The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMN-BZA-1975-05-05 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK, MAY 5, 1975 ------------------------------------------------------------------ At a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, held in Common Council Chambers, City Hall, Ithaca, New York, on May 5, 1975: PRESENT:. PETER MARTIN, CHAIRMAN GREGORY KASPRZAK EDGAR GASTEIGER JOHN BODINE C. MURRAY VAN MARTER EDISON JONES, Building Commissioner and Secretary CHRISTINE SMITH, Recording Secretary ABSENT: ELVA HOLMAN Chairman Martin opens meeting, listing members of Board present and stating that one member is absent and it takes four votes one way or the other for an appeal and anyone wishing to hold their case over to the next time in hopes of having a full Board present may do so. This Board is operating under the provisions of the City Charter of the City of Ithaca and of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinances; the Board shall not be bound by strict rules of evidence in the conduct of this hearing, but the determination shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidence to sustain the sane. Th Board requests that all participants identify themselves as to nam and address, and confine their discussions to the pertinent facts of the case under consideration. Please avoid extraneous material which would have a delaying effect. Commissioner Jones lists what case No. 1075 is to be. APPEAL N0. 1075: The Appeal of William P. Sullivan for inter- pretation for use variance under Section 30.25 Column 2 and 3 at 417 N. Aurora Street in a R-3 use district. ' MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, there are two things that we are asking for tonight. First is a interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance insofar as it relates to the definition of Home Occupation contained under the definitions. As you know from a prior proceeding that was had before you, we would like to be able to use the premises at 417 N. Aurora Street as a portion of the premises as a professional Law Office. At the present time, my father lives at the premises, he intends to continue to -2- live at the premises and the proposal would make use of a portion of the first floor premises as a professional law office. I sugge t to you that this comes within the definition of Home Occupation where it provides it where a member of the family at least in a relevant part, where it provides a member of the family residing in the home, may conduct a business which is then entitled a Home Occupation. The family living at the premises is the Sullivari family a member of the family conducting the business would be me, as a member of the family and I think that it does comport with all the other requirements of the Home Occupation provisions. In addition, we are here tonight asking you also for a variance. A variance which would permit the use of a portion of the premises as a professional law office. There are several basis on which we make that request, with the permission of the Chairman, I will defer those in some reform until such time as we've had a opportunity to put in before you all the evidence through the testimony of my father, Mr. Sullivan, and through the testimony of myself and through the testimony of Mr. Agard, here present tonight. MR. MARTIN: In other words you are asking for the chance to summarize the support of evidence as you see it. I think that it might make sense before proceeding the request for a variance, if there are any questions that there might be on this matter of interpretation. Do any of the Board members have any questions on that point? MR. BODINE: Do you maintain a residence someplace other than at this location? MR. SULLIVAN: At the present time I reside at 310 Taylor Place on west hill. MR. MARTIN: Your argument is that the language of the Home Occupation section when it talks about residing in the dwelling unit is referring to the family and not to the particular member who is engaged in the occupation? -3- MR. SULLIVAN: I believe that is a fair reading of the statute and again without getting terribly technical where there is a question raised by a statute such as this, the courts have indicated that these type of statutes are derogation of the common law and therefore, must be strictly construed against the municipality. • On that principal of interpretation and upon a fair reading of the provision involved, I think that so long as a family resides there any member of that family can conduct whats called a Home Occupation. MR. MARTIN: I'm curious then, what' s you definition of a member of a family is? I note that in the definition of family in the Code, it speaks of persons occupying a dwelling unit presumably together and then it goes on to limited by certain characteristics (blood, marriage or adoption or other legal relationship) . MR . SULLIVAN: Right, but a member of the family does not necessarily have to reside there, I don' t think. A member of the family is anyone related by blood or marriage to the family, which I think is a basic definition. MR. MARTIN: May I ask the other side of it under the interpretation you've argued for. How much living there does your father have to do for it to remain his residence which would then allow you as a member of his family to practice law there. MR. SULLIVAN: Of course, the law says where a person intends to have a place as his residence, then that is his residence. My father lives their, he votes from there, he occupies a Lportion of the premises, he also in as much as he is retired from time to time does leave the state for periods of time. MR. MARTIN: So, theinterpretation you argue for is that as long as it is one person' s legal residence however tenuous their • physical contacted with it, another member of their family anyone related to them by blood, can use it for a Home Occupation. MR. SULLIVAN: I think that is right. MR. GASTEIGER: From the discussions that were made at the Planning Board, their reference made to Anderson Zoning Law Practice, New York State and your position to need a variance with their interpretation from that source? -4- MR. SULLIVAN: Well of course, Anderson is a treatise that deals with or purports to deal with a summary of applicable cases in New York. I'm not-'sure that the editorial summary has any force other than persuasive force in law. To my knowledge this narrow question has never been put before the courts in that context before. In the narrow context that we are framing it here tonight. This is a case, I think at least in New York, a first impression. Are there any other questions on that? If I can, I would like to go on to the question of variance. Whatever your determination on the question of the interpretation is, I think when we deal with the question of variance there is little doubt but what a variance should be granted. I'd like to start, if I could with the Zoning Ordinance itself, and a document upon which that Zoning Ordinance purports to be based . That is the general plan which was adopted in 1971 by the City Planning Board . That particular document provided at least in relevant part page 29 and if I may I' d like to read a section from it. "It is anticipated that the residential character of the Fall Creek neighborhood will continue in the future. The conversion of the large houses to multiple dwelling units and offices is an increasing trend in the neighborhood. Because of the large size of the building ( south of Marshall Street) it is anticipated that the conversion of the buildings will be contained within this area, that is between Court Street and Marshall Street. The increased open space suggested should enhance the residential character of the area" and it goes on later to talk about proposals and it talks about convenience commercial centers in the northern end of the neighbor- hood that' s down in the Fall Creek area that it refers to should not be permitted to expand. Constraints should be placed on the neighborhood commercial center between Cascadilla Avenue and Marshall Street. New convenience shopping centers in the area should not be permitted. I think that the master plan anticipates an expansion as far North as Marshall Street of the commercial, professional, service oriented uses that we now see pushing into the R-3 district. We are dealing here of course, with an R-3 district or at least what the statute calls an R-3 district. I've -5- done a survey and I'd like to submit before the Board some photographs and as I . . . . . may I pass them to you? MR. MARTIN: Are you entering these as evidence? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, I am. May I pass them to you as I describe them to you one by one. Is that acceptable? MR. MARTIN: How many do you have? MR. SULLIVAN: There are 95. MR. MARTIN: Well, will it take 95 minutes or. . . . . MR. SULLIVAN: I hope not. MR. MARTIN: Okay. MR. SULLIVAN: The photograph marked number 1 is a picture taken on the Aurora Street over Cascadilla Creek which looks in a generally westerly direction along Cascadilla Creek and shows both Tioga Street where the first car is seen and Cayuga Street where you see a second car well in the center of the picture much in the distance which I will be referring to later as I deal with • the other pictures . Incidentally these pictures were taken during the first week of April, I myself took the pictures. Picture # 2 is a picture taken from about the middle of the 300 block of N. Aurora Street looking north that is looking toward the subject premises that we are referring to. Among other things in this picture you might note the character of the buildings in this neighborhood which is some three or four hundred feet away from the subject premises. Many of the premises are less than a block away. This picture of the 300 block of N. Aurora of course, is a R-3, I'm sorry a B-1 district which permits a professional law office' s in that area. The third picture is a picture taken again in the middle of the 300 block of North Aurora Street looking south that is looking toward what we might call the downtown district and it shows clearly the commercial nature of the buildings in that area. Picture # 4 is a picture of the subject premises 417 North Aurora Street, in the rear on the right side of the picture is a small house which is 415 North Aurora Street, about which we will give further exhibits here tonight. Picture # 5 is the same picture but from a little different angle again of the subject premises . Picture # 6 is a little closer view of the -6- premises of 415 North Aurora Street. Picture 3 7 shams Wagner Funeral Home which is located immediately north of the subject premises and on the right hand side of the picture you may see the corner of the subject premises. Picture # 8 is again another picture of Wagner Funeral Home from a little different angle and you may see in the right corner of the picture, the subject premises. Picture # 9 was taken from the front porch of the subject premises looking in a westerly direction and shows the Teen Challenge Center located directly or nearly directly across the street from the subject premises. Picture # 10 is one of, in fact, it might be the only picture of residential buildings shown within the R-3 district. It' s shown simply for the purpose of showing the condition of repair of some of the buildings in that particular neighborhood. Picture # 11 shows the offices of Robert Duthie a dentist, located at 436 North Aurora Street, less than % block north of the subject premises. Picture # 12 • shows the premises located on the corner of North Aurora Street and Farm Street, again in the 400 block of North Aurora Street, about % block north of the subject premises occupied by and used by Doctors Neish, and Gardner as dental offices. Picture # 13 shows premises which are presently used at least in part by Mr. James McCarthy for McCarthy Real Estate which is located approxi- mately 1 block north of the subject premises. Picture # 14 drops down to the 500 block of North Tioga Street about a block and a half or two blocks away from the subject premises and it shows the premises occupied by Judd Welch and other accountants as part of an accounting business, again within the residential district. Picture # 15, shows a picture of a house which is locat d in the same relative position on Tioga Street as the subject premises are located on Aurora Street that is immediately north of the Creek on the East side of the street. These premises are used as a book store by a person by the name of Mr. Gould. The premises shows a picture of that commercial use. Picture # 16 shows the Church is located in the 400 block of North Aurora Street. -7- I'm not sure what the exact name of the Church is but, it' s the Temple of Christ or Temple of Lord and Christ, I'm not sure of the exact name. It' s in the northern part of the 400 block of North Aurora Street. I'm sorry Tioga Street. Picture 17, is a picture looking in a generally easterly direction from Tioga Street toward Aurora Street in the background you can see the subject premises. In the foreground you see a sign which says Tioga Street and this is a block away from the subject premises. Picture # 18 is a picture of a building which houses several dentist and several Real Estate Salesmen. The dentist are Dr. Baldini, Dr. Cappucci, and Dr. Fey. The Realtors are J. D. Gallagher Co. Inc . and I'm advised there are some seven or eight Realtors which occupy or work out of the upstairs of this building which is located a block away in a residential district from the subject premises. Picture # 19, is a picture of a building locate on the corner of N. Tioga Street and East Court Street which is presently occupied by Fay Hewitt Realty and I understand there are several realtors or several salespersons who work out of this building. This is located about a block and % away from the subject premises again in a R-3 district. Picture # 20 shows the Temple Beth-E1 located again in the 400 block of N. Cayuga Street. It' s about two blocks or a block % away from the subject premises. Picture # 21, is a picture of 408 N. Tioga Street which is occupied by a Realtor in a residential district. Patterson Real Estate also Gardner Real Estate which involves management of Real Estate properties in the City. There are several persons working for Mr. Patterson in addition to Mr . Gardner. Also in addition to these uses there are at least two dentist offices in this building. About a block or a little more than a block away from the subject premises. Picture # 22 shows the Tioga Building located immediately north of the premises in picture # 21 which is occupied and used for commercial uses by a number of dentist. Thi premises is also located about a block away. I should also mentio the 400 block of N. Tioga Street there is a picture which apparently was not developed. Maybe my film techniques are not what they should be, involving Weaver, Schempp and McNeill which is located -8- just south of the building housed by Gallagher Real Estate and Doctors Baldini, Cappucci and Fey. I'd like to move to # 23 and this shows a view of one angle of the northerly block of the 400 block of N. Cayuga Street which houses a restaurant, super market, Mickey' s Market and also has a vacant store in between those two buildings. I ask you to note exhibit 23 and 24 which follows the view of the same premises from a different angle. The traffic patterns in that picture shows the nature of the neighborhood there. Picture # 25 is a picture of a gas station which is locate on the corner of Farm Street and Cayuga Street and I think it speaks for itself. Exhibit # 26 is a picture of the North Side Pharmacy in the 500 block of N. Cayuga Street. Again, that speaks for itself, clearly a commercial use in the building. Exhibit # 27 is a picture of Guy Natali' s Insurance Agency in the 500 block of N. Cayuga Street. That particular building has what appears to be a modern structure appended to the front of what otherwise would have appeared to be a traditional residential type home which is used for commercial use. Exhibit # 28, is a picture of the 500 block of N. Cayuga Street showing The Ithaca Foreign Car Service Center. At the intersection of Cayuga and Marshall Street. We then head back in a southerly direction to the corner of Cascadilla Street and Cayuga Street or Lake Avenue. There is a picture of a business operated under the name of Finger Lakes Typewriter and Adding Machine Service at the rear of the premises on the corner of Lake Avenue and Cascadilla Street I refer you next to picture # 30 which shows I believe Esther Martins Real Estate Offices located in the 400 block, 425 N. Cayuga Street again in a residential area, a commercial use. The next premises are shown in picture # 31 at 417 N. Cayuga Street, the identical number of the premises at 417 N. Aurora Street two blocks west which are presently occupied by Robert Hines an Attorney and used as Attorney' s offices. Since that time, the time that this picture was taken, I understand a sign has been added to the front of the building showing Robert J. Hines Attorney. Picture # 32 shows again the corner of Cayuga Street and Cascadilla Avenue, this is the west side of the street now where there is an -9- antique shop and a Real Estate Brokers Office, Phoebe Moore' s Real Estate Office, again two blocks away from the subject premise clearly a commercial use. Exhibit # 33 is a picture of a Beauty or a house which houses a Beauty Parlor, I'm sorry at this time I can' t remember the name of the people, the address is 422 N. Cayug Street. Exhibit # 34, is a picture showing a house which also houses a photo studio and again this is located at 408 N. Cayuga Street but I don' t remember the name of the people who operate the Photo Studio, again 21/2 blocks away from the subject premises. Next, picture # 35 is of 404 N. Cayuga Street which shows the premises there occupied by several doctors. I think there are four doctors or five doctors names on the plaque and I think there is another doctor whose name is not on the sign outside. Number 37 is a picture at 308 N. Cayuga Street which I recall is also a doctors office although I don' t recall the name of the doctor there. Number 38 is a picture again in the 300 block of N. Cayuga Street occupied by two Attorney' s. On the first floor Wesley McDermott and Fred Weinstein. The second floor occupied by the Speno family business. Number 36 which I passed over of course, is a picture of the Tompkins County Library and that also I suggest is not a residential use although it is located approximately three or so blocks away from the subject premises. MR. MARTIN: You are less than half way through the pile if I recall your numbers. I think you can assume all the members of the Board are familiar with the area and perhaps if you could summarize them in groups, or if you like proceed one by one. MR. SULLIVAN: What I'm concerned with is that if there is any questions later on among you people or for anyone else as to what the pictures show so that it is clear what picture . . . . . . . MR. MARTIN: Alright identify them as you wish, I'm only pointing out that you may not be giving us a kind of total sense that you want in any better fashion by identifing them one by one. MR. KASPRZAK: Are these numbered? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, they are. MR. KASPRZAK: Can we accept them as evidence pictures number 1 through whatever they are? -10- MR. MARTIN: His point is that he would like to be able to describe them precisely what and where they are. MR. SULLIVAN: What premises they are and that is not on the pictures, I'm sorry. MR. GASTEIGER: Could a list be submitted with the pictures? MR. SULLIVAN: I don' t have anything in writing for you at this time. I'm sure that you want to decide this case tonight. MR. MARTIN: Can I suggest insofar as they come in clumps that you can identify them by streets. . . . . . MR. SULLIVAN: Picture # 39 is a picture of the Presbyterian Church on the corner of Cayuga and Court Streets. Number 40 is a picture of the Episcopal Church on the corner of Buffalo Street and Cayuga Street just over three blocks away from the subject premises. Number 41 is a picture of the Dewitt Building, the Dewitt Mall which houses several attorneys, several offices including the offices of the Congressmen from this particular district, several businesses and a number of apartments in that particular building. Number 42 is a picture which depicts the premises on the 100 block of E. Buffalo Street showing the commercial nature of the uses of those premises for Open House, for a Secretarial Service called Help Limited and some sort of Boutique. Number 43 is the drive-in teller of Citizens Savings Bank on the 100 Block of E. Buffalo Street. MR. GASTEIGER: Why are we looking at property down there in a B Zone that are not relevant in this case? MR. SULLIVAN: They certainly are relevant, Mr. Gasteiger, if I may, they are relevant because what we are dealing with here not withstanding, what the Zoniqg Ordinance says, we are dealing with a area within three blocks, which houses more than 100 non- residential uses and I'm attempting to show that within three blocks. MR. GASTEIGER: Could I make the point though, that there be no Zoning on the basis of your argument. MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, I think there is. It certainly affects the value of the premises, I suggest it affects the value of the premi es by restricting uses. -11- MR. MARTIN: But that would be true of any property. MR. SULLIVAN: But that may be, but I still think that I'm entitle to . . . . . MR. MARTIN: Right, you're certainly entitled to present the evidence and to argue that properties across the B-2 line are relevant to the issue. I do think arguably:! -, they are relevant. I said that we would raise again the question whether this is an efficient way to make your point. MR. SULLIVAN: If there is some other way that I could summarize it, I'd be glad to do it. MR. MARTIN: Please try the best you can. MR. SULLIVAN: Exhibit 44 is a picture on the corner of North Tioga Street and Buffalo Street showing the Telephone Building which houses the equipment. Exhibit 45 and 46 are County properties. 45 being Boardman House and 46 being the annex to the Court House in the 100 block of Buffalo Street. 47 is the Ithaca Savings and Loan Association Bank Building. 48 now on Tioga Street, the 300 block of Tioga Street is a Professional Building occupied by several attorney' s. Used by several Attorney' s I think seven or eight at last count and an accountant and an architect. 49 is the Court House property. 50 on the 100 block of East Court Street the Tompkins County Jail which incidentially is within a block and a half or 2 blocks away from the subject premises. 51 shows a view from Dewitt Park looking at the Baptist Church which also fronts on the 100 block of E. Court Street. 52 is a picture of the Old Court House. 53 shows a picture of the Ithaca Clinic for Women which is located just a hair over 3 blocks away from the subject premises and houses eight or nine doctors. 54 is a pictur of another building which houses several doctors located just west of the Ithaca Clinic for Women. 55 is The Chamber of Commerce Building located in a residential area, I might add about 3% blocks away from the subject premises . 56 is a building for which you people have granted a variance in the past for use as a law office, architect office, accountants office, which is sometimes known as the Bank of Newburg Building located about 2 or 21/2 blocks away from the subject premises. 57 is a building occupied by two -12- lawyers in a residential area, the offices of Norman Freeman and Paul Tavelli located in the 200 block of E. Court Street. 58 is a picture of the offices occupied by three Attorney' s, John LoPint , Mike LoPinto and Robert Stolp located in the 300 block of N. Tioga Street. The other pictures between 59-64 represent all the other buildings on the east side of the 300 block of N. Tioga Street which show commercial premises including an insurance office, another law office housing three lawyers, a office for Family and Children Service, a office for the Drug Programming Coordinator of Tompkins County, an office for 3 other lawyers a couple of insurance companies being the new Thaler Building which we've all read about in the papers recently and finally Reinhardt Interiors which is a home decorating outfit. 65 is a picture of the YMCA located about two blocks away from the subject premises. 66 is a picture of the Telephone Companies Business Offices. 67 is a picture of the Post Office and again, located within 2 blocks of the subject premises. 68 shows a picture of a 5 story parking garage which is located 2 blocks away from the subject premises in the heart of Downtown Ithaca. 69 is a picture looking north on North Aurora Street showing the Pine Tavern which is located some two blocks away from the subject premises and other blocks in that area. 70 is a picture of the next shop down, The Oriental Shop. 71, the next shop which is The Beam Travel Center, Inc. 72 a picture of Bools Flower Shop which is again traveling in a northerly direction toward the subject premises within two blocks of the subject premises . 73 is a picture of Stewart Home Alumni Service which is located just north of Bools Flower Shop. 74 is a picture of the Tectonics Building, the old Crescent Theater which is now used for offices and where incidentially I have a temporary Law Office two blocks away from the subject premises . 75 is a gas station on the corner of Buffalo and Aurora Street which I think speaks for itself. 76 is a picture of the Unitarian Church, kiddy corner from the last gas station. 77 is a picture of the First Unitarian Church School Building at 306 N. Aurora St. 78 is a picture of 310 N. Aurora which is sometimes called the professional building and actually it butts to the building cf -13- Mr. Thaler recently built and there is another picture back on Tioga Street. 79 less than a block away from the premises here is a picture of a building which is occupied by Dr. Visnyei. 80 is a picture of premises occupied by Dr. Leone and McCarthy Builders about % block away from the subject premises. We are • now traveling to the east side of the 300 block of N. Aurora Street showing the Boy Scout Offices and Community Chest or United Fund offices in pictures 81 and 82. 83 shows the studios of WTKO, the administrative offices of WTKO, a commercial radio station located about % block away from the subject premises. 84 shows a picture of Mr. Richard Mulvey' s Office and his associates Martin Shapiro, Philip Winn and Sally Jackle. I would note in passing that that building is approximately 400 feet south of the subject premises and houses both the City Attorney and his private practice and also houses the Attorney for the Urban Renewal, formally the Attorney for the Urban Renewal Agency here in the City of Ithaca. 85 is a picture standing on the corner of Seneca Street and Aurora Street looking South showing the clearly commercial nature, I'm not talking professional now, commercial nature of the buildings there. 86 shows a picture looking at the east side of the 100 block of Aurora, showing the commercial nature of the buildings in that area. 87 is a picture looking west on the corner of Aurora and Seneca Streets showing the commercial nature of the premises there, including the tavern or bar called The Dugout. 88 is another picture of the five story parking ramp located two blocks away from the subject premises. 89 is a picture looking north at the west side of the 200 block of N. Tioga Street showing the commercial nature of the premises there about 2 or 3 blocks away from the subject premises. We now come to exhibit 90 which shows the First Methodist Church on the corner of Aurora and Court Street which incidentially exhibit 91 shows a view fmn the front porch of the subject premises. 92 shows premises presently occupied by Theresa O' Brien which are located nearly directly across the street. These are residential premises which have several apartments in the building -14- I don' t have a picture, which wasn' t developed, of the premises at the north east corner of Aurora and Court Street which are housed by Kiely Real Estate and Kiely Insurance. Mr. Kiely, of course, being the past Mayor of the City of Ithaca. Those premise are located just south of the premises shown in 93 which are residential. The premises in 94 are the next premises in a northe ly direction from 93. 95 are the premises which are presently owned and occupied by a family by the name of Carlson, which I understand also, those premises have a use which is not strictly residential, from time to time when Mr. Carlson teaches classes in those premis s to students of his from the University. I'd like to if I may, and I'm sure it is a relief to you after all of that, have my father talk to you briefly about the premises that we are dealing with 417 N. Aurora Street and the character of the neighborhood as he has seen it develop over the past 20 or 25 years. MR. SULLIVAN SR. : Good evening, my name is Bill Sullivan Sr. and I live at and own the premises at 417 N. Aurora and also own the premises at 415 N. Aurora. I purchased 417 ]ate in the forties and I purchased the property at 415 in the early fifties, give me a little leeway there. When I bought this home at 415, this complete area from Buffalo Street down to Farm was primarily an area catering to transits tourist. There were tourist homes up on the 300 block both side of N. Aurora Street, there were tourist homes on both sides of Court Street and Aurora Street. My home was a tourist home, the home across the street was a tourist home and there were a couple of tourist homes down the street. At that time there were no, in that area if my memory serves me right, there were no commercial ventures and by commercial I mean professional. North Aurora Street from the 300 block down was primarily other than the church was primarily homes. Doctor Forester had an office next to the Unitarian Church. Next there was Mrs. Bates where Thaler is now. It was strictly residential area, strictly. Through the years because of development in other area, developments of Hotels, motels and such, the tourist business deteriorated. These residents then changed into -15- apartments bedause of personal reasons, illness in the family, I was forced to do the same. I had to remodel and renovate and I put apartments upstairs. The apartment business today, I think you all know what it is, the cost of remodeling is prohibitive. • I have had a tenative price of trying to remodel my downstairs into apartments of approximately $15,000 and that is just out of the question. I' ll end up with two, three room apartments that will have no numeral value. MR. MARTIN: Could you describe again the present use of the building. MR. SULLIVAN SR. : I have three apartments upstairs and downstairs I have a living area for myself. What the proposal is . . . . . MR. MARTIN: Is there any reason to believe it wouldn' t be rentabl as it is now as a single unit downstairs? MR. SULLIVAN, SR. : I doubt very seriously if we could get an adequate return. I just don' t think so. MR. MARTIN: Could you expand on the use to be made at 415 now? MR. SULLIVAN.SR. : Well, if you want to talk about 415 when we bought the house at 417, 415 was a chicken coup. The people that we bought the house from remodeled it into a small house. Several years after that, of course, they kept a right away, several years after that to protect the front property, I was forced to buy it. Through the years I have rented it to students, the reason I rent it to students is because it' s too expensive for the type of house that it is, it would be too expensive for a couple to maintain and live in it with the heat and pay the rent. MR. MARTIN: Have you had difficulty keeping it rented? • MR. SULLIVAN SR. : No, I rent it to the same students, the same basic fraternity house for 15 or 18 years. Not the same students but the same group. The cost on it when you pay the water, heat, light, it' s just not feasible. If it will help your thinking any, I paid my last Gas and Electric bill for last month and it was nearly as much as my heat was for the first year that I owned the house at 417. So, I have tried, I have tenants that have been there for years. One woman has been there for 10 years and every -16- since she has been there I haven't raised her rent. The second one has been there for seven years and I have never raised the rent on them, so it is a real problem to make this financially feasible. As I started to say, downstairs is occupied by myself and my daughter. It is my expectation that I don' t believe I' ll be there during the winter although I expect to be there in the summer. It is to be my residence, it' s my home. It is the only place that I have. I haven' t lived : anywhere else in 25 years . And I hope to die there, but I hope not soon. So, the area has changed as I've told you when we moved in we raised four children, it was residential, the traffic was no where near what it is now. When the University lets out in the afternoon, the traffic is backed up from State Street down to Court, a solid line of traffic . So, I just don' t think that it is a place to raise children and downstairs would be, if someone rented it and wanted children and I'm sure would have children and I'm sure they wouldn' t care to • be next to the creep as it is or next to the traffic on the road. Are there any questions, I'd be glad to answer them. MR. MARTIN: Thank you Mr. Sullivan. MR. VAN MARTER: I have a question if you want to get into it. Bill lead us on a route around the area, at the time you went there Dr. Carry had his home and office on the corner of Farm and N. Aurora . MR. SULLIVAN SR: Dr. Carry? MR. VANMARTER: Yes, Dr. Carry. MR. SULLIVAN SR: There was a, not a medical Doctor, I don' t believe. MR. VANMARTER: He was a physician. MR. SULLIVAN SR: I don' t remember him, Which corner of N. Aurora MR. VANMARTER: Where Dr. Gardner and Dr. Neish are. MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, I don' t know, that is down the other side, I don' t remember it. MR. VANMARTER: This is the route that Bill Jr. lead us. Across the corner Conklin Sanitarium. Corner of Tioga and Farm was the Market Basket Store. -17- MR. SULLIVAN SR: I don' t remember any store on the corner of Tioga and Farm. I'm not saying that it wasn' t there, but I don' t remember. MR. GASTEIGER: I'm not sure that I heard this but did you say that you felt that the neighborhood had gone down? MR. SULLIVAN SR: I don' t know what you mean by going down. No, I'm perfectly content to live there. I'm not sure that I'd want to live there and raise a family that I did 25 years ago. I don' t want to give the impression that the neighborhood is deteriorated, it has changed. We have a radio station in the next block which was a single home, we have a Community Chest in the next block which was a single home which I think was the Livermore Home. Across the street we have an office building, so I don' t think that it is deteriorated I just think it has changed. MR. MARTIN: Any further questions? MR. SULLIVAN JR. I will pass out affidavits by Mr. Agard and 1 he is here to make a presentation which may vary from that (affidavit) just a bit. That affidavit is sworn to May 5, 1975 and you may want to mark that as an exhibit. MR. MARTIN: We are. MR. AGARD: My name is Richard Agard. I'm a Real Estate Broker with my office at 415 N. Tioga Street. I don' t intend to read that report that is there, if anyone has any questions. I would just like to say I'm going to be extremely brief. That having had my office in the area for 15 years, having lived two doors from the subject property. Back in the early fifties, we moved I believe in 1958 from the area, so I do feel that I can speak intimately about the area. Both from a residential point of view and from business point of view. I don' t think that there is any • question of the character of the neighborhood has changed over the years. I would certainly take exception of any reference that it has gone down and I don't think any connotation should be attached to that. It' s just things do change. I moved my family from the area because of, to some degree, some of these changes primarily traffic, I must admit. I would like to say a couple of I -18- things that may or may not be a fine edged kind of thing in regard to granting a variance but they are things that I feel. I think that sometimes we have to be reasonable in our judgement. I do think that this location is very desirable for offices especially for law offices because of its location relative to the Court House, to the assessors office, to the County Offices in general, to the banks and to other law offices which are in the area. I think that there has been perhaps some concern expressed that having offices in that area might make the neighborhood go down and I think this could be just the opposite. I think that offices in an area are very good neighbors. They are quiet, they generate minimal traffic and I can speak from having been there. Personall I feel that a refusal to approve this request, would in fact, create a genuine hardship on both the owner of the property, Mr. Sullivan Sr. who you've heard, who I suspect needs the income that this would generate without the cost that would be involved in renovation. • I think Bill Sullivan Jr. eludes to the fact that I might speak towards your question about could it be rented as a single family residence? I don' t think that there is any question that it could be rented, it' s a question of highest and best use in my mind it is a question of that and whether or not it would be a good return. It seems to me that as long as Mr. Sullivan Sr. wishes to live there and he doesn' t need all the space this would be the best most practical use. Whether or not it would financially, I have not done a cost breakdown. I would suspect that it might not return a very good dollar as a single family. I think that in addition to the . . . . . . . . MR. MARTIN: How many bedrooms are there in the downstairs unit? MR. AGARD: I think that there are three. There has been some discussion I think, about the possibility of splitting into two smaller apartments which certainly would be a feasible thing. I just think that perhaps it would not be dollars wise acceptable with todays cost for plumbers and so on. I have not personally gotten into that, I think perhaps Bill Jr. might speak to that. I have not conducted any surveys of cost, I know what it cost for plumbers and electricians however. I think that again this may -19- not be a point that could be considered but it seems to me that it should be considered, is that whereas I think that a hardship could exist for Mr. Sullivan Sr. also I think a hardship could exist for Mr. Sullivan, Jr. I think he had a very personal family reason for wanting to run his law office from this particular location which was his family home and he grew up there and I think that is hard to judge on a written report. I think further that a refusal to grant this request would not be consistant with the actions taken with other properties in the past. I personally can see no valid reason for a refusal. Thank you. MR. MARTIN: Any questions? MR. BODINE: Dick, about half of the properties in this block are being used for conforming uses either as a single residence or home dwelling . What makes this property unique in that it can not be used for a residential unit as opposed to the other propert es in the neighborhood? MR. AGARD: Johq, I don' t think that there is any special thing that makes this property unique over your property or others . It just seems to me that the circumstances right now and on this property are unique, now again. . . . . . . MR. MARTIN: You' re referring to the personal situation of the parties. MR. AGARD: The personal situation of thep arties which involve property in my opinion. Now, I have not closely read the book and perhaps I should but I can' t obviously say that and I wouldn' t say that this property is any different than perhaps a property four houses or five houses away. The Spencer property where the Spencer' s live which is perhaps five houses away and the Murray • family and others certainly a family could reside there, a family did up until the Sullivans grew up. MR. MARTIN: The book which tells us the three things that we have to find to grant a variance, tells us that one of the things that we have to find is special circumstances or unique conditions not applying generally to land or buildings in the neighborhood which prevent the land or building in question from yeilding a reasonabl return if used for any other permitted use. -20- MR. AGARD: Well, again I could not speak to an exact interpretati n of that. I would again say that in my opinion circumstances in' this case would make it very easy for me to see beyond that. I recognize that I'm over here and you're over there so I don' t know what more that I could say too, to that point. MR. GASTEIGER: Mr. Sullivan Jr. developed a case towards this being more of a business district or at least closely aligned to the business district and I think there was an implication that, that depreciated it somewhat as a residential. What is your posit or. on this for instance, I've encountered Real Estate Agents that say there is a growing need for residential property such as this within easy range of churches, medical facilities, shopping and so on. MR. AGARD: I don' t think there can be any quarrel with that, I think that part of the Urban Renewal program was pointed in that direction for certain areas which incidentially have not developed quite that way. I think Stillwell could speak more intelligently about that, Mr. Brown but I don' t think there is any question that there are . . . . . we can pick any subject mentioned and say yes but or can you prove it. I don' t think there is any question Ed, but what we need residential properties of certain kinds. Now, if we are thinking in terms of a family and I know that there are families living close by that are quite content but I think that we have to perhaps think in terms of a general overall situation and it does seem, again perhaps I'm a little bit biased, I'm certainly biased because I have an office in this area and that I've invested a considerable amount in and I'd hate to leave, somehow we got in there and I think we are legitimate but we are in an R-3 zone. I don' t know what kind of a hardship existed then but the fact remains that I am there and others are there too. We didn' t have quite the same personal situation involved. MR. VANMARTER: Dick, I have a question in regard to hardship. Define for us, we must look at the hardship as it relates to the building to the land. Could you speak to that? You mentioned the hardship to Bill Jr. and Bill Sr. -21- MR. AGARD: I think I could elude to that Murray, but I think again there could always be exceptions to this. I think that Mr. Sullivan Sr. spoke very convincingly to me about the hardship created by the size of the building and these are known facts that can' t be argued. I don' t know what it cost him to apply aluminum siding quite recently but I can expect that it was ' considerable and still we have the expensive cost to heat, and taxes and so on. Whether or not that will be sufficient to pin point this particular property, I don' t know. I don' t know what it takes Murray to create a clear enough outline for hardship in any given situation. Again it seems to me because of the circumstances surrounding this particular situation, I can see some hardship. MR. SULLIVAN JR: Can I ask a question that might clear this up? Dick, is it fair to say that the money or financial consideration that you referred to about rents and the need to obtain a return • on a investment, a fair return, would apply to anybody that owned the premises and not just to my father Mr. Sullivan Sr.? MR. AGARD: Obviously, very definitely it would. MR. SULLIVAN JR: Is there any correlation between rents with the respects to professional uses such as a lawyers office, one could reasonably expect from that, and the rents one could reasonably expect from residential uses? MR. AGARD: Very much so. MR. MARTIN: But that would be true also of any other properties up and down the street. MR. AGARD: Very definitely yes. Do you want me to answer the question? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes I would. MR. AGARD: I would say that the rent, we don' t rent houses or apartments on a square footage basis. Offices and commercial space is, but if we did figure it on a square footage basis, it would probably be roughly 2 to 1 or maybe 40% greater for the office space than the strictly residential space. I think that again, that on a comparative basis, could be considered definitely a hardship. In other words if the space that we occupy now in -22- a R-3 zone had to be used as residential, it would be financially unfeasible for Dr. Baldini who owns the building. MR. MARTIN: But, my question is, isn' t that true of all these properties on this street that are zoned R-3? MR. AGARD: Not necessarily. MR. MARTIN: Assuming that they are compatible with office use one could up the rent by converting it to offices? MR. AGARD: I would say that would be true except that I think that as your question was put, it wouldn't be true necessarily that all is the same because there are a number of properties that just by virtue of their size they are smaller and more compact and more compatible to a single family than other properties. Now, I'm sure that there are other properties, large properties that are more compatible to smaller apartments or commercial. This one just happens to be located compatible to the Court House and others where perhaps in the 500 block it wouldn' t be as interesting. MR. MARTIN: Are there any other questions? MR. KASPRZAK: You mentioned in paragraph 5 that it would cost about $14,000 to renovate that apartment and you are using someone elses statement, then you inferred that the return of such an investment, of the total property do you mean the three apartments upstairs included or just the two apartments downstairs? MR. AGARD: Yes, I would say Greg that the concept there as you mentioned the $14,000 is not my figure it is one that Bill gave me and I don' t know I suspect that to be very reasonable but it isn' t my figure. In all I'm saying that if it was in fact something near $14,000 to create another apartment on the first floor that there in the total investment that Mr. Sullivan has in the house now, plus that, probably would not make it a sensible kind of an investment. MR. KASPRZAK: In other words, you are not including the three apartments? MR. AGARD: Yes, sure it would have to. In other words lets assume for a moment that the property as it exists right now, has a cost factor or a value factor of $40,000, this is just an illustration -L3- it doesn' t relate necessarily to the fact. If one spent an additional $12,000 or 14,000 on top of that, it probably wouldn' t be financially feasible, that' s what I think what was the clearest < illustration that I could make. MR. MARTIN: Any further questions? MR. GASTEIGER: I wonder if there is a trap here. If this varianc were given and Bill Sullivan Jr. modified the downstairs into a law office and his father took legal residence in Florida, then would he not have wasted this investment? MR. AGARD: I guess I don' t understand the question, Ed. MR. MARTIN: He is asking for a variance in this half of the case in which event he would remain legal after his father moved his legal residence. MR. GASTEIGER: Then the whole question of Home Occupation. . . . . . . MR. MARTIN: On the variance side of the case is irrelevant. MR. SULLIVAN: May I ask one other question of Dick? MR. MARTIN: Sure. MR. SULLIVAN: Can you talk with the Board in terms of the need for office spaces in the area which is encompassed or encompasses the subject premises here. Is there a pressure away from the downtown area for office needs in this area and what can we expect in the future? MR. AGARD: Well, I don' t know whether I could say that there is pressure for offices. There is in recent months some pressure for offices in this area. This created by the renovation of the offices in the Savings Bank. A number of offices, in fact, many of the offices there have been asked to leave just as an example, Dave Barr had to move and the Ithaca Board of Realtors had to move and is in occupancy right across the street from my office which is in a R-3 zone. MR. SULLIVAN: So they moved from a business district to a residential district, The Ithaca Board of Realtors? MR. AGARD: We weren' t aware that we were in violation. MR. SULLIVAN: I'm not sure that you are. MR. AGARD: I'm not sure that we are either. To answer your I s question, I would say that there has been and probably will contin�E -24- to be demand for offices. I don' t know if that is the answer that you want, but that happens to be truthful, I think in that we know of a great deal of pressure just recently .created by the Savings Bank, there have been in the past some of the similar type pressures created this was a year or two ago, perhaps longer • than that when the First National Bank did the same thing. They keep putting their own people upstairs. So, the location, this doesn' t speak to hardship now, unfortunately but the location of his is just so ideal for this kind of Real Estate or Law Office because it is close to the Court House and that is very precious to me but it may not be a hardship for you. MR. VANMARTER: Dick, you speak in here about the pressures from other professions like Doctors, dentist, lawyers and so on. Do you recognize that the doctors, dentist and chiropractors are a permitted use in these districts according to the Ordinance and too, any of them might be a permitted use as a Home Occupation if they did in fact, meet the definition for a Home Occupation. MR. AGARD: I'm aware of that. MR. VANMARTER: Number two, do you want to speak to the general plan? The general plan adopted by the City in 1971. MR. AGARD: I did not mention it Murray. MR. VANMARTER: No, it was entered. Do you want to give it an opinion? MR. AGARD: You'd have to review it. You mentioned it Bill. It says here the pressure from Marshall Street up. Is that what. . . . . MR. VANMARTER: Yes, it was mentioned in the report. Would you suspect that this might happen in any way other than (1) by rezoning or (2) by variance on individual cases? MR. AGARD: I think first, I' ll have to ask for clarification of the master plan insofar as it applies to what we are discussing. I again repeat, was it in regard to the changes in the Fall Creek area? MR. VANMARTER: How they might come about. . . . . . . . MR. AGARD: Whether or not it was going to be by a variance or by change. -25- A/R. VANMARTER: Going to agree tht the changes may happen. MR. KASPRZAK: May I enter this discussion since I was one of the authors of this plan? It does not say in this plan and I quote as Mr. Sullivan Jr. quoted and it might be taken out of context but I' ll read it further. The part that he quoted is a description of the current situation rather than the future projection of the master plan and the future projection of the master plan reads "Constraints should be placed on the neighborhood commercial center between Cascadilla Avenue and- Marshall Street. " Otherwise, it means don' t let it happen. It' s fine, we can let it happen and it will go for ever, it will go all the way down to the High School but if we talk about a master plan, we have to talk in terms of what has been projected and I refer you again to The Land Projection Map which clearly indicated this area is suppose to remain residential high density because of the pressures spoken of in the paragraph before. Otherwise, there is enough support to rezoning request or variance request by the master plan because it speaks to just the opposite. MR. MARTIN: Members of the Board have any other questions to ask Mr. Agard? MR. SULLIVAN JR: Mrs. Brown is here from the Christian Science Church. MRS. BROWN: I am Louise Brown, Mrs. Stillwell Brown and I represent the trustee of the First Church of Christ Scientist on University Avenue which has a parking lot on Linn Street which abutts the property. I have no recommendation but we have certainly no objections. MR. SULLIVAN JR: I' d like to if I could, just a couple of things to amplify this question about the amount of money necessary to renovate the downstairs. I spoke with Andy McPherson from McPherson' s Builders and he gave me what he called a very rough estimate that it would run just over $14,000 to make two apartment out of the existing downstairs area. The reason for that is that in order to make two apartments, it would involve the installation of two brand new kitchens and one brand new bathroom because of th existing structure, existing entrances and floor plan of the -26- structure. There was another factor too, that was mentioned and that is that inorder to make this renovation it would involve really a desecration, if you will, of the interior architecture of the building. Anyone who has been in the building knows that there is a double living room in the front of the building. These double living rooms between them have a set of columns and kind of a grand passage way between them. In order to make the changes necessary to convert these into two apartments, it would be necessary to close off this archway and box in these structures inorder to provide for both closet space and a doorway to a bedroo . ' I think this. . . . . . . MR. KASPRZAK: The dimensions given on the drawings are approxi- mately correct. MR. SULLIVAN JR: The drawing that I handed out during one of the recesses, yes they are approximately correct. MR. KASPRZAK: I would suggest that if they estimated this, it is actually a good estimate and if you can do it for this mach, • grab it . MR. SULLIVAN JR: Except it is not financially feasible to do it for that much because of the return involved and I understand and appreciate your understanding of the problem but when you come to a return this ties into the rents presently being charged on the second floor. A total of $330.00 per month which includes all utilities. $330.00 a month for basically $14,000 or $15,000 square feet of living space and in order to make that incremental cost that we've referred to, anybody that had the premises would run into the same problem. MR. MARTIN: Projecting the upstairs rents, you are taking the same frozen level that they have been? • MR. SULLIVAN JR: They are not frozen, they are the existing level because of tenancies long term tenancies. . . . . . . . . MR. MARTIN: They haven' t been increased for a very long time? MR. SULLIVAN JR: I might mention, the front apartment which is the one which is been increased most often is $135.00 a month, it is a one bedroom apartment, the middle apartment which has a i -27- living room, dinette area, very small apartment with a bathroom is $85.00 a month and I'm not sure how much higher that could go perhaps I could go to $100.00 so lets call it $235.00, if you want to project and the back apartment which has two bedrooms, • living room dinette and bath which is presently $110.00, it could go perhaps to $135.00 or $140.00, which would maybe increase the whole thing by another $50.00 a month. Again it doesn' t project in the terms of a great return on both the invested capital , the present value of the invested capital and the incremental investment that would be necessary. I'd like to submit to you exhibit # 3 which is a letter from Teen Challenge of Greater Ithaca. Teen Challenge of Greater Ithaca Directors: 412 North Aurora Street Rev. & Mrs. Robert Mott Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 273-8936 May 2, 1975 William P. Sullivan 417 N. Aurora Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Mr. Sullivan: The Executive Board of Teen Challenge met on April 29, 1975 and expressed their views on your building located at 417 N. Aurora St. , as being set up as a law practice. There are no objections on the part of Teen Challenge. Much success in your endeavors. Sincerely, Carole E. Bowman Secretary to Teen Challenge Board -28- I' d like to also submit a letter from John Deal and Marian Deal. May 5, 1975 112 Linn Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Chairman Board of Zoning Appeals 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re: Appeal of William P. Sullivan Gentlemen: We are writing to advise you that we have received notice of Mr. Sullivan' s application to permit him to use a portion of his premises on North Aurora Street as professional law offices For your information, our property abuts Mr. Sullivan' s property on the east. We are satisfied that the use of a portion of Mr. Sullivan' s premises as a professional law office will not injure or change the character of the neighborhood. For this reason, we urge that the application be granted. Very truly yours, John H. Deal Marian N. Deal I'd like to also submit exhibit # 5 which is a letter from Theresa O' Brien at 410 North Aurora Street. May 5, 1975 410 North Aurora Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Chairman Board of Zoning Appeals 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re: Appeal of William P. Sullivan Gentlemen: I am writing to urge that you give favorable consideration to Mr. Sullivan' s application to use a portion of his premises as a professional law office. My husband (now deceased) and I have • lived almost directly across the street from Mr. Sullivan' s home for the past 54 years. I have seen the neighborhood change in character from residential to a combination of residential-profess' onaf • I believe that the proposed use of Mr. Sullivan' s premises would compliment other uses of neighboring premises. Very truly yours, Theresa O' Brien -29- And I would also like to submit exhibit # 6. Burns Realty Company January 27, 1975 To whom it may concern, Re: Application by William Sullivan to utilize his property at 417 North Aurora Street, Ithaca, New York for professional offices It is my firm belief that there is no rational reason that doctors and dentists should be allowed. to maintain offices in an R-3 residential zone, and other professional occupations such as lawyers should be excluded. It seems to me that it is a distinct hardship on Mr. Sullivan that he is not allowed to utilize his property for professional offices My experience in the past has shown that such operations have caused an upgrading of the neighborhood, rather than a detracting influence. I sincerely hope that you will consider the fairness of Mr. Sullivan' s application, and grant him relief. Yours very truly, BURNS REALTY COMPANY, LTD. John C. Burns President I've spoken with Mr. Burns tonight and he authorizes admission of this to you people tonight. Rather than take any more of your time, you have been very gracious in the time that you have allote in a nature of a summation, I just like to close with this thought the whole purpose of the Zoning Variance is to really ameliorate the harsh edges of the Zoning Ordinance. What we have here is par property which even conceding Mr. Kasprzak' s reading of the master plan will really be locked in to a residential use in a area that would otherwise include professional and other commercial uses on a mixed basis. This is so because immediately north of these premises, is Wagner Funeral Home, it has been operated as a Funeral Home in the past for many many years and presumable it will continue to be operated as a Funeral Home. To isolate, to make an island out of this one piece of property in the projections is near to us as 1990 that Mr. Kasprzak is referring to, I think is something that is terrible harsh and that is the whole purpose of a variance. We've come before you tonight, we've shown hardshia. Mr. Agard was I think was more than candid. He really wasn' t sure what you were looking for in terms of your definition of hardship but what he said, I think is no reasonable return can be made upon the premises given the investment, given the current value of the property. For that reason we have shown hardbfk�p, we've hsown the nature of the neighborhood and incident- ially just by calling it residential, it doesn't make it residents 1, I don't think. I think you have to look at the existing uses. We've tried to show you those. Within the R-3 area, let me rephra e that within the two blocks north of Court Street, between Linn Street and Cayuga Street there are some thirty uses of existing structures which are not commercial or which are not residential in nature. These include things like Wagner Funeral Home, Mickey' Market, and they include a number of other structures. Including -30- numerous professional offices. I'm going to ask that you deliber- ations on this matter be made in my presence so that I may know what it is that concerns you in the event that there is some opposition of the Board. I will stay to Ytdll you've completed your deliberations and I ask to be present at the time that your deliberations are made. MR. MARTIN: Well, you will be present at the time that we announc our findings. You're asking to be part of the executive session which we hash out and debate the merits of various bits of evidenc . That is totally contrary to the rules of the Board. We do re- emerge into public session after executive session and state our findings and you are welcome to that public session. MR. SULLIVAN: I'd like to be present during any sessions that you have any deliberations relating to these premises. MR. KASPRZAK: Just for the record the neighborhood that you are speaking of is 53% residential. MR. SULLIVAN: So that means it is 47% non-residential. MR. KASPRZAK: No it doesn' t. It means also that 33% of the area considered as a neighborhood is a street. So that makes a need of a neighborhood a residential neighborhood 85% . . . . . . . . MR. SULLIVAN: That is in the two block area between Farm . . . . Oh, alright now you' re talking about everything in Fall Creek. I'd like to limit our consideration to two blocks. MR. KASPRZAK: We can' t do that Bill, you know that. MR. SULLIVAN: That is not true. I' d like you to limit your consideration to the two blocks between Court Street . . . . MR. KASPRZAK: I can' t! You have commercial on one side and t'ou' r taking residential on the other side. You expect me to mix it and say consider it that way. I can' t do it. MR. SULLIVAN: I'm asking you only to consider the area between Court Street and Farm Street which is two blocks on Linn Street, Aurora Street, Tioga Street and Cayuga Street and see what your percentages are there. I suggest that the percentages are terribly different thah-i53% and 33%. -31- MR. KASPRZAK: Under the new perrameters it is definitely so, I won' t argue that. MR. SULLIVAN JR: I have nothing further. MR. VANMARTER: The route on which you lead us north included for instance Real Estate Office in the 500 block, McCarthy for instance, would you agree that that is a legal Home Occupation? MR. SULLIVAN: I'm not questioning, the dentist operations are legal there are some that I don' t know whether they are legal or not perhaps you will want to go ahead and look into those but the dentist operations and doctors operations are legal. The lawyers operation at the Bank of Newburg Building is legal because you have given a variance, although it is in a residential area. We're not talking about legal we are talking about what is the area, is it residential or is it commercial? Through the use of variances you people can control the orderly flow of businesses into this area and I suggest that this is an appropriate case in which to take that step. MR. VANMARTER: I agree and I say it is to be done under the out- line of what is called for in the way of hardship you have mention( d for instance Mickey' s Market are you aware that a restaurant in a business district. . . . . . MR. SULLIVAN: I understand that that area is an island, it is a area that is spot zoned bwtween Cascadilla Creek and Farm Street for a strip of % block northerly and it includes Mickey' s Market, it includes the Old Frozen Gold Restaurant, the Busy Bee, I think it is called now, it includes a gas station, it includes the pharmacy, it includes Guy Natali' s and it includes the Ithaca Foreign Car Service Center. That may be business zoned but I'm saying that it has an effect on the whole neighborhood and I think that ought to be clear. You ask anybody whose home was or may have been effected by the fire at the Northside Liquor Store when it burned down, the old store which is in that same area. That has a direct effect upon the areas immediately surrounding that % block zoned business that is on the map. _32_ MR. VANMARTER: Okay, you agree that it is on the map and that it does exist, it existed even prior to 1951. MR. SULLIVAN: Alright, I don' t know when the last change was, I will note for you that there has been no effective change in the zoning in the 400 block of N. Aurora Street since. . . . my memory slips me as to when the amendments were made but for the last 10 or 15 or 20 years there has been no change in the zoning of the 400 block of N. Aurora Street, or Tioga Street or Cayuga Street and yet the character has changed. Witness the action of the City in placing parking meters in the 400 block of N. Cayuga Street. The parking meters aren' t shown in those pictures that I passed out because they were put in between the time I think it was April 9 when I took them and todays date which is May 5. The parking meters in the 400 block of S. Tioga Street. There has been public mention about placing parking meters in the 400 block of N. Aurora Street. This is not consistant I suggest with residential areas normally in residential areas you don' t have parking meters normally. MR. VANMARTER: Do you agree then, that the proper way to cure thi area would be by rezoning? MR. SULLIVAN: That may be fine as you will know, .weTba e=_�ad an application before the Common Council since January to do that. MR. VANMARTER: No, I didn't know. MR. SULLIVAN: Well, I'm telling you that now. To help alleviate some of the hardship involved here. Nothing has been done on it, I shouldn' t say that, whats been done has not reached a conclusion we don' t know how much longer it' s going to go. I have personal commitments that I've had to make. That is why I've come back to you. It has cost me well over upwards . of a $1,000 is what it has cost me in the five months to conform with the Zoning Ordinance. And coming back to now at thispoint trying to show you the hardshi involved not the personal hardship, the hardship running with the land. I suggest to you that I've done that here and I strongly urge you to take affirmative action with respect to the request. MR. MARTIN: Now, I think that we have some more who wish to -33- speak on this case. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of the appeal? Anyone who would like to speak in opposition? MARVIN CARLSON: Members of the Board, I'm Marvin Carlson. I reside at 407 North Aurora. I think a picture of my residence was one of the last that ycu received. I reside in the house which is next door across the creek from the property in question. I find this a rather awkward situation in that our limited acquaintance with Mr. Sullivan has been very pleasant and I find it difficult to speak against him particularly in that I recognize that the Sullivan' s are an established family in the neighborhood and an important part of the history and the traditions in the neighborhood. I think what concerns me the most, if I may state it briefly, is to take part of Mr. Sullivans summation. What he suggested, if I'm quoting him correctly, by means of variances this Board may expidite the orderly flow of business into this district. This is what we are afraid of, frankly. We are much interested if at all possible in preserving the residential character of the neighborhood. My wife and I moved into the neighborhood two years ago. We are fairly long termed Ithaca residents, 15 years now. We've never lived in the downtown area before. We made a choice to do so. We've not at all regretted that choice. Many of the things that Mr. Sullivan has mentioned to you and has shown you pictures of we find very nice to be near. It is most convenient to us with two children, 8 and 10 years old. To be just two or three blocks away from the YMCA and the Public Library and doctors offices and downtowQ. We and they like to be able to walk where ever we want to go. Indeed, we walked over here this evening. We like this sort of convenience. We' re concerned about the possible pushing out of the downtown area into residential areas and making it difficult or impossible to have this convenience and this accessibility to the downtown area. I think that is really the main thrust of what I have to say. There are several statements that Mr. Sullivan made, nothing that he says in terms of the description of the structure of the -34- area, could I dispute. I do think, I'm sure many of you recognize that a number of these are only a number of the representations that he gives on only a partial representation. It is of course, true that there are a great many businesses in the area though the businesses as his presentation indicated and as the pictures • indicate, are of course as you go toward the concentration of businesses around Mickey' s Market and of course as you move downtown. Very few pictures indeed, I don' t know that any of the pictures out of the 95 go in the other two directions from the house. Of course, if we look at Linn Street, just on the other side instead of Tioga Street, we don' t find anything like this pattern of usage. If we go the same distance on, instead of going west, if we go east we find ourselves in a two block radius going past the church out on Cascadilla Park which is a quite lovely residential area , one of the loviest and most desirable in the City of Ithaca, I think. There are few if any non- conforming usages in that direction from the buildings. The business district certainly does move in close to this area, this obviously is a part of the way the zoning works. The residential zone indeed stops at the corner of our block. It is our hope that it will continue to stop there and this will be maintained a residential zone. I think the only other thing that I might remark about is the question of the usefulness and the accessibilit of this area to the churches, schools and court house. We' re of course, very much aware that the same thing that makes this a desirable residential area for us that is accessibility to a number of downtown things, the Post Office what have you the banks of course make it also desirable for lawyers and other professional people as well. I think the only remark that I might make about that is that it is our understanding that there are in the downtown area a great number of potential vacant offices. Clearly these are not as desirably for someone like Mr. Sullivan who already has an investment in a particular area but I don' t think that the argument can really be made that there are no other accessible areas for law practices. Indeed some of them I think are in the -35- pictures that you were showing. The Dewitt Mall, for example has areas. I think the only other remark that I might make has to do with the argument about hardship and a return on an investment. Again, it would seem to me that this argument would have to do with the use of the building itself. That is, if a building is once conceived of as an investment, then one could argue about the return but if the building as most of the buildings in the area are, is conceived of as a residence then the sense of finding a return, it seems to me is not or should not be operable in quite the same way. We don' t make money on our house, either. It' s only when one begins to think as the house as a business operation that it seems that that question should arise. I think again just to sum up that it would of course, as I think I said to begin with, be perfectly satisfactory with us and we would be quite pleased to have a home next to us, a residence which had a non variance use in it. If we felt that over a period, I would hope, many years that we would be living in this neighborhood that we could rely on the Sullivan' s to continue to maintain this, We have a double concern, a concern that inddddriperhaps the older Mr. Sullivan might leave and we find simply that we have a law office next to us or even should that not happen, the passing of this variance might set an example and a reference point for further variances which would continue to erode the neighborhood. MR. MARTIN: Any questions? MR. GASTEIGER: In respect to hardship the question of renting it to a family came up, you have children in this neighborhood, do you care to comment on that? Has that been a hardship in the terms of raising your family, the traffic backed up? MR. CARLSON: No. Our children are 8 and 10 as I say and they walk each day to Henry St. Johns School, so obviously traffic holds no terror for them. They need not of course, we are in an area where they could go to Fall Creek, Henry St. Johns, or Central which is another advantage. We have an option and they prefer Henry St. Johns . With younger children this might be more -36- of a difficulty. I guess I could only say that the house immediat ly behind our house on Linn Street, this wuld be 405 Linn Street, is now being in the process of being purchased by a young family the Uren' s. The house immediately to our left on the other side of us from Mr. Sullivan' s has been, I'm sorry the Uren' s are next to us, the Monoaks are behind us, another young family. There are two young families next to us. The neighborhood is not a neighbor- hood with alot of children in it. Most of the residetial use is older people in the neighborhood. I don' t think that there is anybody in the immediate vicinity that has children precisely to our age. So, I can only say we haven' t had any difficulty. But there are not alot of families to have that evidence. MR. MARTIN: Any further questions? MR. SULLIVAN: May I ask a question or two. MR. MARTIN: Surely and he may have a few back to you. MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Carlson, would you agree that one of the reasons why there are so many older people in the area is because of the fact that the area really isn' t suitable to children? MR. CARLSON: No, I think that it mostly a matter of as in your own case, it' s a long well established neighborhood. Many people like Mrs. O' Brien across the street have simply lived there for many years. I don' t know what the particular motives are . . . . . . . MR. SULLIVAN: Several apartments in Mrs. O' Brien' s home aren' t there? MR. CARLSON: There are two other apartments in that home. MR. SULLIVAN: Are any of them occupied by children? MR. CARLSON: No, as I say, I know of no other children within this area. MR. SULLIVAN: Let me ask another question. Can I ask what you spent in renovating your particular home? MR. CARLSON: You can, I don' t know if I remember. I spend a good deal. I've done a lot of the work myself. Pat, can you help, what would be . . . . . When we moved into the home, it was in very bad repair, indeed the roof in the back of the house had completely collapsed and the bank required us inorder to take a i -37- mortgage to spend $5,000 in renovation, which we did immediately. I would say that since that time we probably spent another $5,000 in renovations . MR. GASTEIGER: I didn' t feel free to ask the value of the Sulliva property. • MR. CARLSON: I assume that it is germane. . . . . MR. MARTIN: Well, it' s largely irrelevant and as long as you are willing to answer, I'm not going to protect you but. . . . . Do you want to ask any more questions? MR. SULLIVAN: Will you agree on Linn Street, there is a Church on Linn Street. . . . . . MR. CARLSON: Oh yes. MR. SULLIVAN: There is a rental office for an apartment or for a Real Estate person involved in the rental of Real Estate by the name of Theron Johnson on Linn Street, that I did neglect to mention. MR. CARLSON: I don' t know about that, but I assume thatyou are right. MR. SULLIVAN: That is in the 100 block of Linn Street. Are you aware of that. MR. CARLSON: I'm not. MR. SULLIVAN: And on Court Street in the 300 block of E. Court Street, just around the corner from your premises, you will agree that there is also an office of Help of Ithaca? MR. CARLSON: Yes, that is correct. MR. SULLIVAN: And that has been there for a period of time. MR. CARLSON: Yes. That is a home office. That is a residence. MR. SULLIVAN: I don' t have anything else. MR. MARTIN: Thank you Mr. Carlson. Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this case? I don' t want to leave dangling Mr. Sullivan' s suggestion that he will follow us into executive session. I will defer on that question until we get ready to go into executive session so that we don' t have a large to do over it now. But I'm disposed to rule against his request but I will invite argument at that point and reaction to the Bcwd to the issu . MR. SULLIVAN: While you are taking up the next case, could I -38- review the rules of the Board that you are referring to that relate to this? EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA MAY 5, 1975 APPEAL NO. 1075: MR. MARTIN: I move to deny Mr. Sullivan' s request for verbatim transcript. Pursuant to our standard procedure, we do not make a verbatim transcript of the deliberations in executive session of this Board. MR. KASPRZAK: I second that. MR. MARTIN: For the reasons that I ruled to exclude Mr. Sullivan from our executive session, it would be inappropriate for the full session to become part of the full public record of the hearing. VOTE: YES - 5 NO - 0 REQUEST DENIED 1075 Interpretation Request of Interpretation of Home Occupation MR. MARTIN: I move that we reject the interpretation we were asked to make by the appellant, Mr. Sullivan. I would move that we construe the reference to family in the definition of Home Occupation in paragraph 42b of section 30.3 as being limited to those members of the family who reside in the dwelling unit and not extend to members of the family who live elsewhere. This interpretation is strengthened by the definition of family in paragraph 28 of section 30.3 which limits that term as used else- where in the Zoning Ordinance to related persons occupying a dwelling unit. MR. KASPRZAK: I second that. VOTE: YES - 5 NO - 0 INTERPRETATION DENIED 1075 VARIANCE MR. MARTIN: I move to deny the request for variance. MR. KASPRZAK: I second that. FINDINGS OF FACTS 1) The Board is not empowered to rezone areas in response to changed conditions or its own view of desirable development. Before EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA MAY 5, 1975 granting a variance the Board must find pursuant to Section 30.58 b3 of the Zoning Ordinance that special circumstances or unique conditions which do not apply generally to land or building in the neighborhood justified it. We do not consider such finding supported within the record of this hearing. A great amount of the evidence presented by the appellant attempted to show a condition in the neighborhood which would have an equivalent effec on other properties there. 2) Any finding of hardship which might support a variance must rest upon condition of the land or buildings and not the personal circumstance of the owner. The evidence presented failed to establish that the building because of unique conditions, not applying generally to other structures in the neighborhood could not reasonably be used as permitted use. In fact, there was substantial evidence that such residential space could be rented in this neighborhood and that some families find this an attractiv place in which to live. VOTE: YES - 5 NO - 0 VARIANCE DENIED -39- BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK MAY 5, 1975 Commissioner Jones lists what case no. 4-1-75 is to be. APPEAL NO 4-1-75: The Appeal of Arnold Meyer Sign Corp. for Zikakis Chevrolet Inc. of Sec. 6-B-3 of Sign Ordinance at 401 Elmira Road in an B-4 Use District. MR. GERSH: Gentlemen of the Board, the hour is late and we will try to expedite the presentation of our request for a special permit for the erection of a sign at the premises of Zikakis Chevrolet, on the Elmira Road. The Board is well aware that in determining this type of application, it is to be guided by section 18, indeed the Ordinance shall be guided. Section 18 of the City Sign Ordinance lists five criteria which I suggest will be of some value in considering the evidence to be presented. The first item which comes to our attention in section 18 of the Sign Ordinance refers to the Sign being the smallest sign which will suite the purposes and gentlemen I'm sure you' ll see when we hear further from Mr. Zikakis and Mr. Blumm that the sign which is purposed to be erected, is in full compliance with the Sign Ordinance with respect to setback, height and all other provisions except to size. Indeed the sign is smaller than the sign which is recommended for a dealership of Mr. Zikakis' s size, specifically he has some 600 feet of frontage and he is suggesting that he be permitted to erect a sign which is smaller than that which is purposed by professional sign people for the size operation that he has. Also he is asking for only one sign. As has been recognized, he is on a corner fronting on both Spencer and Elmira Roads and is entitled to two signs. So, he is not seeking more than one sign. He is not asking for a used car sign, he is not asking for service or parts, he is not asking for anything other than a sign identifing his dealership as a Chevrolet Dealer. The Ordinance goes on to say thatthe other things to consider are the speed limits and traffic conditions. And I ask you to just consider the fact that Elmira Road is a 40 mile per hour street, heavily traffic. Mr. Zikakis ' s premises -40- sits on the outskirts . . . I stand corrected it' s 30 miles per hour His premises sit on the outskirts of the City and people leaving the city are really not aware that there is still another merchant yet to go before they are out of the City and people entering the City have their view of his premises hidden by that overpass which is between his property and Buttermilk Park. Item 2 of section 18, asks the Board to consider the number of letters on the sign. The more material, the more text on the sign, the more reasonable it is to approve a larger sign and you will see a purposed diagram of the number of letters to be on the sign. Number three asks you to consider other signs in the vicinity. You are all aware of the complexity of signing on the Elmira Road. Some of it in good taste and some of it not in such good taste. Mr. Zikakis has some photographs, fewer in number than 95 I can assure you, but I think that will help you to just recall the nature of other signs in the vicinity. Number 4 is the character of the neighborhood. Again these are the criteria which the Ordinance asks you to use in determining this type of application. The character of the neighborhood. The purposed sign shouldn' t be detrimental to the neighborhood. Again, I'm confident that you will see that the signing that Mr. Zi-kakis purposes to erect, actually is an improvement to the neighborhood . It is in far better taste, far more attractive,causing far less visual interference than what is now there, both on his premises and on other premises. Finally number 5, let me just go back to the character of the neighborhood. You' ll be aware that we are talking about a B-4 zone. A zone inwhich gas stations and welding shops and similar operations are permitted. The least restrictive business zone. Finally we get down to the protection of the public interest and the desirabilty of maintaining open spaces, views, and vistas insofar as possible. I think the most significant parts of our application to you gentlemen tonight, is the fact that Mr. Zikakis purposes to remove more signing than he purposes to erect. To be specific, if his application is granted, he will remove the Chevytown sign which measures some -41- 225 square feet, he will remove the present pylon which says Chevy, Volvo and Service, remove that in its entirety and that measures 144 square feet making a total removed of 379 square feet of signing. He purposes to replace that with a sign which measures 137 square feet or if you include the frame work and I question the propriety including the frame work in this matter but if you include the frame work we' re talking about 154 square feet of sign. Again in terms of maintaining open spaces, views, vistas insofar as possible and the Ordinance is certainly practical enough to realize that commercial interest are legitimate interest and we are talking about a commercial area but he does purpose to remove more sign than he is asking to erect. Now in addition to section 18, we also have the guidance of our professional staff. I submit to you that it is very pleasant to be able to tell you that the professional staff without exception has recommended approval of this application. Mr. VanCort, the planning director and the Planning Department have recommended approval. The Planning Board unanimously recommended approval. Mr. Liguori, of the County Planning Office has said, he had no objection to your approving this application. The Finger Lakes State Park Commission has indicated it would have no objections. I think, as I say too often I'm on the wrong side of the professional staff and it' s a pleasure to have them in our camp for once. With that as a general introduction, I would like to introduce to you Mr. Bill Zikakis, who will explain a little bit more about the purposed sign. MR. ZIKAKIg: Gentlemen, I did bring some pictures along , and I hope you' ll bear along with us, although they are not too many. What I'd like to show you, the first picture that I'd like to show, is what I inherited when I went there. By inherited I mean I purchased the dealership from Jack Townsend Chevrolet and this is what he had at that time. This particular picture is a little smaller but, it shows the situation that was there. Now, here you have a carnival effect on the used car lot and on this side of the dealership. You have pennants and banners, you have signs all kinds of paraphernalia that are sold to car dealers to identify you in that respect and really puts on a carnival act for you. -42- We don' t at Zikakis Chevrolet, we don' t care for that type of commercialism. I've changed the image of that. I've taken all these lights that have had naked light bulbs at that point and rows and' rows which probably was some of the finest used car lighting but it also gives a carnival look. We have put in a very neat and clean lighting system, which is very efficient to us and it has none of this carnival atmosphere at all. Now our real problem is that at the same time in purchasing the dealership, there is an economy measure,the previous dealer had installed this type of sign. It says Chevy and it' s on a cinder block pylon and it was strictly a very strong economy measure and it doesn't go along with the rest of the building. The building is an quality building. We try to keep that image up, we keep it painted, we keep it shrubbed, we keep the grass mowed, we try to keep it as nice as we.can, and this just doesn't go along with the rest of it. It is illuminated by two spot lights on each side and frankly, we can't even keep them lit. They keep burning out on us from going on and off, the rain or the cold weather or whatever the case may be, burns them out. So, we are always changing the bulbs and we hope to and for practically for the last year and a half we haven' t even bothered to change the bulbs. Consequently, you take your life in your own hands. You put a man up there, some 30 feet to change the bulbs and it' s not worth the effort and the illumination is so poor , that it just doesn' t help us. The real problem is and I've appealed to you, is that it looks like we' re closed. We have an exotic lighting system but we can not light that place up enough to make it look like we are open. We are open evening hours, we're open until 9:00 o' clock every night except fridays and we need that identification. The real problem is that anyone coming down the Elmira Road in the evening or any- time, they are coming down the Elmira Road, they get to Ripley Motors -and they think that automobile row has ended and that there is no one down there. So, we need something to holler out to someone and let them know we're down there or a beacon to let them know that we are down there. 'What we're purposing is to take down the Chevytown sign, which is a very large sign and to take down -43- the pylon completely and put up a clean identification sign and I have here my friendly competitors and these were all taken locally and they were taken this weekend, to what they have. This is the type of sign that we are after. We're after a sign that would be, actually it would say Chevrolet and GM. It' s clean, neat, it' s illuminated but not flashy, it doesn' t do anything, it doesn' t blink, wave or anything else. Its just an identification sign. The other part that' s important to us, that it' s also a sign of identification that we are an authorized Chevrolet dealer. That we just haven' t got a sign that says Chevrolet and we're just not going to hang a shingle out there. It ties in with our national advertising and it is also a symbol to the transit community that we are here. That we are an authorized dealer and it' s a friendly place to come to and hopefully safe for them to bring their automobiles in for service needs and identification. What we have found on the Elmira Road, we think that it is a large improvement because this is the type of signs that are on some of the signs that are on the Elmira Road. No, disrespect again to my friendly competitors here, but I think that this is through accumulation of years of poor planning on their part or additions that they have added different lines and they keep adding different signs. So, what we have here is very undesirable or unplanned type of signs and too many signs whereas we're purposing to remove the two signs and put up a smaller sign, just so that we can have the identification sign that we request. We have another situation that occurs, is that people who come in from Elmira, I've had guest come in or out of town people come, they come in through an Elmira route or route 96 and you buzz right by the place and you don' t realize that you are there. You're coming in off a 55 mph zone at that point, and then you pop into a 30 mph zone but the 30, the sign is on our property I think. So, it is a hardship in that respect. I think one of the biggest things to cover is that we do try to keep our place looking nice and I think that our end of the Elmira Road is one of the nicest part of the Elmira Road. Again no disrespect to anyone else, but -44- ours is a newer portion of it and alot of planning and thought has gone into it. The sign that is up there is certainly not our image. It is not my personal image by a long shot. It' s not the way we would like to keep the place and we think that the sign, the change will be an improvement for the Elmira Road. We will assure you that it will be kept neat, clean and that everything will tie in together with it. I will be glad to answer any questions. MR. MARTIN: Members of the Board have any questions? MR. VANMARTER: What about the existing sign? MR. ZIKAKIS: It will be removed. MR. VANMARTER: All the existing signs will be removed? MR. ZIKAKIS: The only sign that I would like to leave up is my name on the building. Gentlemen, it took me 20 years to get my name up there and I just as soon leave it up there. Also for the Motor Vehicle Bureau, it is required that you have the name of the incorporation up on the building, so that would serve for both purposes. MR. VANMARTER: Could you suggest the size of the sign? Your name on the building. MR. BLUMM: I'd say 175 to 200 square feet. MR. ZIKAKIS: That is inside the building portion as you may recall by driving by. That it sets back, the show room is in front and this sits up against the building which is about 40 feet back from that. It' s not open really, you have to be coming from one side and be looking sideways to really see it. The Motor Vehicle Bureau does require that the name of the Corporation be on the building. And that is the name of our Corporation. MR. GERSH: The total Murray, according to Mr. VanCort the Planning Board. Mr. VanCort noted that the new total signage may slightly exceed the 250 square foot total maximum but, that this may not be significant in that Mr. Zikakis is allowed an additional build- ing sign because he is located on a corner. Mr. VanCort said that the Planning Department recommends the Board approve the appeal. MR. MARTIN: Are there further questions? -45- MR. BODINE: One comment Bill, on this existing sign, that does tend to block visibility, with cars coming in and going out. . . . . MR. ZIKAKIS: Yes, that is true. The other is open at the bottom as you may note from the card, it gives a better visibility the only part that would be is the sign. . . . . .,.. . . . MR. VANMARTER: Does the purposed sign have your name on it? MR. ZIKAKIS: In the lower part, it would have our name, yes. That' s not very large, frankly. MR. MARTIN: Any further questions? MR. GERSH: Gentlemen, I think a very important consideration is the technical details about the sign, its method of illumination, construction and also the type of maintenance if any which will be afforded this sign. Will this sign be allowed to become an eyesore or not? To address himself to these matters is a represent- ative of the sign company, the company which will erect and maintain the sign, Mr. Robert Blumm. MR. BLUMM: My name is Robert Blumm from Arnold Meyer Sign Co. in Binghamton. First of all I'd like to pass around these exhibits. Exhibit # 1 shows an overall view of Zikakis Chevrolet. Exhibit # 2 shows a view of Elmira Road looking down from Zikakis. Exhibit # 3 shows a photo of the existing pylon with the sign on top and the dealership in the background. Exhibit # 4 shows another photo of the dealership. Exhibit # 5 shows a picture of the Chevytown which he intends to remove. Exhibit # 6 shows another picture of the pylon. Exhibit # 7 shows an artist drawing of what the sign will look like. Where it says Hometown Motors of course, will say Zikakis Chevrolet Inc. Originally General Motors programmed Zikakis Chevrolet to have two signs. A larger product sign which will read Chevrolet and then a used car sign which will be 92 square feet. However, Mr. Zikakis with regard to the curren Zoning Ordinance decided to eliminate the used car sign and drop the size of the product sign, the Chevrolet sign from 245 square feet down to 137 square feet. Also when the 137 square foot sign was offered to him, it was offered at a height of 36 feet and he declined that and chose to conform with the Ordinance and apply -46- only for a 30 foot high sign. The sign will be 38 feet setback from the road proper of Elmira Road. One thing that I want to cover which I think is very important, and that is a 10 year maintenance contract which goes with the sign package. Now under this contract, for the 10 years after the sign is installed, the sign will be cleaned every year thoroughly that is all the plastic face will be cleaned inside and out, the columns will be repainted and also the stainless steal trim which boarders the entire structure and the sign will be cleaned with lemon oil. In additio to this Arnold Meyer Signs is obligated to service thissign and call within three days or the dealers request. In other words, if Mr. Zikakis called us on a Monday, and said that some of his lamps were out, we would be obligated to be there by Thursday to correct the situation. What all this maintenance does is that it assures the sign will always be in 100 percent operating condition. It will eliminate the amount of deterioration with age that the sign would undergo. In addition to our annual cleaning each and every sign that we clean, is field inspected by the GM people. They send people around in September or October after the cleaning season is over with. We haven' t been asked to go back too often, but it has arisen and they do inspect these signs. The signs are engineered by GM' s own engineers with sign consultants. The signs are solidly made with steel, with plexiglass faces, fluorescent lighting and I might add whenever a face gets broken by vandals which does occasionally happen, GM replaces the face and that is part of the contract with Mr. Zikakis or any other GM dealer. So, again the sign never falls into disrepair, just in terms by the contract. Mr. Gersh already went over with you the square footage of the sign that we would like to put up and the square footage of the signs that would be removed, if this variance would be granted. I don' t have anything else to add and I'd be glad to answer any questions. MR. MARTIN: Are there any questions? MR. VANMARTER: Is the pylon sign going to be removed? MR. BLUMM: Yes, the brick including the brick and the sign is -47- 144 square feet of sign that will be removed. MR. GASTEIGER: How far is that pylon from the highway? MR. BLUMM: Exactly the same setback. I also might add it is the same setback as the building. , MR. MARTIN: Further questions? Thank you. MR. GERSH: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to conclude by also mentioning that the Sign Ordinance calls to the Boards attention when it considers an application of this kind, the legislative intent of the Sign Ordinance and within that legislative intent, section 1, we find to improve communications within the community and to create a more attractive economic and business climate and I submit to you that this type of sign will do just that. I think that Bill Zikakis, is a good citizen, neighbor, a good businessman in our community and this is the type of sign that Bill Zikakis is asking you to permit him to install. A sign that will bear his name, something as he has told you, he has put 20 years of his life into the business and I submit to you that he is asking for some- thing which will be a definite improvement not only to his busines and he is having the same economic hard times as the other merchants in our community are but, I sincerely urge that it will be an improvement a betterment to the Elmira Road business neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. MR. MARTIN: Is there anyone else who would like to be heard on this appeal. First anyone who wishes to be heard in favor? ' EDWARD CONLEY: Edward Conley, 1309 E. State Street. I've got to talk very briefly, wearing three separate hats. The first one I'd like to get out of the way with is the fact that I am an employee of Zikakis Chevrolet. I would like to state that it is an outstanding dealership. It is the one that I selected to go to work with. I do know that Bill has spent alot of time and alot of effort in improvements to his property. Last year he engaged a local landscape business who put shrubbs and trees all around his property to beautify that property. He has gone to the extent, he has bought a street sweeper to clean the street which should be the cities responsibility, but cleans it because -48- of the dust kicked up by trucks going by at a high rate of speed, much more than 30 miles per hour. He maintains his property very well and he has an excellent repetation and an excellent image. I think that this Sign Ordinance request is in keeping with that image. Now, getting that out of the way with, I would like to speak maybe a little bit as a member of the Board of Directors of Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce. That is this summer the Chevrolet Division of General Motors, will be part and parcel partner with the City of Ithaca and the Chamber of Commerce, Cornell University and Ithaca College in the Junior Olympics. They will be flying athletes from all over the country to here and they will be housing them for the Junior Olympic game. Along with that will come also the top executives of Chevrolet Division. In fact, we hope to have the President of the Chevrolet Division here in Ithaca at that dealership and also to the opening ceremony of those games. - I think that they would like to see their National. image projected in the sign. You also know, any of you who have had any experience with appeals of this sort, that there are two different types of signs, size signs that people like Chevrolet have. They have their major highway sign which is the big sign that the man from Arnold Meyer had spoke of and there is a much smaller one that Bill has selected for his business. It' s not much bigger than what our law allows and I think that he is doing something that is extremely healthy. He is trading in existing signs or a sign that is slightly over the size that our Ordinance calls for. The main reason that I'd like to speak, is that I'd like to speak as Mayor of the City of Ithaca. That is that I'd like to point out a few figures for the members of the Board. I don't think that it is strange to any of you that this adminis- tration, the Councilmen and myself have been working very diligent .y over the past four years to develop a business climate in this are . We have worked heart and parcel with our business community to develope a better business atmosphere so our businesses might do better and that it might bring more income into the city. In the past four years we like to think partly because of our efforts and strongly -because of our Urban Renewal efforts, in the past five -49- years we have increased the tax base $4,696, 185. Much of that has happened in the Elmira Road. Fast food eating places and _mprovements to businesses in the Elmira Road plus our central business district. That with the present tax rate of $19 a thousand added to the income of the city $89,228 in additional income. Sales tax 1970, the year before our present push for the downtown redevelopment was $786,982, that was the sales tax income that this city received. In 1974, $1,658,432 now that is more than 100 percent increase. That is an increase of $871,450. The first quarter of this year, now this was last year at a time when our car dealers were not doing exceptionally well on the Elmira Road, it was a time when our central business district was tore up, we were rebuilding Rothschilds Store and tore up the Mall and rebuilding the Mall, all at the same time and we received a substantial increase over the previous year. Some $238,000 increase. This year we have received a $40,000 increase. The first three months of this year which is a 10 percent increase which is much higher than the inflation rate. This is because this city it working together with this business community trying to develop a better atmosphere. Well, the reason I brought up these figures and the fact that over the past five years, our projective incomes, the incomes that we are now receiving is almost a half a million dollars higher than they were five 'years ago. Now, that' s income to the City. The tax rate four years ago was $17.90. Then we brought them down two years, came back to $18.00 which was a 10 cent increase. This year we could have brought our tax in at a $18.00 tax rate except for the unfortunate situation we are put in with one of our firefighters which is having a heart transplant with is a $100,000 budge item which we've had to set aside in the budget for that particular item. So, that in itself means $1.00 a thousand. So, we have maintained our tax base in this City because of working with the business community. Now, the Elmira Road to this city has always been treated as a step sister. Just recently we have received a very strong communication from the Elmira Road area asking tht we -50- divert some of the attention that we have been giving to that area. They are looking for maintenance. They know that we have projected a plan and have been talking for years about Elmira Road improvements. We have inacted a Sign Ordinance that was originally put in to help boast businesses since then the council on May 7 , next council meeting this Wednesday night, will be asking the Charter and Ordinance Committee, will be having a publi hearing. We will be asking for a creation for a B-5 district. A B-5 district is a highway orientated strip which is the Elmira Road area. After we create that that will call for setbacks, additional setbacks which were recommended by our Planning Depart- ment. We will be asking too at that time to reevalute our Sign Ordinance to see if we could encourage merchants such as Bill Zikakis is doing. People who will trade in some of their existing signs that you saw in the pictures and consolidate their signing to the pylon type, a consolidation of their efforts so that we will be able to visually improve the Elmira Road. The Elmira Road area has been paying rate and a half for water and always have been every since they have been annexed into the city. That is a very difficult thing to justify do to the fact that so much of the Real Estate income now comes from that area and some of our sales tax income comes from that area. It is very difficult for us to continually justify why we change them rate and a half for water. We are going to have to take a look at that. I'm asking the City to devote now some of it' s attention to working ..ith the Elmira Road merchants to allow them the opportunity to enjoy some of the increases that we have been able to do in the central business district. That will be curbs, gutters, defining of the driveways, beautification projects encouraging the planting of shrubbry and trees as Bill has done. And we will be asking the different merchants to do as we are asking you to permit Bill to do tonight to trade in some of their signs for something more realistic. I think what he is asking for is an realistic sign and many of the things that we are going to have to address ourselves to will probably come before this Board within the next 3 or 4 years. Many difficult problems on the Elmira Road -51- that we will not be able to cover by a Ordinance, a sign Ordinance or a typical type of flat ordinance that would be uniform all the way down the Elmira Road. Many times we are going to have to come back to the Board of Zoning Appeals for variances. In some cases, for exceptions in some cases but all the time the City and the Planning Board and The Planning Department will be working to what is the best economic interest of the City that is the only area where our city can expand as far as auto oriented businesses. There is only a very few parcels left and use want to make sure that we have proper planning before those parcels and that we start encourging redevelopment in that area. The removal of some of the existing structures to something more substantial, something that means more to our tax base something that means more in the way of total sales that helps the economics of the Cit and we will also be looking for things that will increase the job opportunities in this community by offering better and upgrading jobs. Now, it just happens to be this particular variance is one of the first ones that comes out of the hopper first, it' s a little bit ahead of the Councils Charter and Ordinance Committees B-5 Zone and some of the new things that we are going to try to incorporate to make the whole Elmira Road a better place to do business and a better place visually for this community. It is one of the major entrances to the community and we want it to look like it. Our downtown is looking fine. We are going to be doing the very same thing in the west end and I hopefully, some of our Planning Department is already working on the beautification projects that will happen in the Collegetown area. I'm going to try to encourage this by going to have to come and ask the Board of Zoning Appeals to take all of these things into consideration in your deliberations as we ask for exceptions in some cases and variances in other cases to make it a better place to do business. Thank you. MR. MARTIN: Any questions. Anyone else who wants to speak agains ? MR. GASTEIGER: What will you do about the Volvo dealership? -52- MR. ZIKAKIS: We have purchased the Tompkins Supply Building and I hope to move the Volvo Dealership next door into the Tompkins Supply Building. The Tompkins Supply Store is probably the biggest eyesore of the Elmira Road, or one of them and we plan to remodel it. MR. MARTIN: If there are no more questions then we will hear the next case. EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA MAY 5, 1975 APPEAL NO. 4-1-75 MR. MARTIN: I move the variance be granted subject to the following conditions. MR. KASPRZAK: I second that. 1) That the signs which the appellant indicated would be removed at the time the proposed sign is erected, be so removed (the existing Chevytown and pylon signs) . 2) That the variance lasts only until August 31, 1979, the date in which all non-conforming signs must be removed. FINDING OF FACTS 1) The existing signs exceed the total amount allowed by the Sign Ordinance but are valid non-conforming signs. The proposed new sign when it is coupled with the removal of some of the non- conforming sign area well ahead of the 1979 deadline reduces the amount of the non-conformity. 2) The evidence presented indicated that a free standing sign of only 50 square feet might impose considerable hardship on a business in this location. VOTE: YES - 5 NO - 0 APPLICATION GRANTED. 1 i -53- BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK MAY 5, 1975 Commissioner Jones lists what case No. 1078 is to be. APPEAL NO. 1078: The appeal of the Building Department for interpretation of Section 30.25, Column 6 in an R-3 Use District. The square footage in an R-3 Zone. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Jones would you like to summarize the question briefly. MR. JONES: All that I want to say is the Building Department has to figure this thing as it is written and we are getting static and that is not what is intended. Now, all I'm asking you to do is direct the course as to how you want it figured. MR. MARTIN: Alright, you say as it has been applied the require- ments of square footage are treated as accumulative. MR. JONES: That is right. MR. MARTIN: And the question is whether they should be accumulate or whether the minimum which is set for in the very beginning 3250 square feet. It' s simply a minimum when the others then applied independently and if the minimum then is an excess if the minimum that governs the others are in excess then the others governs but you don' t add them together. That is the alternate reading. Is there anyone who wants to be heard on that question? If there are no other questions then that concludes the hearing on case No. 1078. EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA MAY 5, 1975 APPEAL NO. 1078 MR. MARTIN: I move that we interpret Section 30.25 column 6 of th Zoning Ordinance (square footage requirements in an R-3 Zone) as being cumulative, that is, any building must comply with the minimum in paragraph 1. For each additional unit if it is new construction it would be 1000 square feet requirement of paragraph 2 is added, if conversion is involved paragraph 3. In so interpreting the Ordinance we note that the language is far from clear and rely heavily on the interpretation which has been applied in practice by the Zoning Officer. For example construction of a new multiple family residence with 3 living units in it would require 5250 square feet. A conversion to a multiple family residence with 3 units would require 6250 square feet. MR. KASPRZAK: I second that. VOTE: YES - 5 NO - 0 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I CHRISTINE SMITH, DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, in the matters of Appeals 1075, 4-1-75 and 1078 on May 5, 1975 at City Hall, City of Ithaca, New York; that I have transcribed the same and the fore- going is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meet- ing and the executive session of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, on the above date, and the whole thereof, to the best of my ability. Christine Smith Stenographer sworn to before me this 30 day of MA_ 191.50" J�-• IQOA—,JL. JOSEPH A. RUNELE Notary Public, State of New York No. 55-4507134 QuaUfied in Tompkins Count Term Expires Mareb 30, 19! I