure - that is relevant the concrete still
,! exists - it runs off the barn, off of the concrete and it crushes
lion top of Walter Gangl ' s land. He ignores the fact that he and
I
i
his employees harass Walter Gangl and prevent him from even enter
ding his own back yard or to go into the driveway - that is also
i
relevant . He ignores the fact that he does not have the required
i
(sanitary facilities to operate a produce business and tries to argue
ithat he has water via hose which he said last time, from a neighbo
I
to hose out his coolers and the water runs off where to - the only
iplace it can run is Walter Gangl 's property, Freezing winter weather
i
would certainly make the use of such a hose impossible - that' s
relevant. He has no water in the winter time how could he have -
at least when it is cold and freezing? He ignores . . .
a
IMR. WILCOX, Excuse me. Mr. Chairman n this is relevant to the court
lease that they are pursuing maybe but is this relevant to the BZA
i
here?
!CHAIRMAN AMAN; if there is any information that addresses the
i
�Ifinancial issue - we' d like to hear that but we have that other
if
' information well in hand - the other meeting was not that long ago ,
iJMR. GANGL; 1 would like a ruling from you, Mr. Chairman, as to
((whether it is relevant as the man asked.
jCHAIRMAN AMAN: We don' t operate by strict rules of evidence .
MR. GANGL; I realize that .
iCHAIRMAN AMAN; We will hear you out and try to understand what the
ientire
case . . , but the focus of this proceeding is undue hardship
i
and the economic question as to what that property is worth if then
!is no variance. Can it be used in any way which would be a permiss 'bl(
i'
i
I
- 18 -
is
i
use and . . . that ' s the focus of this proceeding. The surrounding
; complex I don't think are particularly relevant to that issue but
in any event we've heard them - we've believe me, we 've - we have
that well in mind.
,MR. GANGL: Well I respectfully disagree , sir. Anyway I would lik
to say that this all - all of these matters and there are many mor
things that I was going to say here - they go to the issue of the
i
character of the community - they affect the character of the com-
Imunity and if they only affect Walter Gangl ' s property and his use
of his house which was originally the property that gave this
right-of-way and sold out the back piece, etc. it did not say that
i
I1you could take more and more whenever you need it.
II�!CHAIRMAN AMAN: I understand and I am not ruling something out of
i
evidence or in evidence and as to the character of the neighborhood
I agree with that - what we 've heard has some relevance to that but
, we've heard it before and all that I am saying is that if you can
edit your remarks we 'd appreciate it.
MR. GANGL: Alright, I would like to take the exhibits that are her
;land submit them and describe them first and submit them if I may? I
`understand this was not accepted?
SECRETARY HOARD: It was not distributed.
not
CHAIRMAN AMAN: It was distributed, it was accepted.
MR. GANGL: It is accepted?
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Yes, it is a part of the record.
MR. GANGL: In that case I simply want to call attention to a few
! more things and leave it be. It might require a little explanation -
there is - I can show it to the Board here - this is a survey by
Carl Crandall and the survey has indicated as August 1 , 1957 - quit
a number of years before Mr. Cutia got the property in the back and
that shows the ten foot right-of--way, it shows that the lot - both
Mots being only forty-four foot wide and I think the measurement of
jthe distance in front of his barn is roughly about seventeen feet -
i
it could be a little bit more - 17-18 feet and Mr. Cutia made the
statement how he can park northerly - face his trucks northerly on
that seventeen feet and these trucks are ten feet apiece you know,
i
I
1i 19
'lhe couldn' t possibly do it without going across the back yard. No
the exhibit 29 which is the next one shows the same survey but it
r
shows how he has drawn and the papers have been submitted today show
.!the same thing - how he draws the line once he gets by the house
�i
corner here and he swings northerly and goes up to his alleged door -
the northernmost door. That is a door for well - people passing
s
'tthrough., you know - there is a larger door south of there. Now he
wants that right-of-way now to go up to there - now, if you take the
rue measurements of where that door is it would be still northerly
of where he had it - where he has it. So it is a little confusing
,you have got to consider there is probably another four feet or so
land then if you look at the location of the various trees that are
i
here and they are there - they are exactly shown, very closely
!shown where they were because I recollect it - I saw it and I saw
the work in progress when they cleared out and they left the rose
I1bushes, and so on and planted the lawn in there - put the hay and
so on before the bulldozing and almost immediately when that was
done was when it was bulldozed. You have a hickory tree - five inches
thick here that' s way over - close to the ten foot right-of-way an
where the one truck was parked constantly - right smack in the middle
I
Hof that truck, almost - the front part of it , was a maple tree , four
�linches thick that was dozed out. He couldn' t have put his trucks
f
in there. There is another maple tree right in the line here where
he claims his right-of-way goes now and that is the first time he
ever alleged that right-of-way, he's never alleged it in court or
anywhere else.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Mr. Gainey?
SMR. GANGL: Now - I 'm sorry.
�MR. GAINEY: This survey - 1957 is the one you are using, right?
MR. GANGL: Right.
MR. GAINEY: It says that there is a ten foot right-of-way.
MR. GANGL: That's right.
MR. GAINEY: But we are arguing something about there is no right-
I
Iof-way?
!MR. GANGL: No, we concede that this right-of-way exists , we always
r
I
!I
20 -
!
Ihave. All the way back.
SMR. GAINEY: But not to the north?
; MR. GANGL: Not to the north and also that it has limited use -
lthis is what we argue too and, of course we have been upheld in
! court now - you know the fact that he can' t use our right-of-way
i
there for parking except for legitimate loading and unloading - but
the is doing it - the red truck which was broken down and allegedly
! hauled away and he is going to replace it with a smaller one is back
lithere
a k
there - it is parked right there now for a long time . And anyway,
! since the last hearing the red truck for awhile there was taken ou
ji
land the blue truck was the only one in use for awhile . However it
s
was only a short while and then the red truck was back too and the
only thing that happened was they reversed positions in their park
ling - they continue to be so parked. And now I 'd like to show you
e
some more exhibits here, exhibit 30 - this is all since the last
!hearing. On June 15 , 1980 pictures were taken showing the two trucks
; side by side, parked as they have been before and they were parked
i
Ifor over a period of - I think three or four days at that point and ,
1!
!without being moved - that ' s over a weekend - a long weekend. Then ,
exhibit
he ,
exhibit 31 shows the remains of his shed that he took down and open
garbage containers . Exhibit 32 shows red tomatoes on my son' s back
Pot and exhibit 33 shows an open container of garbage that is many
!colors and you can identify some of them rotten but oranges and
lettuce and cabbage and various things like that and that 's defin-
itely, the open containers clear violation and, of course, we claim,
you know what I mean, it affects our property and the use of our
property and the character of the community - we're part of the
(community. Now exhibit 34 is another picture of the same box at a
different angle - from a different viewpoint and exhibit 35 shows
!other box and crates that are open. Exhibit 36 shows right along
the line of the house that the red truck is barely visible there
lit' s completely off the ten foot right-of-way because the right-of-
Tway i,s ten foot as the survey shows with the sidewalk still intact
;and, of course, regardless of whether he pounded the sidewalk into
ji
Hthe ground or what - you know what I mean - he was limited to up to
i
21 -
li
t�
; that edge of that sidewalk we have maintained. Now there are many
J
lother - I won' t go into detail except that there are new pictures
�' taken of other areas too and so on, you know, about the same time
land additional to see that over a three day period this continued
this condition of garbage and the condition of the trucks so parked -
I
IIso we have a continuing condition over there that we maintain and
claim affects the character of our property and we are part of the
I
11community and affects the character of the community and that is
lour main contention which we think is the main issue here. If we
, can say that because of hardship this man should have the right
of a variance to the detriment of this house here - the owner of
{
; this house and the property owner of this house - then I would
I
( like to know what kind of a law that is . So gentlemen, there are
l
lseveral more here the one shed has been removed - he claims that
he removed that shed because it was too close to Walter Gangl ' s
property - he has made statements under oath and affidavits that h
� - the city told him he didn't have to get any variance to build it
e
jand then later on, of course, here before the Board and so on, you
i
! know what I mean, he has never claimed that , you know.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank you Mr. Gangl , unless you have . . .
iIMR. GANGL: I have finished. I do submit that the present appli-
! cation is merely a rehash - it doesn't show anything new and we
request that it -- the application be denied. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank you, for purposes of the record, we have not
ruled out of evidence any of this discussion at all - it is all
+ part of the record and the Board will accord it what weight it
deems appropriate but it all part of the record. Is there
anyone else wishing to speak against the variance? Yes .
MS. FRASIER: I 'm a resident of that neighborhood.
! CHAIRMAN AMAN: Could you state your name and address?
i
IMS. FRASIER: My name is Patricia Frasier and I live at 108 Second
Street. I don' t know exactly where that place is I 've been by
; that place a lot of times but I haven't seen it really - I haven' t
I3
( seen a number - when I was looking at it, you know, I wasn' t aware
i
;i
well nobody
of it anyway - but nobody passed a petition around -
I
i
- 22 -
ii
jasked me to sign any petition for one thing and for another thing
lithere is a P & C already at the end of that street and there is
; cars that go through Cascadilla Street, through Second Street to g
Ito the P & C and if there weren' t the P F C and, of course, it use
Ii
Ito be the A & P before the P & C - if there weren't that P $ C
i
there wouldn't be so many cars going through that street. Okay.
So let' s say you've got this produce business well that 's going
I
to be more cars and then not only will it be cars but it will be
trucks and I live at 108 and I think this is 2062? Like I say, I
haven' t seen it it must be hidden or it must be on the other
Iiside of the street but it' s there and as a resident I do think
I
i that it would be more noise per people living there and I wouldn't
1 like it. I just think it would be better not to have it.
I'
IMR. ANGELL When did you become aware that this business was . . .
MS. FRASIER: I haven' t - you know like I saw it in the paper an
i
i
1I noticed that number but I didn' t remember - when I went by the
place, I couldn't remember the number and I know its the 200 block
Wand I see a spot with a lot of vegetables - is that it? Is that
i�
; where it ' s at? There ' s a garden I can't really find it you
�i
know - that ' s what 's funny.
MR. ANGELL: It ' s just you saw it in the paper, you were not aware
,, that it was there?
i
SIMS. FRASIER: I wasn't aware that it was there, right. And I 'm
istill not aware that it ' s there - I always forget the number, but
iI know that you are talking about it - and having read it in the
papers and it caused some problems , And I don't know why its
( hidden - and I haven' t seen it but I haven't , you know, that' s
i
! funny but that 's the way it is ,
( CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank you. Anyone else?
IMR. RYAN: Might I have just a few minutes?
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Very briefly.
IMR, RYAN: Just one minute or so , please .
! CHAIRMAN AMAN: I think we've aired this case quite fully.
IMR. RYAN: The only thing that I feel constrained to come up here
l
labout and I' ll only take a minute is the reference has been made
ii to that map that Mr. Gangl referfed_io . I want to say that that
!I
I'
i
-
23
I'
;
; map appeared in the chain of title of Mr. Gangl - the house in
; front - it never - there is no map in the chain of title of Mr.
I
Cutia that limits the driveway to ten feet. The only limitation
�Ithat he had is the limitation that was originally contained in the
( deed back in 1912 which said a right-of-way along the south edge
°
of the property - the ten feet description came in 1957 in a deed
°[ in one of Mr. Gangl ' s predecessor's titles .
I
ICHAIRMAN AMAN: And that' s in litigation?
IMR. RYAN: Yes , and that ' s all in litigation and it has nothing,
really, to do with this matter.
I
MR. GAINEY: When is that supposed to come before the courts?
IMR. RYAN: Well, we are - I think this summer. I believe that it
I
! will be tried this summer. The only other thing that I wanted to
point out was that the business has been in effect for twenty-five
i
! years - that' s how long it has been in there and the lady that
came forward didn' t even know where it was and she thought if you
I
let them have a produce business it will increase the traffic
11well this business has been there for twenty-five years . Mr. Gang
estates that two trucks are parked in there. They have been parked
two trucks have been parked in there for twenty-five years . We ar
not asking here to increase a burden on the neighborhood, we are
asking to continue the situation that has existed for twenty-five
years . That ' s all I have.
° CHAIRMAN AMAN; Thank you very much.
MR. GANGL: That is completely false.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Mr. Gangl - this could go on all night.
&R. GANGL: Twenty-five years R he didn' t see th.e property there
I�
and I did, i saw it when this map was . . .
(! CHAIRMAN ALAN: There are obvious conflicts in the record and we 'll
i
! simply have to deal with- that . Thank you. If there are no furthe
i
(, statements for or against, we 'll call the next case .
I
i
i,
I
,
- 24 -
i
Ii BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
JULY 110 1980
EXECUTIVE SESSION
i
I
APPEAL NO. 1309
CThe Board considered the request for a use and area variance under
I
Section 30. 25 , Columns 2 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 and 14 to permit
continued operation of a produce business at 206% Second Street.
! The property is located in an R-3b use district in which a produce
i
( business is not permitted, and the property is also deficient in r( -
Ilquired off-street parking, minimum lot size, minimum street front-
E
�lage, maximum lot coverage and front , side and rear yard set backs .
' CHAIRMAN AMAN: I move that the Board grant the variance.
In light of new evidence having been pre-
sented, the Board determined to reconsider
i
this appeal .
MR. ANGELL: I second the motion.
VOTE: 4 Yes ; 1 No ; 1 Absent .
i
FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) The appellant has shown that undue hardshi
i
would result if the requested variance wer
1
jnot granted. The structure in question
would have no value if it were to be used as
I
a residence. The structure is a barn whit
has no heat, water or insulation and would
�! have to be completely rebuilt . In addition
I
the structure is located too close to the
property lines and even if it could be
j turned into a residence, it would violate
1 applicable fire codes.
2) The business carried on in this barn has been
I
carried on for over twenty-five C25) years
ing
I' The primary complaint neighbor whose house
is adjacent to the right-of-way leading to
I
I
the barn bought this property with full
i knowledge of the business that was being
I
i carried on.
,
I
- 25 -
i
3) The character of the neighborhood will not
JI be substantially changed. The business ha
Ai
�i
been in place for over twenty-five (25)
years and though it has grown somewhat it
i
has not grown to a point where the char-
acter of the neighborhood would be adversely
changed by continuing business in its pres nt
form.
4) With regard to the truck traffic generated
i
by this business, there has been no substa -
i
j tial complaint from the neighbors other then
j the one adjacent home owner . In fact ther
i
was a petition in support of the variance
from a substantial number of the neighbors
0
5) In short, the Board found that there were
special circumstances and unique condition
applying to the building in question which
do not apply generally to land or building ..
in the neighborhood and which would prevent
j said property from yielding a reasonable
I
return if used for any permitted purpose.
The granting of the variance is thus
necessary for the reasonable use of the
j
property in question.
i
i
I
I
i
i'
i
I
i
i
j
i
i
i
I'
a
I I
l - 26 -
i` SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is appeal number 2-2-80 :
i' Appeal of JVRC Enterprises for a
i! sign variance under Sections 34 .4b
34. 5 , 34. 8 and 34. 3 to permit re-
tention of the existing sign at
602 West Buffalo Street (Joe' s
Restaurant) in a B-4 (business)
j use district. The existing sign
projects more than eighteen (18)
inches from the face of the build-
ing, exceeds the total area per-
mitted, and projects within eighteen
(18) inches of a sidewalk.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Will you please state your name and address when
I
{ you come up front?
MR. VAIL: I 'm John Vail, 602 West Buffalo Street, JVRC Enterprises.
i
I submitted an affidavit to the extent that five people , that is
i
previous employees or owners of Joe' s Restaurant said that we the
i
undersigned hereby certify that the neon sign at Joe' s Restaurant
3
has been a part of the edifice for over thirty-five years . The
i
j date was June 13 , 1980. I had previously submitted affidavits to
I
Landmarks Preservation Committee - they wanted pictures - we went
through pictures of the sign to prove it - we had gone through th
v
I Ithaca Journal microfilms and we had contacted numerouspeople to
I
the extent of finding out what proof we could provide as far as
pictorial aspect was concerned. We found nothing and Eunice Parr
i
has been employed at the restaurant for thirty-two years - she ha
I been a resident - sheds 65 probably and she has been a resident
j of the city for quite some time, I think probably life. Tony
Polio was one of the previous owners . Abraham Nicholas - these
people have all signed the affidavit. Abraham Nicholas , Jr. has
I worked at Joe' s Restaurant for over forty-five years . Vincent
i
Giordano and J. Victor Bagnardi have also been residents of the
I
city and signed it, verifying that it has been there for thirty-
five years. We previously submitted affidavits to this extent
and the Landmarks Preservation Committee would not give us approval
„ g
on an historic basis until they saw pictures which we couldn' t fi d.
I think the affidavits - if we need more I can find them but I
I
would hope that this would be sufficient.
i
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any questions?
I�
1'
27
i'
SECRETARY HOARD: Let me ask you - I 've got some pictures here of
j
the property and I just want to clarify which signs we are talking
about as far as your request for a variance. On Buffalo Street,
starting from the west end of the building there is a sign that
says - it' s a white, internally lit sign that says Joe' s Parking
j
that projects out. Then there is a sign on the side of the build-
ing - a neon sign that spells out the word Restaurant - then on
I
i�
the corner - sort of a 45 degree angle there, there is a sign, a
I
I neon sign that says Joe' s and then there is what looks like a
pattern in brick that says Joe. Then going along Meadow Street
there is another neon sign that says Restaurant and that is flat
4
against the building. I ' ll pass these around so everybody knows
li
which ones we are talking about. Then there is a projecting sign
I'
that is neon that says Joe 's Restaurant and then beyond that there
is a sign that says Joe' s Parking which is not attached to the
j building. All of the others are attached to the building. Are you
I
planning, as part of this proposal, to remove some of the signs o
are you asking for variances for all of them or what is the - I
�I just want to make sure that everybody understands what we are
i
talking about here.
i
MR. VAIL: Okay, I think that the sign that we 're appealing for
i
is the sign on Meadow Street which is attached to the building .
�i
!� SECRETARY HOARD: The one that projects and says Joe ' s Restaurant.
,I
MR. VAIL: The one that projects I 'm not sure that the others a e
in violation anyhow, especially the neon signs that are attached
I
and not overhanging the sidewalks .
MR. GAINEY: How many square feet are they allowed?
SECRETARY HOARD: They would be allowed 131 square feet in that
i
zone.
�I MR. GAINEY: Total , right? Both streets?
SECRETARY HOARD: Total .. The sign that projects it says Joe ' s
Restaurant it projects over Meadow Street is approximately
eighteen square feet but it projects seven feet out over the -
seven feet from the building where eighteen inches is permitted
�i
or the limit. That ' s , I think, the key sign in contention here.
l
it
28 -
�I
i
{ Then there are the building signs that are conforming - the ones
I
that say Restaurant and Joe' s and then there are two that are non
i
conforming that say - one is free-standing on Meadow - that 's
II twenty-five square feet that says Joe ' s Parking and then the one
iprojecting from the building on Buffalo Street that says Joe' s
a
Parking . Would you be removing the parking signs or making them
I so they conform to the ground sign requirements?
MR. VAIL: I don't think there will be any problem conforming
i
with the other signs as far as that is concerned. The major sign
{� being contested, as far as we are concerned, is the sign that is
overhanging the street which is Joe ' s Restaurant the neon sign
i that is attached to the building.
I�
MR. GAINEY: So if you had to you could get rid of the other two,
right?
I
MR. VAIL: We will make them conform at the very least, okay?
MR. GAINEY: Okay, the main sign you are interested in then is the
one that hangs on the corner over the sidewalk?
MR. VAIL: Right - this one - (pointing to photo)
j CHAIRMAN AMAN: And that is the one the affidavit is for.
f
MR. VAIL: Yes, that is the one that the affidavit conforms or
applies to.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions? Thank you very much.
I
I; Anyone here wishing to speak on behalf of Joe 's variance? Anyone
here wishing to speak against it? (no one) I ' ll call the next
j case.
i
i
i
1
I
I
i
I
i
i
i
29 -
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
l COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
is
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
it
i
JULY 1 , 1980
EXECUTIVE SESSION
�I
APPEAL NO. 2-2-80:
i
The Board considered the request for a sign variance under Sec-
tions 34. 4b, 34. 5 , 34. 8 and 34. 3 to permit retention of the exist
�I ing sign at 602 West Buffalo Street in a B-4 (business) use dis-
trict. The existing sign projects more than eighteen (18) inches
from the face of the building , exceeds the total area permitted,
and projects within eighteen (18) inches of a sidewalk.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Motion was made that the Board grant the
i� sign variance requested in appeal number 2-2-
80 for the projecting neon sign on Meadow
i Street with the condition that two signs
I which say "Joe' s Parking" be changed to
conform with the Sign Ordinance.
DR. GREENBERG: I second the motion.
ij VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent
FINDING OF FACT: The neon Meadow Street sign has been in
place for over thirty-five years and is
historic in nature.
i
I
i
i
i
i
f
- 30 -
i
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
i'
JULY 1 , 1980
;! SECRETARY HOARD: The next case Mr. Chairman is appeal number
la
15-2-80: Appeal of William T. Pritchard for a sign
variance under Section 34. 4b and 34 . 6-A-1
to permit the retention of two signs at
304-306 South Cayuga Street and a large
free-standing sign at the same address . Cur-
rently five (5) signs are located on the pre-
mises , three (3) above the permitted number
in a B-4 (business) district .
! Is there anyone here on this appeal? (no one appeared)
IThe next appeal is appeal number 6-3-80 :
Appeal of Albert and Myrtle Johns for a sign
variance under Section 34. 4b to permit the
retention of the existing sign at 409 West
Seneca Street (Seneca Printing) in a B-2a
j (business) use district. The sign projects
j more than eighteen (18) inches from the face
of the building, the maximum projection per-
mitted.
i
MRS. JOHNS: I had talked to . . . .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Would you please state your name and address first .
IMRS. JOHNS: It' s Mrs . Johns , 208 E. Lewis Street . I have gone to
I
! the Planning Board - I don't have my papers , I guess you have what
i
II filled out and what the problem was and we had made arrangements
; The sign is 4 ' x 2' as it stands now. If we take the sign as it
, is , move it close to the building as far as it can go against it,
i
turn it around the other way it will still protrude six inches ove
! the eighteen and that is what we are asking the variance on at thi
point. Instead of the eighteen it would be twenty-four.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: As I understand, you are planning to change the
! sign, to move the sign?
MRS. JOHNS: Right to move it into the building all the way and
then turn it the lengthwise of the sign and that is what Mr. Meigs
din the Planning Board recommended our doing .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Now why is it that would still project - is it
i
, simply the size of the sign?
MRS. JOHNS: Yes. It is two feet so it would go the opposite
direction that it is going in now - is all .
MR. GAINEY: You are just going to move the sign in farther on the
i
{ side of the house?
- 31 -
i.
JMRS. JOHNS: It will go in right next to the building - all the way
kin, as it is out now on the structure of the building - before the
i
I�ign starts .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions? I haven't seen the pictures
Ire there any? If there are no further questions , thank you very
I
nuc h.
IRS. JOHNS: Thank you.
ICHAIRMAN AMAN: Anybody wishing to speak for the variance? Anyone
ishing to speak against it? If not we' ll call the next case.
I� EXECUTIVE SESSION
6PPEAL NO. 6-3-80
he Board considered the request for a sign variance under Section
4 . 4b to permit the retention of an existing sign in a B-2a use
district. The sign projects more than eighteen (18) inches from
he face of the building, the maximum projection permitted.
R. GAINEY: I move that the Board grant the sign variance
requested in appeal number 6-3-80.
HAIRMAN AMAN: I second the motion.
►
MOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent Granted
INDINGS OF FACT: 1) The appellants agreed to meet the Planning
Board' s recommendations .
i
2) The projection of the sign has been signifi-
cantly reduced and is in substantial compli-
ance with the Sign Ordinance
t
i
i
I
r
i
f
i
ij
32
ii
it BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
JULY 1 , 1980
{SECRETARY HOARD: The next case Mr. Chairmain is appeal number
i
16-4-80: Appeal of Dewart, Peterson and Creighton for
a sign variance under Section 34 .4b to permit
i the retention of the existing sign at 201
North Aurora Street (Pine Tavern) in a B-2b
I (business) use district. The sign projects
more than eighteen inches (18) from the face
of the building , the maximum projection per-
mitted. This sign has received historic
designation from the Landmarks Preservation
f Commission.
!Is there anyone here to represent this case?
i
�R. BUCCI : My name is Gary Bucci from the Pine Tavern, 201 North
Aurora Street . Our sign was it' s a period piece from the 19301s .
We were told that if we were to re-neon it - at quite a cost, I
ight mention, that we could keep this sign and I guess that is the
ase here. We did receive - that is a historic piece and . . .
HAIRMAN AMAN: It' s been designated by the Landmarks Commission as
�n historic sign?
R. BUCCI : Right as a period piece representing the 301s .
HAIRMAN AMAN: What do you mean by re-neon it - do you mean that
�ome of the letters . . .
�R. BUCCI ; Yes - it was broken over the years and never being re-
laced and we took it to a sign shop and it is now fully running as
neon sign — neon running right through the whole thing.
HAIRMAN AMAN: Any questions? Thank you very much. Is there any-
ne here wishing to speak for or against the proposed variance?
Oearing none, we ' ll move to the next case.
I
i
i
i
i
i
'i
I
i
i
i
i
I
I I
i
33 -
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
i
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
JULY 1 , 1980
iI
Ii EXECUTIVE SESSION
jAPPEAL NO. 6-4-80
1
!The Board considered the request for a sign variance under Section
i
�'34. 4b to permit the retention of the existing sign in a B-2b use
district. The sign projects more than eighteen (18) inches from
fthe face of the building, the maximum projection permitted. This
,sign has received historic designation from the Landmarks Preserva-
tion Commission.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I move that the Board grant the requested
E
sign variance in appeal number 6-4-80.
IMR. GAINEY: I second the motion.
i
i
(VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No ; 1 Absent. GRANTED
FINDING OF FACT: This sign has received historical classifica-
tion from the Landmarks Preservation Commis-
sion and thus qualifies as an exception unde
Section 34. 4b of the Sign Ordinance.
I'
i
I
I°
E
i
i
I
f
i
I
i
i
I
e
i
i
I
i
i
1s
1
i
jj
I
I
I
i
I
- 34 -
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
ii JULY 1 , 1980
Ii
�
'f' SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 7-1-80:
Appeal of Niagara Frontier Services for a
sign variance under Section 34 . 5-A-4 to
permit construction of directional signs at
614 South Meadow Street (Tops Market) . The
{ proposed signs would exceed the permitted size
and height for directional signs in the B-5
(business) zone in which the property is
located.
IMR. TANNER:My name is Cyreno Tanner from Elmira, New York. I
I
jrepresent the Elmira Building Company that owns the property and the
Niagara Frontier Services who actually are the controlling corpora-
;tion for TOPS Food Markets. And the request came from Tops Food
i
Markets . Briefly all of the advertising signs on the property meet
Pthe regulations of the city and a permit has been issued for those
and they are erected, I believe, tonight. The problem is traffic
!going in and out of Meadow Street. Our application says that the
high volume of traffic on South Meadow Street requires a larger
;sign so that the entrances can be seen from a further distance
fallowing cars to maneuver more safely into a turning position. At
Ithe adjacent similar commercial plaza on South Meadow Street there
lis a traffic light but we are asking for one. These egress signs
are not commercial advertising, they are clearly to distinguish
where and when to enter and to exit. This is especially important
I
'for safety because in the design of this entrance and exit way
�!
lIwhich was made to comply with the request of the Planning Board - the
subdivision of the property - we have a divided entrance-way, one w y
lin and one way out. Now in addition to that there have been some
!other thoughts - a sign three feet high, from my experience in Itha a,
hand T was a winter time resident here for about four years some tim
,back - three feet of snow, particularly along Meadow Street - there
after the streets have been cleaned could very readily cover such
A sign. I did attend the Planning and Development Board meeting an
II understand that they recommended denial. There were no appear-
I
,a.nces in opposition, I don' t know about tonight. The reasons for
II
I
i
r - 35 -
the Planning $ Development Board were that the regulations are in
;effect, have been in effect and have been enforced to the point of
`requiring some merchants to remove such signs . And until the need
iwas demonstrated, the variance should not be granted. I can under-
fstand the reasoning for this , that is , equal treatment. It is
i
something like waiting to lock the barn after the horse is gone , in
I
this case. The problem is solely traffic control. There is no ad-
I
vertising on either sign. All of the advertising signs do meet re-
gulations and we are asking for signs about the size and the height
!of the sign immediately across the street from City Hall indicating
directions to the parking ramp. I think someone in the city govern-
ment must have agreed with us in principle. We do not feel that a
sign three feet to the top will be seen from a sufficient distance
jto allow for proper preparations , slowing and turning into the
Iproperty and we do not wish to erect anything offensive to the city
!or its citizens - we are only trying to help traffic. If the need
I
alis demonstrated and I don't know what will determine that we will
f
stand ready to erect whatever signs are indicated and we will await
a request from the city at that time.
�ISECRETARY HOARD: Mr. Tanner, I wasn't at the part of the Planning
I;
!Board meeting when you spoke on this - but the Planning Director
!gave me these two photographs. Are these yours and samples of what
�e are talking about?
I'11�`
UnR. TANNER: Yes . That' s right. There was quite a discussion at
the Planning Board meeting as to whether the three foot restriction
was to the top or the bottom and whether we were applying for top
I
bottom. As I understand it, from- checking further - the three
ifeet is to the top by regulation and we are asking for seven feet
jto the top in this request.
R. GAINEY; If we were to deny this - if, okay? An alternative may
IIbe to approach the state or the city to put signs up like they have
I
:along where there are factories and schools , etc.
kR. TANNER: Right .
II�
' IR. GAINEY; It is clearly marked as an entrance?
it
IMR. TANNER: That' s right.
�f
I
I
i
36 -
t
i�
!MR. GAINEY: Would you be willing to accept something of this
If
,Inature?
i
MR. TANNER: We' ll take anything that will slow people down that
go in that driveway so that they know what they are doing. We
are merely making a suggestion, really.
IDR. GREENBERG: Is there any indication that the decision in regard
to a traffic light will be taken at a certain date? You say you
applied for traffic light - a signal light?
��MR. TANNER: We have asked the State to at least consider one - we
Ii
have even asked - we have even agreed to pay for it. It takes a
I
;lot of study and research and that sort of thing on the part of the
State and really . . .
IDR. GREENBERG: There is no date that you have in mind where you will
receive an answer in regard to that?
I
!MR. TANNER: The state has indicated no time that . . .
iMR. GAINEY: It' s usually about six months .
i
IMR. TANNER: And if it was felt by the City that if we do get a
traffic light and if they' d like the signs removed at that time,
(we 'd be very happy to take them down.
(CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions? Thank you.
MR. TANNER: Thank you.
i
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone here wishing to speak for or against that
Ivariance request? I ' ll call the next case.
I
i
i
I
i
I
i
i
I!
- 37 -
i
I
�I' BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
j COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
i! CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
I
JULY 1 , 1980
I
EXECUTIVE SESSION
i
APPEAL NO. 7-1-80
The Board considered the request for a sign variance under Section
34 . 5-A-4 to permit construction of directional signs at 614 South
Meadow Street. The proposed signs would exceed the permitted size
and height for directional signs in the B-5 zone in which the
!property is located.
IMR. GAINEY: I move that the Board deny the requested
sign variance in appeal number 7-1-80.
MR. WILCOX: I second the motion.
VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent DENIED
FINDING OF FACT: 1) No other signs of this type are located in
the area.
1
2) Adjacent plazas have been requested to remov
I
similar non-conforming signs.
i
E
1!
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
i
A
I
ii
I
It
j
'i
i
1 - 38 -
i
i
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
f
I JULY 1 , 1980
i
'SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 7-2-80:
Appeal of Evans Products Company for a sign
variance under Section 34 .6-A-1 to permit
retention of an existing sign at 505 Third
Street (Grossman' s Lumber) in an I-1 (Indus-
trial) use district . The existing sign ex-
ceeds the size limit of fifty (50) square
feet in an Industrial zone .
IMR. COOK: My name is Robert Cook, I 'm with Evans Products Company,
� Grossmans - the Construction Division. As the Commissioner stated,
I
our sign is over the square foot allowed. The sign in question
comes in two parts - a 6 x 14 copy board that measures 87 square
! feet and the top - Grossman's logo which measures 7 x 28 or 125
i
a
; square feet. We were before the Planning Board last week and I
believe we worked out perhaps an acceptable compromise whereas we
! would remove the 6 x 14 copy board and hopefully the Zoning Board
i
" would grant a variance for the Grossman's logo. I have a copy of the
site plan which shows the location of the sign. It is located
140 feet off the property Fine and that is a considerable distance
, off of route 13 beyond the property line on the right-of-way. I
; also have Photos of the sign in question taken from both direction
i
I have three photos here . Now I have a fourth small photo that
i
' shows the sign much better, although. this is a different location
i - you can much clearer see how the existing sign is made up. And
T have a large 8 x 10 here that would show the proposed variance
with just the Grossman' s copy on it . I 'd like to point out
several other facts. At present there are no other signs on the
! building or the premises . We would be allowed by the Sign Ordi-
i
nance 250 square feet -. the compromise we 'd like to make would be
the retention of the 125 square foot Grossman' s logo as shown in
i
that photo and we would agree to not having any other signs on the
! site so we would still be well within the 250 square feet allowed.
This sign is located on a very fast and busy highway and the area
1 on that side of highway 13 is kind of clutter. The sign doesn' t
i
i
f; 1
li
I
Ij
- 39 -
! show up as well as we'd like it to. That sign is manufactured as
I!
; one of our standard logos and the cost of replacing that would be
1'
( prohibitive. The lot is also a triangular lot that faces Third
i
f
Street and a sign on the front entrance of our building would not
Ido us as much good as this road sign does . By the way the existing
!height of that sign is twenty-five feet.
SMR. GAINEY: Tom, what are they allowed?
(SECRETARY HOARD: All together they are allowed a maximum of 250
square feet. But a free-standing sign - the maximum is fifty square
I
IIfeet so they are within the maximum square footage permitted on the
�iProperty but they exceed the amount permitted for free-standing
i
!signs.
MR. GAINEY: Any signs . . . ?
MR. COOK: No there are no other signs on the site at present. We
would be allowed, I believe, a total of three signs on the site. One
i
free-standing sign not to exceed fifty feet and two other signs on
�jthe building because we face two streets .
(CHAIRMAN AMAN: My understanding is you are suggesting that you
!would have only this sign, you would not put up any other signs?
i
SMR. COOK: That is correct. I believe that was part of the motion
f
that the Planning Board made or suggested. And it would be as that
l8 x 10 photo showed - just the Grossman logo.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any questions from the Board? Thank you very much.
IMR. COOK: Thank_ you.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone else who wishes to speak for the variance or
against the variance? We' ll call the next case.
i
I
f
i
i
i
i
i
f
I
i
I
f
If
i
f
I
- 40 -
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
j COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
I JULY 1, 1980
I
EXECUTIVE SESSION
APPEAL NO. 7-2-80:
lThe Board considered the request for a sign variance under Section
34. 6-A-1 to permit retention of an existing sign in an I-1 use
district. The existing sign exceeds the size limit of fifty (50)
square feet in an Industrial zone.
IMR. WILCOX: I move that the appellant be permitted to
existing
retain the/sign at 505 Third Street with
modification that they remove all other signs
and that there be no further signs on the
property.
IDR. GREENBERG: I second the motion.
i
VOTE : 4 Yes ; 1 No ; 1 Absent Granted w/condition.
FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) It would not harm the character of the
neighborhood.
i
2) There would be less square footage of sign
than the firm would otherwise be entitled
to.
I I
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
ji
ii
ii
- 41 -
I' BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
ITHACA, NEW YORK
JULY 1 , 1980
.i
; SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 7-3-80 :
Appeal of William Dillon Properties , Inc. fo
a sign variance under Sections 34 .8A and 34.
to permit the retention of the existing sign
j at 127 West State Street (Interlakes Finance)
in a B-3 (business) use district. The sign
i currently projects over a public sidewalk an
is occasionally used to advertise businesses
on other properties within the City of Ithac
thus defining said sign as a billboard.
1
IMR. DILLON: My name is William Dillon and I reside here in the
City of Ithaca. I think first I would like to give you a little
history of the first urban renewal project that took place with my
,private enterprise here in Ithaca when we created I .L.F. and tore
down the old J. C. Stowell building and had the first off-street
1parking and the first drive-in teller and the first walk-up window of
any financial institution in the community in 1958 . And at this
same time we also created, what I thought at the time, was a com-
munity service bulletin board as well as a sign to be used for our
own product. Over the years this sign has been used approximately
half of the time for all kinds of community service , shall we say
bulletins or messages. I would hazard a guess that - say taking
half the time maybe 3 ,300 community service messages have been up
there for all kinds of community service. I could go through letters
i
that we have from high school classes and Ithaca College and the
Cancer Society and Secretary' s Week and Ithaca Opera, high school
I
splays and the Ithaca Players , the Hangar Theatre , scholastic awards ,
'convocation, St. Catherine of Siena, Art in the Park, Kiwanis
Chicken Bar-b-que, T.C. Economic Opportunity, City Federation of
Women' s Organizations , car washes for all kinds of kiddie' s func-
tions and fund-raising things for ski trips and trips to Washingto ,
ID.C. , and on and on and on and I have many, many letters here
fljattesting to the value and the funds that have been raised for all
, sorts of community projects with and by the use of the sign. Ther is
�! no question also that the sign is also used in our own behalf - ou
i
i
i
42 -
i
i
(I
own business .
�I
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Is it used for any other businesses?
'MR. DILLON: We have also advertised for our subsidiary Old Port
i'
, Harbor. I have a letter here from - oh, we were asked at the time
li
(when we applied for the variance to contact all of the businesses
within 200 feet so I assume that the purpose of contacting those
jpeople was to see whether they approved or disapproved. There were
twenty-nine of them - I was able to contact all but eleven and
eighteen of them said yes by all means leave it - it is a great
1community service. I have a letter from one gentleman, Mr. DiPas-
quale, that says the structure has been providing a community ser-
vice for over twenty- two years and should remain as a West State
Street landmark. I personally classify it in the same category as
the State Theatre marque and the time and temperature pylon at the
I
entrance to the Commons, both of which. have been allowed to remain.
Another one of the folks in the 200 foot area - Ethel Wilkinson, says ,
of course the pylon should remain it has become an Ithaca Landmark
and provides good community service. We look there for notices,
announcements, acknowledgments, comments as we do for the time and
temperature at the Trust Company pylon. Within the same block our
pylon is a freestanding pylon it has two sides , it is approxi-
mately - extends ten feet so that would mean it has - both sides
it has twenty feet. 170 feet away in the same block the State
Theatre has a marque that is seventy-one feet of changeable letter
space that is "legal. " I find that to be a little disturbing to
say the least, that ours is not and that one is , although I under-
stand the technical reasoning is that it is a marque. It is also
my understanding that we could take our free-standing sign, build
marque over our doorway, extending the same distance, move the
panels leave the panels 'identically the same but attach them to a
i
"Marque" and we would be perfectly proper. Now, the only problem
with that is it would cost us ten to fifteen thousand dollars to do
that and it seems to me that that ' s an unnecessary expense to - and
:end up with essentially the same thing.
[MR. CAINEY: Does the sign have to be as large as it is? the blue
1portion?
s
1
43 -
i
�iMR. DILLON: The blue portion does not, no - although it is all - i
is in about five tons of concrete. When we first put it in it was
1put in with a crane and it is in about five tons of concrete and it
i
,all of the size of it is in huge steel. IT WOULD be a major under-
taking - we got a Quote from - I guess everybody quotes Vinnie
(Giordano - he seems to be the man who does most of the things in th
!city - but we got a quote from Vinnie and Vinnie said anywheres
t
from $10, 000 to $22 ,000 to move it and do a marque and there is
another economic side of the thing that I think should be brought
out. For a period of time we tested not using it to see what would
happen and how we would promote our product . It cost us from $1 , 50
Ito $2 ,000 a month in newspaper and radio, extra money - out of
pocket - to make up for not having the use of the sign and that is
I
�a considerable sum of money and as you all know in these times -
it' s a - the squeeze is on everybody and ourselves included. I
would hazard a guess I know there have been variances given to otlier
types of signs in the same area - they all serve their own purpose
+I was going to say selfish purpose but that comes across as unkindly
and I don' t mean it that way - but it serves only their own interest.
Our pylon - 50% of the time serves purposes of everybody else in this
community - advertising all kinds of community events - you name it
land it is on our pylon. I am sure that we have raised considerable
I
sums of money for all kinds of community functions by it.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Besides your business and your subsidiary, Old Port ,
do you advertise any other businesses that are unconnected with
your operation?
MR. DILLON: I don't think so - not that I recall . As a business ,
I
I don' t think a business but , I 'm just trying to be sort of a
i
devil ' s advocate - theremight be the Kiwanis Bar-b-ques , yes , we
have raised money for them by putting the message in the pylon but
las a business . . .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I mean do you sell advertising space?
IMR. DILLON: Oh, no. No , we don' t sell advertising space on it.
;No. And it' s used and has been and actually when I first conceived
i
'it way back in 1958 I thought of breads cast upon the waters that
Ilif you do things for other people and provide a community service
i
44 -
; such as we do and have provided all these years that maybe someday
{
Land somehow some of these people would maybe become customers or d
i
!something for us in one way or another, you know, and help I .L.F.
Ismall
become investors or customers one way and we think that in some
way we have succeeded. I think that is all I have to say.
;CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any questions from the Board? Thank you.
�I
,VOICE FROM THE FLOOR: Mr. Chairman, may I take the floor for a
Imoment?
�j
( CHAIRMAN AMAN: Yes, if there are no questions from the Board. I
hake it you are speaking on behalf of the variance?
MR. LYDLE: My name is Bill Lydle, I 'm the president of Ithaca are
.1253 of the Fraternal Order of Eagles, who are neighbors , share what
i
,lis supposedly a common driveway but which has become pretty much a
city alley - fire lane - access from W. State Street to Green and
;visa versa. The people that are requesting the variance , particularly
Mr. Dillon and his organization, have been very good neighbors to us .
i
jWe did receive a notice from you asking if we had an exception to
I variance, to appear. On the contrary, we have none but we did
11feel that we wanted to speak on behalf of continuance of the pylon
;for a couple of reasons. The eagles is a nationwide , statewide organ-
ization and we have many visitors come from other areas - Lockport ,
lKingston, New York, Kansas City, wherever and when we are requested
;for directions as to how you find the Eagles we have them coming up
i
,West State Street but West State Street ends past the pylon and we
Huse that as a landmark and say look., you turn right , right there
ilandyou' ll find our parking right along side our building but if
;they do go far enough to see the Chanticleer, which is a traditional
I
(landmark, you've gone too far and they are into the millstream of
i
!one-way streets. So as a result, we feel, that if for no other rea-
son than the fact that the organization, business-wise and the man
i
himself has been a very good neighbor to us that it is a very
helpful landmark for us to give directions , or anybody else in that
I,
;first block of West State Street to identify just exactly where the
;are and for that reason I 'd like to go on record both as a person .
Aland on behalf of Eagles area 1253 , we ' d like to see that pylon stay
'there. Thank you very much.
I!
!I
I:
45 -
I
I
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone else wishing to speak for the variance?
IIAnyone here wishing to speak against it? I ' ll call the next case.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
l
I JULY 1, 1980
EXECUTIVE SESSION
APPEAL NO. 7-3-80 :
IThe Board considered the request for a sign variance under Sections
, 34. 8a and 34. 3 to permit the retention of the existing sign at 127
,;West State Street in a B-3 (business) use district. The sign cur-
Irently projects over a public sidewalk and is occasionally used to
I
(;advertise businesses on other properties within the City of Ithaca
(thus defining said sign as a billboard.
i
DR. GREENBERG: I move that the Board deny the requested
sign variance in appeal number 7-3-80.
,MR. ANGELL: I second the motion.
i
VOTE: 4 Yes ; 0 No ; 1 Abstention; 1 Absent DENIED
1i
!! FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) The sign violates the Sign Ordinance in a
i
large number of respects .
i
2) The Planning Board recommended denial and
s
this Board concurs .
i
I
J
1
J
r
�i
I
I
i
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
i, JULY 1 , 1980
jSECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is appeal number 1305 :
Appeal of Normand and Laura Mainville for a
i
use variance under Section 30 . 25 Column 2
to permit operation of a plastercraft business
at 309 East Lincoln Street. The property is
'i located in an R-2b (residential) use district
i' in which businesses are not a permitted use.
An insurance business was located at this
address within the past year, but the propose
use is classified as a more intensive use an
thus would not be permitted under the "Grand-
father rights" which were established by the
other business.
1MR. MAINVILLE: My name is Normand Mainville and I work for the
Water Department . My wife and I are trying to open up a small
plastercraft shop which is about the same thing as ceramics and
± there wouldn't be that much parking problem or - as far as I can see .
I
!MR. GAINEY: What hours do you plan to operate?
iMR. MAINVILLE: About 9 to 5 .
i
iMR. GAINEY: No evening classes?
IMR. MAINVILLE: About two nights a week - we ' ll have evening
classes from 7 to 9.
i
'MR. WILCOX: Mr. Weimer here?
3
'iMR. MAINVILLE: Yes he is.
. MR. WILCOX: I have a question for him.
I
SMR. MAINVILLE: We went through it once and tried to get it in our
i
( house and they turned me down so we are trying to rent this place.
' CHAIRMAN AMAN: Yes, I know. Why is this considered a more inten-
Isive use - I am not sure that I understand that.
! SECRETARY HOARD: Than the insurance business? Because it involve
jretail and selling of things and also because of the night classes
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I see.
SMR. MAINVILLE: They do have a ceramic shop on Aurora Street which
is the same thing and they have to order their paints and their gr en-
ware the same way as I do. They have to have retail.
SECRETARY HOARD: Well as a result of the last meeting we've been
looking into that ceramic shop on North Aurora and there is a ques-
tion of whether that is illegal or not and we have contacted the
i
1�
�( e
?I
II
i'
- 47 -
I I
1owners about establishing whether they did exist legally before th
izoning changed in 1977.
I1
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions from the Board? How many
jpeople do you expect in each class?
I
1MR. MAINVILLE: Not more than four or five - most generally they all
come in one or two cars that's all.
i
' CHAIRMAN ARAN: And what were your proposed hours for the retail
operation?
jMR. MAINVILLE: I would say from about 9 to 5.
i
( CHAIRMAN AMAN: Can you have any estimate of what kind of traffic ),ou
1would be generating on the number of customers that you expect?
�IMR. MAINVILLE: No I don' t - I don't think there would be that
i
much. A lot of the problem would be right from that laundromat
you know - they are there waiting for their clothes to dry - they
! would come in and shop around.
�i
;MR. GAINEY: Can you guarantee that?
IMR. MAINVILLE: No, I don't.
SMR. GAINEY: How many employees do you plan to employ?
I
MR. MAINVILLE: None, just myself and my family which is five of
! us .
i
IMR. GAINEY: Will they all be there at the same time?
i
MR. MAINVILLE: No. I work all day and my wife works all day - so
lit would most generally be my daughter and my younger son there in
the daytime.
iCHAIRMAN
AMAN: Are there any further questions? Thank you very
1
jmuch, sir.
l!MR. MAINVILLE: Thank you.
ICHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone wishing to speak on behalf of the proposed
I
Ivariance?
IMR. MAINVILLE , JR. : My name is Normand R. Mainville , Jr. , I resid
slat 105 First Street. There has been some questions with parking
I 1
labout this proposal and the size of the place that we are going to
i
be renting is only about 20 x 30 and for it to cause any traffic
;problems would be totally unforeseeable due to the size of the
I
business at this time. If at a later date we did decide to expand
i
I!
k
- 48 -
�1we would be moving out of the area therefore we would possibly
create a problem, then we would have to move. We are willing to
! foresee that but at this time there should be no problems at all.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: What provision for parking is there?
MR. MAINVILLE, JR: There is street parking so if there is no plac
to park they cannot come in and it is 9 to 5 , most people are at
I
(work during that time so there should be no problem. We tried to
` get the variance in the home - it was turned down and with the
price of rent, it is almost impossible to find a place for a start-
ling business.
IMR. GAINEY: Why was it turned down?
SMR. MAINVILLE, JR. : Home occupation - it wasn' t counted as a home
occupation because of the zoning. R-3a zone where business is
totally unpermissi,ble.
IMR. GAINEY: Okay, so you want to go from an area where it is non-
permissible and you want to go into another area where it is non-
permissible?
MR. MAINVILLE, JR. : We found a gentleman who has an open space ,
1who has very graciously offered to rent it to us at a very decent
price that we could afford.
MR. GAINEY: Yes, but that' s - I 'm talking , you were turned down
in one residential area now you want to go to another residential
area and open it up?
MR. MAINVILLE, JR: Right, due to the fact that this is the place
! that we found it and mainly because of the price factor because we
are just starting out and we are very small and we cannot afford
Ito go into a larger place. The classes are free, they don't cost
anything therefore we are actually doing a service to the people
who are interested. So we sort of feel that we are doing somethin
for everybody who wants to attend, let alone not hurting anyone at
the same time. And with the size of the business that we are anti
I
Icipating there should be no problems with anyone . Thank you.
i
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank- you. Anyone else wishing to speak on behalf
of the proposed variance? Is there anyone here wishing to speak a ain
st the proposed variance?
i
li
s;
- 49 -
!i
'!IMRS. HUDDLE: Barbara Huddle , 302 E. Lincoln Street and I have a
I'
petition here.
(!CHAIRMAN AMAN: Excuse me , do you wish to read this?
iMRS . HUDDLE: No, I don't want to read it, no.
!CHAIRMAN AMAN: I ' ll read the petition into the record. "We, as
s
!homeowners and residents of the Fall Creek neighborhood, are sin-
cerely opposed to the establishment of a Plastercraft and Supplies
i
(business in our area. The proposed site , at 309 East Lincoln Street ,
pis located in a residentially zoned area. Although we are designated
as such, several businesses are presently operating in this immediate
area. Within a one block radius of 309 East Lincoln Street , is lo-
cated a Laundromat with parking for customers only clearly posted.
There is also a diner with off-street parking for approximately two
Icars and a heavy volume of automobile and truck traffic. Within
!the last year, a variance was granted for the establishment of an
Insurance Office, where there is off-street parking for one vehicle.
i
!This variance was strongly opposed by the neighbors and supported
with a petition, sketches and pictures. Also located in this imme-
diate area is an Appliance Store with no off-street parking. Adding
ito the vehicular congestion is the fact , that only one block away
I
from 309 East Lincoln Street, are located a bar, school, fire
(station, and church_. A deplorable traffic situation already exists
ion the 300 block of East Lincoln Street, and we feel that with the
establishment of another business , the problem will only become
r
greater . Between the hours of 6 : 00 A.M. and 4 ; 00 P.M. the probabil-
ity of any emergency traffic, let alone school buses , proceeding
,through efficiently is very doubtful . There is parking on both sides
of the street during these hours and one can always find an assort-
ment of department trucks on both sides with two lane traffic atte -
ting to pass through. it has also become an unnecessary nuisance t
The a resident of the area and have to search the block for the owner
of a vehicle parked across your driveway. We feel, collectively as
!homeowners, that this places a greater hardship on us . Each of us
!has put extreme amounts of money and time into the upkeep of our
!homes. With the establishment of another business , we have to work
r
I!
I;
i
- so -
!'even harder to maintain our residential character. In order to
�i
,reside in our homes with the assurance that our children will be safe
jand our property values will be protected, we feel justified in
!opposing the creation of this business. Signed by:
Mr. $ Mrs . John C. Baker 1107 N. Tioga St.
Ivan Durling and Mrs . 1106 N. Tioga St.
Mr. & Mrs . Donald Smith 210 E. Lincoln St.
Mr. & Mrs . C. R. Wiedmaier 208 E. Lincoln St .
Mr. $ Mrs. J. D. Hagin 206 E. Lincoln St .
Steve Myskow 402 E. Lincoln St .
Susie G. Hatt 304 E. Lincoln St .
Leotta Gengo 306 E. Lincoln St .
Mrs. Joseph Gainey, Jr. 308 E. Lincoln St.
Charles Tuckerman :1001 North Aurora St.
4 Dottie Hill 1006 North Aurora St.
Marian Knapp 312 E. Lincoln St .
Mr. & Mrs . Oliver Huddle 302 E. Lincoln St. "
(CHAIRMAN AMAN: Do you wish to add anything to that?
IMRS . HUDDLE: Just that we own an apartment and we do need parking
space on the street for our apartment upstairs. A lot of other
people have apartments in the block that need parking places for
people to park that rent from them. And if there were a lot of
cars they just wouldn't have a place to park.
MR. WILCOX: Mr. Commissioner, is this the same building that there
was an insurance company applied for?
SECRETARY HOARD: This is not the case.
�MR. WILCOX: Is it the same property?
SECRETARY HOARD: No. This is a different property. The Insurance
Company as I understand it - the Insurance Company that was in he e
(moved to the property that was before this Board a few months back.
MR. WILCOX: Has it been vacant?
SECRETARY HOARD: I believe so.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions? Thank you very much. Is
there anyone else here wishing to speak against the proposed vari-
ance? Hearing nothing further, we will take the next case please .
i
}
i
i
I
i'
II - 51 -
i
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
i;
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
i' CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
I�
JULY 1 , 1980
i
.i
EXECUTIVE SESSION
!The Board considered the request for a use variance under Section
,30. 25, Column 2 to permit operation of a plastercraft business at
309 E. Lincoln Street. The property is located in an R-2b use
district in which businesses are not a permitted use. An insurance
business was located at this address within the past year, but the
i
proposed use is classified as a more intensive use and thus would
;not be permitted under the "grandfather rights" which were estab-
I
dished by the other business .
li
IDR. GREENBERG: I move that the Board deny the use variance
requested in appeal number 1305 .
MR. ANGELL: I second the motion.
!VOTE: 4 Yes ; 0 No ; 1 Abstention; 1 Absent DENIED
i
FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) It would increase traffic and parking
ij
problems .
.i
2) It is not grandfathered in on the basis that
i
i the previous business was not a retail trade
I
while this one would be.
3) Because of the present impact of businesses
in that neighborhood the residential char-
acter of the neighborhood is threatened.
!
I
I
I
1
1
I'
i'
52 -
i
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
(j JULY 1 , 1980
I
SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal is appeal number 1306 :
!� Appeal of Charles A. Fritschler for an area
I� variance under Section 30 . 25, Columns 4, 6 ,
11 and 13 to permit the continued use of
801 East State Street as a multiple dwelling
The property, - which is located in an R-3a
I (residential) use district in which required
off-street parking, minimum required lot siz ,
and required front and side yard setback.
The property had been converted to a multipl
by a previous owner, in violation of zoning,
building and housing code requirements .
Is there anyone here on this case? (no one) The next appeal is
I
appeal number 1307 : Appeal of John Novarr and Martin Shapiro for
an area variance under Section 30 . 25 , Column
4 and 6 to permit use of the property at 118
Eddy Street as a multiple dwelling , that is ,
to permit up to four (4) unrelated individuals
I to occupy the main unit . The property is lo-
cated in an R-3a (residential) use district,
in which mutliple dwellings are permitted;
however the property is deficient in require
` off-street parking and minimum required lot
size.
MR. NOVARR: This is a house that is just a few doors down from th
place that I . . .
CHAIRMAN ARAN: Mr. Novarr could you just state your name and
address for the record?
� MR. NOVARR: I 'm sorry. I 'm John Novarr and I live at 202 Eddy
, Street. This house is down about three on the same side of the
street from my residence. A lady lived in it for forty-three year
land decided to sell it and when I heard that a landlord from out o
town wished to buy it I decided to buy it myself, thinking that I
could keep it up better than he would. The house currently has a
basement apartment in it which has two bedrooms and the main house
is essentially a four bedroom house. . It is a big house, it 's got
fa couple of big porches , a sort of a half finished attic, a living
i
froom, dining room,kitchen, big main hall ups tairs and down. I do ' t
want to do anything more than to make use of the four present bed-
rooms , Marty and I are not cutting the house up, adding bedrooms
for putting extra walls in or anything of that sort - we just wish
! to use the four bedrooms for four people. The lot size is deficie t
I'
i
i'
- 53 -
i
! by about 350 square feet, something like that, on 7 ,000, so it is
Ii
la very small lot size deficiency and there presently are two parki g
places that are on the property - we lack one in other words . Are
! there any questions I can answer?
MR. GAINEY: Is there any chance you could provide that other park-
ing space?
IMR. NOVARR: That came up at the Planning Board meeting too. It
would be very difficult to provide a third parking place there with-
out hurting the looks of the property. It would mean putting the
third one in alongside the other two and that would place that
parking space in front of the house. I don't know whether that's
legal or not but even if it were it would look awful. And inasmuch
as one of the reasons I bought this property was to add to the
neighborhood rather than detract from it , I really would rather no
do that.
MR. GAINEY: Okay, now what do they allow in this area Tom? And
what is he requesting?
( SECRETARY HOARD: The use is permitted, the problem is that by having
I
four people in that one unit, four unrelated people , it falls unde
the definition of a multiple dwelling whereas before it was a two
family dwelling, now all of a sudden it' s a multiple . For a multi le
Idwelling, 7, 000 square feet lot is required - they have 6,430 , so
! they are deficient by 570 square feet. Also with the multiple
i
( they are required to have three parking spaces - off-street parkin
spaces there are two existing.
MR. GAINEY: There are two apartments now?
IMR. NOVARR: It isn't divided into apartments. Eddy Street is such
that the buildings on the right, coming up Eddy, fall off from front
to back so that the basement apartment is really at ground level .
The upstairs unit, as Tom calls it , is really the whole house,
other than the basement.
i
(IMR. GAINEY: And you want to put four people in it upstairs?
MR. NOVARR: I want to put four people in a four bedroom house , ye! .
Four, unrelated people . . .
jMR. GAINEY: What you want to rent out is bedrooms then?
i
SMR. NOVARR: That' s right, I want to rent the four existing bedroos
!i
54 -
�ibedrooms as a - to four - possibly four unrelated individuals .
i•
MR. GAINEY: And someone will also be living in the lower . . . ?
' MR. NOVARR: And there will be two people living in the two bedroo
�japartment in the basement so there will be a total of six people i
I
; the house which is probably less than the house was originally
! build to hold - it 's a good sized house , there is no squeezing or
i
! anything going on there. I guess I 'm through.
. CHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone wishing to speak for the variance? Anyone
There wishing to speak against it? I 'll call the next case.
I
I EXECUTIVE SESSION
APPEAL NO. 1307 :
( The Board considered the request for an area variance under Sectio
130. 25, Columns 4 and 6 to permit use of the property as a multiple
dwelling, that is, to permit up to four (4) unrelated individuals
to occupy the main unit. The property is located in an R-3a (resi
I
idential) use district, in which multiple dwellings are permitted;
( however, the property is deficient in required off-street parking
i
land minimum required lot size.
i
IMR. GAINEY: I move that the Board grant the area varianc
requested in appeal number 1307 .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I second the motion.
VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent GRANTED
FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) Does not unduly change the character of
the neighborhood.
2) Practical difficulties have been shown.
3) Parking is not a major problem.
I
I
I
i
I�
�I
.i
I
I
I I
i
i;
-
i
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
JULY 1, 1980
SECRETARY HOARD: The next case is appeal number 1308 :
Appeal of Ellen S. Baer for an area variance
under Section 30. 25, Column 11 to permit
construction of a one-story addition to the
northwest corner of the two-family house at
306-308 South Corn Street for an additional
i bedroom. The property is located in an R- 2b
(residential) use district , and is deficient
in required front yard setback and one side
yard setback.
IMS. BAER: I 'm Ellen Baer and I own the property at 308 Corn Street
and I 'd Eike to build the addition to - there are two one-bedroom
apartments and I would like to build the addition to the downstairs
apartment which I will be living in as soon as , hopefully, the addi-
tion is done. One more thing - building the addition - the house is ,
at present, too close to the front road - the addition would not
interfere with that , it would be set back from the road at least
twenty-five feet.
;!CHAIRMAN AMAN: Does the proposed addition in any way change the
�I
ji,present relationship of the house to the front yard lines?
IMS. BAER: No. The addition would be set back.
SECRETARY HOARD: Would you describe, just for the record, what the
addition is for and the dimensions of the addition?
MS . BAER: The addition is a bedroom which I ' ll be living in and
the dimensions will be approximately 12 x 12 .
iMR. ANGELL: How many bedrooms at present now?
MS. BAER: There are two bedrooms , one bedroom upstairs and one
bedroom downstairs - two one-bedroom apartments .
1MR. ANGELL: You are renting?
;IMS. BAER: The upstairs and I ' ll live downstairs with someone else.
MR, WILCOX: Have you spoken to INHS yet for plans?
IMS. BAER: I spoke to them and I will be speaking with them about
;different designs .
I'
i1MR. WILCOX: You are working out designs?
AS. BAER: Yes with- them.
i
i;
56 -
; CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions?
I I
' MR. ANGELL: Tom, the present apartment - does that conform, is
that . . . ?
( SECRETARY HOARD: The building is conforming in the use, yes . It '
i
gJust that it is set a little too far - too close to the sidewalk and
too close to one lot line . But the addition would be on the other
side of the deficient side yard and there is quite a bit of room
on that side.
IMR. ANGELL: Well how close will it take it to the existing boun-
dary? Will it be conforming to distances?
SECRETARY HOARD: Well the one side is right now twenty-four feet
and it would take it down to nineteen feet and the reason that it
isn' t exactly twenty-four minus twelve is that there is a projecting
I
stairway on that side -- it would be an overlap.
MR. ANGELL: What are the limitations now as to how close it can
1come to the boundary?
+SECRETARY HOARD: Okay, the limit on that side - you have to have
one side ten feet, the other side five feet and after the addition
is put on, there will be nineteen feet on one side and then three-
one-half feet on that other side.
MR. ANGELL: Three and one-half feet exist now?
SECRETARY HOARD: Right.
MR. ANGELL: But even with the addition there will be nineteen feet
SECRETARY HOARD: On the other side.
MR. ANGELL: On the other side of the addition?
(SECRETARY HOARD: Right.
i
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank you.
IMS. BAER: Thank you.
i
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone here wishing to speak for the variance?
(no one) Anyone here wishing to speak against it? (no one) If
not, we' ll call the next case.
f
i
I
li
57 -
I
�I BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
JULY 1 , 1980
i
EXECUTIVE SESSION
I
'APPEAL NO. 1308 :
The Board considered the request for an area variance under Sectio
30. 25 , Column 11 to permit construction of a one-story addition to
the northwest corner of the two-family house for an additional
bedroom. The property is located in an R-2b use district and is
(deficient in required front yard set back.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I move that the Board grant the area variance
j requested in appeal number 1308 .
IMR. GAINEY: I second the motion.
OTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent GRANTED
i
!FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) The proposed addition would not substantially
exacerbate the present minimum front yard
I
set back deficiency.
2) Practical difficulties have been shown.
I
{ 3) The proposed addition would improve the
property and not adversely affect the char-
acter of the neighborhood.
I
i
I
I
i
i
1
I
i
i
i
f
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I!
I' '8
I
- 58 -
i!
I
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
ii JULY 1 , 1980
i
SECRETARY HOARD: The next appeal , Mr. Chairman, is appeal number
1310 : Appeal of Ethel Harrell for an area variance
j under Section 30. 25 , Columns 4 , 11 and 12
to permit conversion of the one-family house
at 611 West Green Street to a two-family
dwelling. The property is located in an
R-3b (residential) use district where two-
family dwellings are permitted; however the
property is deficient in required front and
side yard setbacks , and has no off-street
parking.
I
MR. LEE: Abe Lee from Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services .
SECRETARY HOARD: If you will just present what you are asking for.
iMR. LEE: Oh, I 'm sorry. We are deficient, as Tom just explained,
i
lin the side yard set backs and also the front yard set backs . Two
( sides and also since we are going from one family to two family it
requires two parking spaces which is physically impossible to do
i
�, at this point. There is only about eight feet between the largest
clearance on one side of the property so it is impossible to use
the rear of the yard for off-street parking.
SECRETARY HOARD: Do you have any pictures of . . .
I
MR. LEE: Yes I do. I was remiss about getting you the copies of
the petition. We presented a petition at the last - the Planning
lBoard meeting. All the property owners within the vicinity -
business and home owners . And from the description on the appeals
' form we had to add an income unit to help offset the high renova-
tion cost . We 've been going through this now since January trying
Into put this package together and this is where we are at right now,
hoping to get the appeal through. V
CHAIRMAN ALAN; I just want to make sure I understand - there is n
bulding or renovation going on which would exacerbate the set bac
{ requirements , they are the same . . . ?
I
1MR. LEE: Right, as I explained at the Planning Board meeting,* we
just - there is no changes to the original envelope - basic enve-
! lope of the house, What we are doing is creating a small income
apartment in the rear of the building which will be entered from
I
i
i
Ii
I'
59
I�
( the rear of the building so the entrances will be separate to
I'
maintain privacy between the owner and the rental . It is a studio
I�
11apartment - it will be rented out to one person - it is just big
jenough for one person.
i
( CHAIRMAN AMAN: Is there any on-street - what is the parking situ-
i
Ijation in the area?
i
iMR. LEE: Generally it is pretty good. There is commercial through
out the area and they have their own off-street parking. I per-
i
fsonally don' t think it is going to exacerbate the situation, or
impact the situation negatively.
MR. WILCOX: So they are not going to enlarge the building, right?
MR. LEE: No we are not.
MR. WILCOX: So it ' s a non-conforming use already?
IMR. LEE: Right.
ICHAIRMANAMAN: Any further questions from the Board?
DR. GREENBERG: There will be one tenant then?
R. LEE: There will be one tenant. I can't - you know - it' s
i
`not big enough for much. more than one tenant .
DR. GREENBERG: Is that secure, I mean that's certain? Or do we
have to make that a condition if we give you the variance?
SIR. LEE: I don' t think you have-to make it a condition, I think
(that just the size of it would limit it to one person or maybe a
I
Couple at the most. But generally we are talking about just one
Car - one additional car for that unit - whether it is one or two
I
eople renting it.
�R. GREENBERG: Would it be big enough to house two people?
�R. LEE: I have a plan here .
i
R. GREENBERG: I was just asking Tom -- by dimensions - whether the
puilding codes would permit more than one person in the addition?
�ECRETARY HOARD: In the efficiency apartment? How many square fee
i
� s there?
�R- LEE; Roughly about - close to 300 square feet. That includes
the living, sleeping area, separate bathroom and a kitchenette and
he room is 16 x 15, I think the living-sleeping area.
R. ANGELL: How do you get into the existing parking?
- 60 -
I�
! MR. LEE: Pardon me?
'i
;SMR. ANGELL: It says you have parking for two cars - one car?
' MR. LEE: No, it doesn' t say that.
I
MR. ANGELL: Then there is no parking? Oh, zero parking.
i
( MR. LEE: You see that' s the problem we have - they haven' t been
able to have off-street parking because the clearances between the
adjacent structures has never allowed it. The project is important
Ito us mainly because its been sitting for so long and this woman
had decided to invest in the neighborhood and, again, we created
this small in-community - you know, it' s costing a lot of money to
! renovate the property so - that' s how we ran into this problem. And
+ again, we created this studio unit so that it wouldn't impact the
I�
area negatively. I think that is the best we can do in that regard .
Otherwise I don' t know what is going to happen to the property at
this point.
SECRETARY HOARD: To answer Dr. Greenberg' s question, the limit on -
I
i
! there is a minimum of 150 square feet for a dwelling unit and if i
llis an efficiency apartment and it meets the 150, it is also large
lenough for two people because 120 square feet is the minimum size
for two people in a bedroom.
! CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions? If not , thank you very muc .
Anyone here wishing to speak for the variance? (no one) Anyone
here wishing to speak against it? (no one) I ' ll call the next
case.
j
I
i
I
i
I!
I
I�
I
l
I�
i'
I'
ii
- 61 -
ii
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I! CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
i"
JULY 1 , 1980
I
f EXECUTIVE SESSION
i
APPEAL NO. 1310
The board considered the request for an area variance under Sectio
30. 25 , Columns 4 , 11 and 12 to permit conversion of the one-family
house at 611 West Green Street to a two-family dwelling. The
property is located in an R-3b use district where two-family
dwellings are permitted; however the property is deficient in re-
quired front and side yard set backs ; and has no off-street parking .
IMR. GAINEY: I move that the Board grant the area variance
requested in appeal number 1310 .
I
CHAIRMAN AMAN: I second the motion.
VOTE: 5 Yes ; 0 No; 1 Absent GRANTED
FINDINGS OF FACT: 1) The proposed renovations will not exacerbate
the present non-conforming aspects of the
building.
2) There is adequate parking to accommodate the
one additional car which the proposed reno-
vations would generate .
3) It appears that parking will be allowed in
the rear of the Kentucky Fried Chicken park-
ing lot located in this neighborhood.
I
I
i
i
62 -
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
!� JULY 1, 1980
i
i
; SECRETARY HOARD: The final case on the agenda is appeal number
; 1311 : Appeal of Norton Electric Company, Inc. for
use and area variance under Section 30. 25 ,
` Columns 2 , 11 and 14 to permit construction
of a 6875 square foot electrical supply buil -
ing at 316 Third Street , adjacent to an exis -
ing house. The property is located in an
R-3b (residential) use district in which
warehousing and other commercial uses propos d
are not permitted uses , the proposed buildin
i would encroach in the required rear yard, an
the existing building is too close to the
!i front property line.
IIMR. KERRIGAN: Mr. Chairman, if I could let you and the Board memb rs
; look at the proposed plot plan . . . Mr. Chairman and members of
lithe Board, I 'm Jim Kerrigan an attorney in Ithaca, I represent
i
1Norton Electric, the principals of which are Ed Austen who is here
! tonight and Cliff Northrup. We are making this application on be-
` half of my clients who are proposing to purchase the property of
jiCora Sepos, who is also here her self, this evening, in support of
a
Ther aspect of this application. The nature of the requested perm`
11is to permit the addition of a block building - painted block build-
ling
uil -Ding in back of and to the side - in back of principally, a resi-
Iidential or formerly residential home in an R-3b zone to permit the
` Norton Electric to move substantially across the street, to convey
i
; the existing residence to its office structure , to use a new build
d ing which is shown on the plot plan for storage and as a warehous
Ij
Land also for the distribution of - on a wholesale basis to other
I� electrical contractors principally of electrical supplies and
jcomponents . If I could take a moment to show your attention to a
rather poorly, quickly done sketch with some photographs of the
i. neighborhood that I know you can' t see from where you are but I
hope you' ll 'take a chance and take a look at. I guess the most
common bearing is route 13 and the Ithaca Scrap Junk Yard on the
corner of Third Street and Route 13 - the Tayntons Warehouse and
i
li Trucking facility is on the other side of Third Street at the
I
intersection of Franklin Street, which I didn' t know existed,
I;
II
li
63 -
; Route 13 and Third Street. On Third Street working back from Rout
1113 , the next facility on which I have a couple of photographs , is
! a New York State Electric and Gas substation which I think is a
353, 000 volt substation, the Sepos ' property I have sketched in red
li
;Ito point it out - it is approximately 20 ,000 square feet. Now at
the intersection of Third and Hancock Street is the Ithaca Housing
I
Authority apartment development. There should be a photograph there
{!of it - there is a corner of one shown on the Sepos existing property.
There are five photographs here of the existing Sepos property.
Across the street from Third Street as I tried to indicate in back
of Tayntons , is Norton Electric, the Bowl-O-Drome, Adams Street
which runs across from the New York State Electric and Gas sub-
station and the remaining portion of that lot is the Great American ,
24 hour supermarket with a self-service gas station. The gas
hstation is directly across the street from Mrs. Sepos ' property.
jiIn back of this property on Fourth Street - the balance of the neigh-
borhood
ei h-
borhood are two residences which are shown in two photographs be-
jtween the Housing Authority and the Electric and Gas substation.
fOn Hancock and Fourth Street - in this area (pointing to photographs)
''is the Giordano Realty World offices, the Hancock Building Supply -
j
II believe retail, I 'm not sure, facility facing on Hancock Street.
l;In back of that very same building consists of what I believe to be
IlIthaca Business Systems and a Motorcycle parts or repair shop, I 'm
�lnot sure which. There is - next door to that is a relatively narro -
{gI guess I would almost characterize it as an alley, if you will ,
I'
which is a storage facility for, what I 'believe to be other Giordan
iConstruction Company building materials which is stored outside and
�Iwas shown in the photographs. And back further, on Fourth Street
which. does not extend to Route 13 is the Dairy - the HiHealth Dairy
(;facility which is , I believe , a transport trucking depot where I
(,think dairy products are taken in and put in another container and
f{
then shipped out in larger trucks . The photographs up in the corner
land out of place are photographs of the abandoned building which
I
Mrs . Sepos owns on Third Street. The property, as I have indicated,
i�.
l!!]Ls zoned residential. The only residential facility within sight o
it
i
- 64 -
;!this proposed development is the Ithaca Housing Authority apartments
i'.
,!which was one of the concerns of the Planning Board, which I will come
i;
;!back to in a couple of moments . The property itself is a relatively
it
!Ismall one-family residence which has been owned by Cora Sepos and
i
i
(members of her family since it was built - earlier, much earlier
!this century. It has been vacant since 76 or 77 , a year or so
I
!after Mrs . Sepos ' husband died in 1975 . She has been trying to sell
(the property and she ' ll correct me, I think, if I 'm wrong - when
(she speaks to you - for the last four and one-half to five years .
�IIn terms of the proposed use - as I have indicated before I come t
I
the hardship in dealing with the use of this property, you have in
9front of you a plot plan which indicates that the existing building
((which is cross-hatched and is shown as approximately 1 ,225 square
feet, would be renovated, painted, fixed-up and used for the offices
I!
of Norton Electric Company. The addition which is requested is the
electric supply facility and there would be some wholesale distri-
bution out of that it would be principally used for the storage,
I
indoors - completely indoors - of electrical parts and tools and
I+I 'm sure an area for electricians working for Norton Electric to
have a cup of coffee in the morning before they start work. The
(height of the building - there is not an elevation done at this
1point - would be approximately fourteen feet. In appearance, it
I1would be quite similar to the Norton Electric building which is
�
`shown by photograph on the present leased Third Street site although
Ih
I believe it would be, add another two feet taller, if I 'm not
mistaken than the existing facility, to accommodate deliveries .
iThere is no contemplated - there are no contemplated retail sales that
! would take place out of the facility. The other thing that I should
i
indicate in terms of truck traffic or materials being brought in
and out, if you will, is that Norton Electric is one of the larger
lelectrical contractors - when they are working at a major job,
one at Cornell or one as a sub-contractor for one of the other
�!
projects, major items are shipped direct to the site so if there
ip � � PP
is a ten foot by four foot electrical box that arrives and is
Ito be used by them, it is not and would not be shipped to Third
i
l
E
I
- 65 -
jStreet, it would be shipped to Merse Chain or Cornell or the Bio
I,
building or wherever it would be used directly by them. We are
I!
!! talking about the storage and receiving of smaller materials -
I
II think their present truck traffic at their present location
i
! across the street is a couple of trucks a week - that might go up
Ito three trucks a week, if I 'm not mistaken Ed? The other comment
� in terms of a plot plan - there is one photograph of the property
! itself in the upper left hand corner which does show a corner of
' the Ithaca Housing Authority apartment project. Between this
,property and the property - the Housing Authority property at the
i
present time is a cyclone fence which is approximately five feet
high with a six, seven or eight foot shrub around that . That would
be continued - the property would be fenced so that the six foot
I
lispace between the building and the lot line would not be accessible
I
i! to - either for foot traffic or children in the neighborhood which
would be the case in the rear yard. There is , I believe, at the
present time similar shrubbery in the rear and a fence dividing
! this property from the two residences in the back of the property.
i
! The request for variances - if I take a moment on the area vari-
ance. I think the principal concern is , of course , the use. Ther
is a request for a front yard set back variance. The reason for
Ilthat is that the present porch of the property as shown on the pl t
plan does not meet the present zoning setback requirements . There
� is a possibility that, in the course of construction or as plans
, progress , that that porch would be taken completely off and if tha
lis the case there is no need for front yard - there is no further
!! construction to bring the front of this building any closer to Thi d
( Street or to shorten the front yard set back. I have been a littl
: bit puzzled on the side yard set back. It is my understanding,
I
! although it is before you - I think in this zone the side yards hale
i
to be five feet on one side and fifteen on the other - we are showing
six. I think that complies , The rear yard does not. As I read the
' Present Ordinance, it requires on this property a twenty five foot
rear yard set back requirement - we are showing a twenty. Plans
( were attempted to be done on the basis to comply in terms of the
it
66 -
; area - in terms of the proposed use of the building, the needs of
; Norton Electric and sufficient space to be added to make the build
ing economically viable. An additional five foot is necessary to
lithe building - I would respectfully submit that the narrower that
' distance is between the rear fence and shrubbery area and the
i
Dback of the building that - I would submit that it is better - you
are far less likely see to the type of - I don' t think there will
YP
be any materials stored outside but the shorter that distance is,
! it is far less likely that you will see the type of building materials
or other outside storage used between the back of the building and
!the rear property line as is done in the one photograph shown in
Fourth Street. I think that is really all I 'm going to say in terns
jof the area variance. The Planning Board - in our appearance there
(last week - voted against this recommendation with two or three -
II 'm not sure as to how the chairman' s vote was carried - with one
abstention. The concern expressed by the Planning Board was first
of all the impact on the Ithaca Housing Authority and secondly, as
i
I understood their discussions, they are concerned that this type
of change in a residential district should be done by Council . I
Idisagree with. both, and, very briefly, it would seem to me that if I
were a resident in the Ithaca Housing Authority development , which
is some twenty to twenty-five feet from this , I would be happier with
la quiet electrical firm R they do no onsite work there is no in-
dustrial activity on site they store materials . There are no -
Iother than perhaps an emergency exit - the wall facing that area is
fa secure wall with outdoors or ingress or egress . It seem$ to me
that I would be happier.x if I were a tenant there to have that type
i
facility maintained, which the present lot is not , and the present
Iva.cant deteriorating lot I think I would be happier to have a used,
lelectrical warehouse and office building next door than what I would
guess from my observations of the neighborhood, is a gathering place
IIfor youth that a variety of inappropriate hours in a vacant house .
;The proposal talks about leaving the existing fencing and shrubbery
�i
I - enclosing the area in a fence to keep traffic or foot traffic out
IE
Hof the back yard of the two properties and I think most , if not all ,
i
ij
I
- 67 -
1
i'
jof this wall a part from the set back from the line and apart from
ithe shrubbery, will not be visible to the apartments next door and I
ithink I would also be interested if I were a tenant in terms of
i
.,having a maintained property next door. Mrs. Sepos cannot do so a
the present time . In terms of the hardship which is the basis for the
japplication for the use variance, it is respectfully submitted through
some outlines that I have that the property is not viable and the
property cannot be given away as a residence . The property has been
Misted on the real estate market locally since 1975 or 1976 . I spoke
;today to Mr. John Vasse , who has been the listing broker for most of
I
those years - he indicated to me that he has taken five or six per-
spective residential purchasers to see the property over the time that
1+he has listed the property and has been unable to even convince them
Ito go in to look at the property once they see the neighborhood. I
ithink very few people are going to want to be across the street from
I
is twenty-four hour gas station next to a 35 ,000 volt substation, next
E
'to the junk yard on route 13 - next door to that . In back of the
1property on the other side of Fourth Street is a second major truck-
ing
ruc -
ing facility in terms of the Hi-Health Dairy and there has been no
interest and I think the property and Mr. Ralph Marvin who is the
salesman with J. D. Gallagher Commercial Properties is here and I
think will bear me out when he suggests , hopefully, that the property
!has no value whatsoever as a residential - for a residential use.
ITh.e neighborhood in which the property has been located has been
!changed largely by variance but also by some rezoning in the fifty
Ilior sixty years the property has been in the Sepos family. Mrs . Sepos
f
ihas lived there for thirty-three - thirty-two or thirty-three years
iif I 'm not mistaken, before finally abandoning ship as she felt she
iwas force d to do three years or so ago. I believe variances have
been granted by this Board for the Great .American in terms of the
i
supermarket and for the Great American in terms of the gas station
!across the street, for the Ithaca Scrap building that was put up,
'lalthough it is in a business zone and I believe also , although I
;have not looked at the Building Department records , for the Giordano
p
I
building which is Hancock Supply, Ithaca Business , the Motorcyle at
i!
- 68 -
i
lithe corner of Fourth and Hancock Street . The - she has attempted
: she has been unable to rent the property for the last few years - she
III think, will speak very briefly in terms of the difficulty she ha
I
? in the two years that she tried to live there or the year or Bette
that she tried to live there after the death of her husband in 1975
with the theft of furniture, with the constant breaking of the
jwindows, which in part comes from the neighborhood - she has indi-
cated to me that the only way she has been able to pay the taxes
on the property have been the sale of her only automobile - she
presently lives in the city on East Shore Drive , on the lake - her
income is less than $200. a month and there is no way on that income
i
I! that - I don' t understand how the taxes are paid to this date . Th
� - I don' t think she can give it away for a residential use, which
its as it is presently used. In terms of the Planning Board conner
that it' s for Council , I think this is exactly the type of property
that the variance process is designed for - it is , with the excep-
tion of one property, that I do not believe that this property would
impact and I think it would help, it is in a commercial or industrial
zone and I would respectfully submit the variance should be granted .
I
CHAIRMAN AMAN: What about the two houses behind it?
!MR. KERRIGAN: The two houses - there are photographs of the two
(houses behind it - there is a similar screen - I do not think that
, they would - one of the owners is in the back of the room and I
! suspect he will speak to you, I do not think that they will be
! adversely affected by the property. We are talking about a quiet
9 to 5 : 00, 8 ; 00. to 5 ; 30 type of operation without outdoor lighting -
1with no outdoor activity. If I laved there , I would wonder if I
would rather have this than what is going to become an increasing
! eye-sore as Mrs . Sepos ' finances indicate that she can' t maintain
tfie property. I don' t know the nature of the use of the two house -
iI don' t know if they are one or two family homes - I believe Mr.
� Keshisoglou will probably be able to tell that to you.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Sir, you say it is a commercial or an industrial
zone - are you using those interchangeably?
IIMR. KERRIGAN: I am using them interchangeably as the area has bee
- 69 -
i!
*d, I am not using them within the meaning of the zoning. There
s a B-2 district down there, there is another business district -
i
lihree or four districts that come pretty close to meeting at this
property. I think one of Mr. Keshisoglou' s concerns is with in-
reased truck traffic - he is concerned, I think, justifiably with
�he difficulties of the heavy trucks going in and out of the dairy
operation and I think minimal truck traffic for light deliveries to
Morton Electric would be far less than truck traffic he is presentl
acing on Fourth Street.
PHAIRMAN AMAN: - That is what I 'm getting at, I 'm wondering , assumilig
i
that the house itself is not saleable and not an economic entity as
t presently exists - what does that zoning have to be - B2 , B3 or
ghat does the zoning have to be to accommodate this structure that
you want to build?
R. KERRIGAN: In terms . . .
CHAIRMAN AMAN: How much farther are you escalating is what I 'm -
you know, going from residential to . . .
IMR. KERRIGAN: I 'd have to look at the Ordinance I think there is
wholesale facility a couple of steps down in . . . now wait a minut . .
i
14R. GAINEY: It is between B2 and B4 . . .
IR. KERRIGAN: There is a difference - to be a warehouse , I think
Irou've got to be down in an I district - I don' t know the different
with a wholesale district - you've got a storage room out back and
�it is in one of the business districts - I 'm not sure how far it
�ould go down - t guess I haven' t looked at it as though Council
ere rezoning it but I think any use of the property is going to be
ommercial . I don' t see it as an office structure in a B-1 zone .
I
�onit know if wholesaling is - or light wholesaling is permitted or
here in B-4 that starts . Are there any other questions that I can
�nswer?
i
�R. GREENBERG: Has the Ithaca Neighborhood Housing agency ever beell
!Called in to look at this property or
i
IIR. KERRIGAN: Not to my knowledge. Cora, have you ever been con-
tacted by INHS about this property?
iMRS. SEPOS: No, I don't
f
I
I!
- 70 -
I
'IMR. KERRIGAN: Has anybody ever contacted you about renovating it
i
or changing it for residential use?
I
MRS. SEPOS: No. I might add . . .
I!
CHAIRMAN AMAN: If you are going to speak, I wish you would come
forward.
iMR. KERRIGAN: Why don' t you come up . Do you want to tell them
Iiabout your problems with the property?
(MRS. SEPOS: When you were talking about the property in back of
(Fourth street , I lived there when I first got married and I was
there when Lake View Dairy moved in. For a number of years I live
there probably ten or eleven years so I 'm just going to say - that
E
+was commercial - you know - there were homes there - quiet people -
1we had children and the big trucks and the milk trucks and banging
fall night. I mean, God bless , you know - I 'm not complaining about
it but in back of me and in front of me and on both sides - all four
sides of me - and I can't understand why it isn't commercial . It '
all businesses - on all all around me - surrounding me.
iMR. KERRIGAN: Cora could you tell them what difficulties you had
living there after the death of your husband?
MRS. SEPOS : Yes . Well - I slept with a shot gun for quite awhile.
The housing project threw rocks at me broke my windows, at that
time I had insurance and I hired a man to mow my lawn and he was -
they threw rocks at him and I had to cut that out - he refused to
come there and mow my lawn anymore it looks terrible and it ' s
a terrible place to just live - for a family to live . You cannot
live there - you have to fear for your life . I had a beautiful
Thome there I really did and I think the only thing that should b
built there is a concrete building or a prison or something. I do ' t
( mean to cry and I 'm not a speech maker . . .
( CHAIRMAN AMAN: That ' s fine, we understand . . Thank you ma'am.
MRS. SEPOS: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any further questions from the Board? Thank you
` Mr. Kerrigan. Is there anyone wishing to speak for the variance?
1Speaking on behalf of the variance request.
MR. MARVIN: I 'm Ralph Marvin, I 'm a licensed real estate salesman
v
i�
I
- 71 -
with Gallagher Commercial Properties and I am familiar with this
particular property. To explain what it is, it used to be a very nice
! one-story building with a large attic which was useable as a playroom.
`On the first floor there are three bedrooms , a bath, kitchen, a
diving room and a dining room - it was very nicely built but, the
i
� building is now in need of a new roof, all the windows on one side
i
Ijhave been broken out and half of the others on the other side - some-
!how
o e-!how the kids sort of missed it but they are getting around to it .
IThe roof is in need of replacement - what was beautiful hardwood
ifloors are beginning to warp and I 'm afraid that I can' t agree
i
(with Mr. Kerrigan who said that no one would live there, probably
I
Ila couple of squatters would move in but that is about the limit of
the residential quality of that particular house. It has many
violations of the City Code and all of those would have to be met
before it could become useable. So at the present moment the building
jas such is not useable and I 'd like to emphasize what Mrs . Sepos
I
lsaid when she told me about this awhile back and I 'm emphasizing it
I'
lonly because I 'm speaking louder than she did. The place is going
E
Ito rack and ruin basically because no one will go near it, as she
has told me - the man that was supposed to be cutting the grass had
the kids throwing stones at him so he refused to go back. The hedges
,i
fare approximately ten feet tall and they used to be the nicely clipped
hedges kept down to approximately three feet . As to the hardship,
I
IMr. Kerrigan has pointed out that it is an extreme burden on Mrs .
iSepos because she has no income from the property and only expenses .
I
As to the area, T would like to submit that there be no change in the
i
{character of the area. Norton Electric will be moving maybe 300 yards
I
;from their present location to a new location. They are a daytime ,
jquiet , business . Right across the street and I didn' t hear Mr.
it
IIKerrigan mention it - is a bowling alley. And while I 'm not compla'n-
1!
Ding that its noisy, it could be but what it does attract is a lot o
('nighttime business. It is not a quiet afternoon business . Again,
I
'to emphasize -- there is an all night gasoline station - there is a
I
1124 hour grocery there and the property that we are asking for a
I I
Ilvariance for - or Mr . Kerrigan is asking for a variance for - would be
l�
ii
I:
i - 72 -
I
IIfor a daytime, quiet business with very little traffic. There is
Ione other thing that I neglected and I might throw that one in too
I
land that is the fact that this is an old frame building uninsulate -
I
,, not energy efficient and therefore when they attempt to heat it th y
would be using a lot more fuel than is really needed for a building
that size and so I am recommending and speaking for the variance.
Any questions?
I
! CHAIRMAN AMAN: I know that you mentioned this earlier but the hou
I
Us late and it slipped my mind but - you are moving from across the
street- what are you going to do with the other building over there?
MR. KERRIGAN: Norton Electric leases this building on Third Street
I
at the present time . They would move their entire operation to this -
� if it meets with. the Board' s approval - presumably the owners of this
building would find another similar tenant who would meet the zoning
requirement which is a B-3 or B-4 , if I 'm not mistaken down there?
i
IIMR. GAINEY: Two and four you've got down there, right?
'CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak for the
'!I
(,variance? Anyone here wishing to speak against the requested vari-
ance? Yes sir, will you come forward?
MR. KESHISOGLOU: My name is Mike Keshisoglou and I live at 315
!Fourth Street. My property is adjacent to that land and I am sure
I
that a construction of a warehouse or building I ' ll have more voice
land more polution than is already existing . Also two thingss sur-
rise me - one is just because a business wants an extra place for
is warehouse - appears to change the residential area to a commercia .
lIf some of the business they are getting downtown Ithaca would do
I
!the same thing I am sure we didn' t - we are not going to have any o
many residential areas downtown. Also , the City Department of Plan
i
ding and Development - the meeting of June 24 , 1980 - no representa
gltive from Ithaca Housing Authority attended that meeting. I don't
now if someone is today here. There are about one hundred apart-
nents very close to that area and I am sure they want to breath som
�lear air and have some less noises instead of more . Also , I am ve y
I
orry about Mrs. Cora Sepos because she couldn' t sell her house but
L
ii
`'unfortunately leased it for sale for two yea s
I
Ii
1-
- 73 -
�i
Ior so without any luck but she forgot to mention that under the sign
�
was the word commercial . It isn' t commercial either, at least right
now. That ' s all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any questions from the Board? Is there anyone els
jwishing to speak?
MR. WILCOX: Could you point out your house on that ?
JMR. KESHISOGLOU: Yes sir.
IfMR. KERRIGAN: You are the one closest to the Electric & Gas?
SMR. KESHISOGLOU: Right.
(CHAIRMAN AMAN: Anyone else wishing to speak against the proposed
i
variance?
I
MRS. SEPOS: I do.
I'
CHAIRMAN AMAN: You want to respond to his point?
(MRS. SEPOS: Yes.
!CHAIRMAN AMAN: If you can do it very briefly then we will conclude
11this case. If you wouldn' t mind coming forward.
MRS. SEPOS: He feels sorry for me, I don't know who he is or how
,long he has lived there. I lived there all my life and I had com-
I
mercial trucks and this and that coming in and out - you know - it
was no big deal . So I don' t think he will be bothered by that - I
9lived there many years. I don't think he will be bothered at all .
;CHAIRMAN AMAN: Thank you ma' am.
IDR. GREENBERG: I think at one point , Fred, the gentleman from the
!'Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services was going to respond to my
yI
question about what . . .
;CHAIRMAN AMAN: Yes if that gentleman would come forward, we would
i
,appreciate it .
IMR. LEE: I didn't come prepared to speak and probably for reasons -
I should abstain from discussing it . In fairness to . . .
�I
iIMR. WILCOX: What was the question?
I
;IDR. GREENBERG: Well , I know that the Neighborhood Housing Service
Chas been active in my area and I 've been to meetings and I think that
this is the type of property that they have been attempting to
ilrenovate , is that correct?
IlMR. LEE: That is correct .
I�
I�
f
I!
- 74 -
l
SDR. GREENBERG: That is correct. I know that they may not have
Illooked at this one particularly but I think it is this type of thing
lithat they may have an opinion about so I was going to ask - you know
'! if you had some kind of comment to make in regard to it - as a
general statement even if it is not specific to this property.
MR. LEE: Tom, you understand it? Well , speaking for Neighborhood
I
House - we would - I think Sue mentioned last week that several
people had approached her at some point about the property. I heard
a gentleman say something about no one had ever approached to buy it
I
,(for residential use - there seems to be a difference who has spoke to
(whom. We have just begun in the northside area the past year and we
!will be making a greater effort all over that area in the upcoming
years . And it is something that conceivably we might be involved with
I
but the property - I think what has turned — as the gentleman mentioned
!in the back - has turned people off before was the high price that
that property was being sold for so by the time somebody comes
!in and attempts to renovate it for residential use they have over
'!invested in that property that is surrounded by commercial entities .
i
MR. ANGELL: Well would your agency be interested in it in connect! n
!with the Ithaca Housing Authority then?
MR. LEE: I think the Ithaca Housing Authority should speak for
I
!themselves . And someone should have been here because it does
affect them - it does impact that community but I don't know - I
can' t say we would definitely buy the property and renovate it - it
his something that we would - we could conceivably be interested in
i
�but there are a lot of other properties that I think the general
(community - northside community would benefit from before we got to
!that one and . . .
`DR. GREENBERG: Do you know the listed asking price? What they ar
Hasking for that house?
R. LEE: I think it was originally listed for $49 ,500 which takes
iit out of the realm of residential possibilities .
!DR. GREENBERG: Thanks a lot.
11�R. LEE: And that strictly off the record.
MR. KERRIGAN: May I answer, Mr. Chairman, very briefly?
II
If
it
I
75 -
I
(!CHAIRMAN AMAN: Yes.
fMR. KERRIGAN: I don't know what the property was listed for. It 's
about one-half an acre with a single family home that was sold - or
was proposed to be sold for $35 ,000. The broker who was unable to
i
The here has indicated to me that the people that he took to see the
(property, over the three or four years that he had it , which num-
bered five or six - he couldn't get to the point of discussing pric .
They looked at the neighborhood and said the price was not affectiv .
) CHAIRMAN AMAN: Was it being offered as commercial piece of real
testate? Possibility of commercial piece of real estate?
SMR. KERRIGAN: There was some discussion before the - I don' t know.
There was some discussion before the Zoning Board that one of the
Forest City Realty Signs was supposed to have commercial across it -
�I don't know - I do know ' t was - think ' t has been shown - I know
o a� I a, s
f
'that it has been shown to more prospective residential buyers than
1,commercial buyers there were very few of either in view of the
,;state of the property - its unheated and the cost of I think if it
iwere given away it would take to insulate it and renovate it I
�i
don't know - I'm not going to guess at numbers . I have one request
lif you take a look at the photographs you might get some sense of
f
jthe neighborhood when you deliberate,
i
11CHAIRMAN AMAN; We will .
MR. KERRIGAN: Thank you.
; CHAIRMAN AMAN: Any other people wishing to speak for or against
I
, this variance? The Board will adjorn to executive session and
Ildeliberate. It probably will take us sometime but whenever we
,; finish we will reconvene and announce our decisions but I can' t sa
ii
( when that will be but you are welcome to stay. If you don't stay,
! my understanding is that you will be informed of the results just
�l
1by calling Tom Hoard' s office or you will be informed by mail .
II�
f'
Ii
i!
Ii
l)
ill
ii
ii
i'
- 76 -
li
i BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
JULY 1 , 1980
i
I
EXECUTIVE SESSION
i
APPEAL NO. 1311 :
The Board considered your request for a use and area variance unde
Section 30. 25, Columns 2, 11 and 14 to permit construction of a
116,875 square foot electrical supply building at 316 Third Street
! adjacent to an existing building. The property is located in an
i
! R-3b use district in which warehousing and other commercial uses
( proposed are not permitted uses , the proposed building would encroach
Fin the required rear yard, and the existing building is too close
Ito the front property line.
I
1DR. GREENBERG: I move that the Board deny the use and area
variances requested in appeal number 1311 .
MR. ANGELL: I second the motion.
VOTE: 4 Yes ; 1 No ; 1 Absent DENIED
IFINDINGS
OF FACT: 1) This property is zoned residential and the
I change of zoning should be done by the Common
Council , not by the Board of Zoning Appeals .
i
2) The question of the salability of the real
f
estate was difficult to judge in that we wer
I
lead to believe that the asking price was
based on a commercial value rather than a
residential value .
i 3) There is a large residential population in
I the area which would be adversely affected
by the addition of another industrial type
of business .
4) Even if undue hardship were shown the re-
quested variance would necessitate a major
change in zoning from a residential area to
1 an industrial area.
,I
I
,
III
I
- 77 -
IIi
I,
II
I , BARBARA RUANE, DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes of the Boar
of Zoning Appeals , City of Ithaca, in the matters of Appeals
i
numbered 1309, 2-2-80, 5-2-80 , 6-3-80, 6-4-80 , 7-1-80 , 7-2-80,
7-3-80, 1305 , 1306, 1307 , 1308 , 1310 , 1311 on July 1 , 1980 at
j City Hall, City of Ithaca, New York; that I have transcribed same ,
and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minute
i
of the meeting and the Executive Session of the Board of Zoning
�i Appeals, City of Ithaca and the whole thereof to the best of my
I
ability.
I
i
Barbara C. Ruane
Recording Secretary
i
I;
I
i
i
Sworn to before me this
'i
I
day of 1980
i
Notary Public
PUTHANN BROWN
Notary Public, state of New Y&k
NL 46',1223
Qualified in l,,n:pf:ins County
Terni Expires :rch 30, 19 L
I
I
i
i
I
Ii
I
l