Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1973-03-05 I ii BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK, MARCH 5, 1973 ------------------------------------------------------------ At a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, �i it City of Ithaca, held in Common Council Chambers, City Hall, Ithaca, New York, on March 5, 1973: PRESENT: EDISON JONES, Building Commissioner & Secretary ! GEORGE HARPER, Chairman 1 GREGORY KASPRZAK l PETER MARTIN !� HARRY BORTZ DARLEEN LISK, Recording Secretary �1 Chairman Harper opens meeting, listing members of Board press, i j) ent. This Beard is operating under the provisions of the I f! City Charter of the City of Ithaca and of the provisions of li ,i the Zoning Ordinances; the Board shall not be bound by strici it rules of evidence in the conduct of this hearing, but the ;! determination shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidenc j to sustain the same. The Board requests that all participants identify themselves as to name and address, and confine theii �i discussions to the pertinent facts of the case under consid- ' eration. Please avoid extraneous material which would have a delaying effect. As of tonight there are five of us preset Ik and that is all that will be here tonight anyone who has a - case could delay it to our next meeting when hopefully we would have a full Board of six - it takes four positive vdtei to get an approval. Is there anyone who would like to delay!, i r i i `� II ..2, I i� their case? If not we will go to our first case, case #995. 1, li CaMMISSIONM- Jones lists what case #995 is to be. APPEAL HC, 995. The Appeal of Robert Flumerfelt for an ex- ` ception under Section 7, Column 13 at 115 Campbell Avenue in an R-1 zone. if i Robert Flumerfelt: ley name is Robert Flumerfelt and I H live at 115 Campbell Avenue in Ithaca and we would like to widen our present one car garage to a two :! I car garage which involves widening i° of about six to six and one half feet. In widening to what we feel ii is a minimum of about twenty feet 11 I we would have to extend into the side yard by about one foot and nin� inches average amount. On one corn4�r I' it would be a foot and on the other ,1 corner it would be two and one� half;' feet. So this is what we are askin �I for the exception for is to enable !! protrusion into the side yard by th't li amount. The construction would be similar to our present garage whichll there is a picture of on the appli Ij cation. � ii MR. MARTIN: How much side yard is left now? j A. The amount left would be from five to three and one half feet as the garage is not quite parallel to thel ll side line. j MR. MARTIN: How close is the nearest structure in the neighbor' yard? II it A. I don*t know exactly how close it i*, I would guess ten or fifteen feet maybe closer to fifteen feet. I' 14 MR. KASPRZAK: Will the garage be at all submerged !! under the grade level or is it going 1 to be all above grade level? '- • I� L !' A. It will be as it is in the picture li only extended. I, j ii ai _3_ it MR. MARTIN: Is your lot at all of abnormal size�� j or shape for the neighborhood? II A No, I think it is a normal sized to !i for the neighborhood; however, I I, would say most of the lots in the f neighborhood are a little bit bigge�. Ours is about 1100 by 1501 . ;I II Q. You roughly have about 15,000 squar� 1 feet of space? i' ii A. Right} j MR. MARTIN: How much side yard do you have from house to boundary on the other side i A. There is a lot more on that side then there is on the side where we runt to widen it. Appellantts Exhibit 1 marred for identification. �j The other end of the house looks toi be twenty five to thirty feet from the lot line. Air. Flumerfelt goes on explaining the map showing the location of his house on his lot. . KASFRZAK; In your opinion, would this obstruc any light or air or difficulties to the neighbor? A. In mfr opinion it would not, ou-r neighb©r - the closest point of the r residence is their garage also whic As in relatively the same position on the lot line. THE CHAIR: parking on the street is what, alternate? A. Yes. THE CHAIR: Any other questions? None. l i' -._ I� Is there any one who wishes to spec i' in favor of this appeal? None. Is there any one who wishes to op- pose this appeal.? GEMGE BEST: My name is George Best and I live !j I at 123 Campbell Avenue, I .am Mr. �j Flumerfelt' s next door neighbor I; and; I object vehemently to this I proposed variance on several ground . The main thing is just from a selfi h i) point of view in that I think that it it would detract from my property. When we built on the adjacent lot, of course we knew what the R-1 i zoning regulations were and I per- � sonally thought they were pemanent ' and not subject to change unless there was a real tremendous reason for it. Now, spy house is of some II value I think and it appears to me that any infringement on space towards my house will detract meas- urably from its value. There is no economic reason here for her. Flamer felt to do this. There is another factor here, and that is that Lever i months ago Air. Flumerfel.t asked me this question and I told him my feelings, and he said at that time that he could do it under the press t R-1 rode without the necessity for an exception although his garage would be smaller, it would still be a two car garage, if that be so, wh is it necessary to grant an excep- tion which would infringe on my living space. So for these reasons I have entered my objections, and I will do what is necessary to pursue it if necessary. €. MARTIN. Can you verbally tell us where your house is situated on your lot? A Well he is probably right the corne of our garage is about fifteen feet - — I !I I� !� I ! from his lot line and garage; how- � j� ever I didn't also tell you but I �I have a ten foot deck outsidei� kitchen which is part of our Avingj area in the suer - we picnic out I� there and what not. MR. MARTIN: The point of your garage is the I closest to his lot line and that iI point is about haw far from his lot liner I A. I would say twelve feet perhaps. MR. MARTIN: If you were to draw a line from it the window in your kitchen to the lot line, how far would you say that i ? I� A. It might be somewhere around f if to or eighteen at the closest. i MR. MARTIN: Hoa much worse is this from the wi dow in your kitchen than if the i garage came right up to the permis- sible line as opposed to Mr. Flum- li erfelts proposed line? I� A. Roughly two feet difference. I feel this is worse for me. It is all a matter of degree - it is a matter of worse and worser. MR, KASPRZAK: How such of the house can you see now from your kitchen window across the property line? A. All of it. MRS. HOLMANi Is there no landscaping between the two properties? A. There is but it is flimsy. THE CHAIR: Is there a problem with parking up there? A. I dorft believe so, as far as I know. People don't park on the street, ' everyone seems to have driveways ; i I� UiE CHAIR: Is there any one else who wishes to+ II appose this appeal? j' None. �P I �1 ij i I' �i it ii �I I II � i i i r i �e EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZCKING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, MARCH 5, 1972 I �I APPEAL NO,,- 995 MR. KASPRZAK: Move that the appeal be granted. MRS. HOLMAN: Second. I F3INGS OF FACT: 1) Given the location of the exist ing structure, how and garage on Mr. Fl erfalt'*s property; it would be unreaso le to comply with the six foot side yard requirement contained in the Zoning Ordinance; 2) Granting exception would be consistent with the spirit of The Zoning Ordinance since it would not significantly inter- i� fere with sight and air flow to adjacent property; 3) It would enhance the neighbor- hood to have the car- inside instead of parked on the street I' VOTE, YRS - - NO - 0 i ii 11 ii -7- !I �� II '! II ii BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA* CITY HALL# ITHACA, NEW YORK, MARCH 5, 1973 ------------------------------------------------------------ I. COMMISSIONER Janes lists what case #996 is to be. i APPEAL 1E3. 996: The Appeal of Bill Avramis for an exception{ ..,.....,.._..... -......,....r.. �! under Section 7, Column 12; Section 9(F) (4),i at 609-617 Old Spencer Road in an R-S zone. l STANLEY TSAPIS: Aly name is Stan Tsapis I am an , !; attorney practicing law in the Cityll ij of Ithaca and in this particular it situation I am representing Mr. Bill Avramis who is petitioning form an exception in accordance with � i our petition to the following. It is Mr. Avramis' plan to construe thirty-six units of apartments, one bedroom units on the south side of Spencer- Road this is all per- mitted within the rules of R-3 zone . At the present time, the property doyen there returns on a taxable li seven.-hundred dollars a year = the I� proposed investment for the construe- tion ons -tion of these units is in excess o two-hundred and fifty thousand dol lags which will add substantially to the City*s tax base. I MARTIN. We got a memorandum from the Code and Ordinance Committee whish says to us number of units proposed for the site is in excess of the number permitted under Sec. 7, Ctrl. 7.- the ,the lot size of approximately 37,501) sq. ft. , divided by 1500 sq:._ ft. of lot required for each new unit, gives only twenty-five units allow A If this is the case, it would seem to me that we didn't request that in our papers and that we should have to came back if that is our intent rather than to put the Boar' to the time and effort of going through this. :hat we did came in requesting was the off-street pare ig I I i I i li -8- i I� �I i! exception and if we did not request{ an exception for the number of unit then I would respectful) withdraw our application and submit to the Board at another time. ' MRS. SLOVIKt I'm Mrs. Slovik and my property is i 608 Old Spencer Road. If you come �I back at another time, will we be I i� notified by letter so we know exact. y what isgoing on? ! R. TSAPIB: Exactly, Yes you will. Thank you. i� ii I i f I i i i ,� I If Ii -9- li !I � BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA# CITY HALL, ITHACA, .I it NEW Yom* LARCH 51, 1973 • Ii --------------------------------------rr.rE----...r-------wr.--- if �' COMISSSONER Jones lists what case X997 is to be. �I a APPEAL NO. 97: The Appeal of Ithaca Gun Company for an exception under Section 7, Column 12, at 123 Lake Street in an 1-1 zone. I THOMAS MATAVA My name is Thomas Matava and I am III !f the industrial engineer for the Ithaca Gun Company and in this I' position I am representing the Gun fl Corny in an appeal to Section 7, it Column 12 of the Zoning Ordinance. 1, Basically what it amounts to is an j� appeal to encroach upon the right. of way on Lake Street in order to ii construct a new security buildingg. The reason for the construction is � to provide additional space for thel f' security area so that we can tear down our existing guard she-,k and th existing fence in front of "the II building. We are also going to I provide locker rooms for our employ EI ees in the first floor of this ad- i dition and furthermore we hope to f eliminate a traffic situation and the traffic hazard that exists then i now. At quitting time, we have ap- proximately three-hundred people that Just pour out onto the road in any fashion - with the addition, I we are going to put in a sidewalk with railing to funnel the people across the read into areas so that it will help the people and the traffic situation and in turn I think help the community by providing a better building, more modern build- ing, more modern front to our building which will present a Bette image for us and hopefully for the 1 entire community. Appellants exhibit 1 marked for identification. 1 1 ° -10- it r 11 if r. Matava is now explaining to the Board members the site plan and all[ the plans showing the proposed new i addition. i THE CHAIRt How far will this new buildi.na 11 extend beyond the fence that Is no I there? A. It will not extend beyond the fence In fact it will be about a foot , shorter than the fence. � Donald J. O'Connor:� ' : Tam D. J. O'Connor and 1,-..am Business Representative of the International Association of Machinists and Workers 1607. I would briefly submit to th Board our recommendation for the Boards' favorable approval for the Gun C€mspanyst request for a varian in this matter. Since the General Recreation Inc. has bought the Gun i Company, they have made real att s to improve the inside of the build g i� both from appearance and safety standpoints. They are now attempt- ing, as far as we can see, to do the same thing to the outside of tte building without harming the safety factors outside of the building. �i n addition to this, we represent about three-hundred and fifty hourly rated employees in this plant most i of them from the City of Ithaca an as far as their working conditions are concerned- as I pointed out before their working conditions in side of the plant have been improved tremendously- and the Company is making one further attempt by making available locker space which will make it a lot more safe for the i) employees' personal things and also better working conditions. So on behalf of the Machinists Organization that I represent, on behalf of th le - �� huddred and fifty employees that work in this plant, I feel that th factors of safety would- be improv€ ; as far as traffic is concerned, it IT F Ii !I i I i� i ! ii would be no further hindrance, and in my opinion it would be ars improv - ment in the traffic safety on this particular corner and I would salmi that the Board give it favorable { consideration. THE CHAIR: Does the Board have any questions? ! None. 's Is there any one who wishes to spec 41 in favor of this appeal? i! None. Is there any one who wishes to op- 'I pose this appeal? Mone. I li 11 i i i II it (f i Ii EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS* CITY OF ITHACA i ii ii MARCH 5, 1973 ii APPEAL. NO 297: I! 1I MR. B TZ: I would like to make the motion th a we grant this Exception to the Zona g i Ordinance. I; SER. KASPRZAK: Second. j FINDINGS OF FACT: ,) 1) In order to make improvements �I to the facility required by the Federal Government there is no reasonable way to achieve the required improvements at the existing site without the re- � �j quested Exception; 2) Requested Exception would im- prove mprove traffic conditions at the ly location both pedestrian and vehicular and thus be consistent II with the spirit of the Zoning I Ordinance. I�I VOTE: YES - 5 NO - 0 I I i I i; C E R T I F I C A T 1 0 N I DARLEEN F. LISK, Da CERTIFY that I took the minutes 1� of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, in the mat- ters of Appeals No. 995, 996, 997, on March 5, 1973 at City i( Hall, City of Ithaca-, New York; that I have transcribed the � same and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and executive session of the Boa Of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, on the above date, and i` the whole ereof. I i ar een . Usk �I Stenographer I Sworn to before me this �Loay of �Nbtam' -Vc Notary Puha¢ S , GREY No.5 4 [V u�i#'ier! tr T,m 4#t5 t er,., xr ch , iy 7� i i