HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1971-06-03 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
..•w••�r.N.•.r..•••ww••wr••r••r•rr•..•..r••rrw•••••rwr••.r•••w�••••r••••r
PRESENT:
RALPH P. BALDINI, Chairman
r
JAMES ROGAN
HARRY BORTZ
GEORGE HARPER
ANTHONY PETITTI
FRANK ALO
EDISON JONES, Building Commissioner & Secretary
Chairman opens meeting, listing attendance of members and appeals to be
heard.
MR. JONES: With reference to Case No. 898, the Appeal of Bill
Zakskis Chevrolet, Inc., 401 Elmira Road, Ithaca,
New York, for a special permit to erect sign at above
address, under provisions of Section 79 Column 4, is
a Br4 district, this case will have to be set aside
for tonight because we have learned that under the
law, where a zoning change or exception requested,
borders on a State park or other community property„ r
u this must be set aside for thirty days.
MR. TSAPIS: I represent Mr. Zikakis and we are interested in
making sure that this does not get lost over in the
Planning office. Reserve our rights to report back
in thirty days.
a
-2-
THE CHAIR: Our first case tonight is No. 931, the Appeal of Donna
R. and Alan J. Boardman, 15 Hudson Place, Ithaca, New
York, for an exception to erect residence at 13 Hudson
Place, Ithaca, New York, under provision of Section 7
Columns 13 and 149 in an R-2 district. Who is appear ng?
ALAN BOARDMAN: I as Alan Boardman, representing my wife and myself,
of 15 Hudson Place. We would like to construct at 13
Hudson Place a house, 30 feet deep and 64 feet long.
22 feet would be garage and 42 feet would be living a ea.
This would require an exception because the Zoning Or i•
nance requires 15 feet between each end of the house nd
the side lot line for a two-family house. The house
would like to build would have 10 feet on one side of
the lot and 11 feet on the other side, instead of 13.
This would leave 25 feet between the house at 15 Hudson
Place and the one I want to construct, and on the other
side 39 feet between that and 11 Hudson Place. If I
do not get an exception then I either have to leave the
garage off or have the garage a separate building, which
would take up just as much space, or orbiting the living
area in a north-south direction. This would cause the
house to protrude over into the back yard and also mak
It more expensive. I have a problem now to build it f r
a reasonable cost. The lot slopes steeply down hill
towards the north and I suspect if the house were in t e
other direction the house would have to be at least 5
feet deeper on the other end.
THE CHAIR: According to your drawing, will these three houses be
on the same line?
A. Yes, 25 feet back.
Q. This new building would be 2 feet beyond the house at
No. 11 and 4 feet beyond the one at #15?
A. Yes.
-3m
THE CHAIR: Is there any one here speaking in favor of this appeal
GUS STRATAKOS: No. 7 Hudson Place. He can build it. It dont bother
as any.
MR. BOARDMAN: I did notify every one within 200 feet of the lot. I
notified Mr. Glover across the street and he sent a note
back saying he saw no objection.
THE CHAIR: Is there any one here who wishes to oppose this appeal
None.
M4«
THE CHAIR: Case No. 932, the Appeal of Theodore Bellisario, 129
Pearsall Place, Ithaca, New York, for an exception for
an addition at above address under provision of Sectiom
7, Columns 7 and 13 in an R.2 district. Who is appearing?
THEODORE BALLISARIA: I am Theodore Bellisario, of 129 Pearsall Place an
I would like to build a 20 by 30 addition to my home, it
small apartment. The lot size is thequestion and the
side yard also, but it would only continue from the
present structure which is 4 feet from the lot line.
My lot size is 60 by 122.
MR, AIA: Is there any way to get back there?
A� Yes, there will be a sidewalk.
MR. HARPER: How about parking?
A. I will provide off-street parking for one.
MR. PETITTI: Is there a driveway?
A. Yes, and I am planning on widening bhe driveway for
two cars.
THE CHAIR: Where is the driveway?
A. My house faces north and the driveway would be west. I
own the driveway. The addition is to be on the south
side of the present building.
(Draws sketch on board)
THE CHAIR: Is there any one who wishes to speak in favor of this?
FRANK McCONNELL 125 Pearsall Place. I an the immediEte neighbor on the
left side. I think I would be the person most likely
to object and he informed me of his intention to build
and I have no objection. It seems like a reasonable
idea and that it would increase the value of his property
and I should think for the neighbors also.
THE CHAIR: Is there any one appearing in opposition?
RALPH BONNETT 133 Pearsall Place.
405M
RALPH BONNETT
& Mrs. Bonnett: 133 Pearsall Place. According to the line, they have
a chimney on the end of their house about 18 inches fr
the line on the east side of the house. We have closer
to three feet back by the garage instead of six inches.
Our house is 30 by 30. We have 24 feet from the edge o
our house to the west lot line. On the east side of our
house is exactly 60 feet including our house to the lot
line on the side. Also the people on the west side are
just selling their house and I don't know if the people
buying are informed of this or not. I don't think too
many of the neighbors up there want apartments. I thin
they will object.
Opponent's Exhibit 1 marked and Mr. Ralph Bennett indiw
Bates his house and Mr. Bellisario's house.
THE CHAIR: Is there any one else who wishes to speak?
MRS. RALPH
BONNETT: I would like to ask Ted where he considers the lot line
is as to where he put his grape vine.
A. Right where the surveyor put the stakes.
u Q I would like to know why he feels this addition is nece sary
A. I want to get ahead.
ELVA HOLMAN: 141 Pearsall Place. I would like Ted Bellisario to sh
me where he expects to put the off-street parking.
(Mr. Bellisario indicates on sketch)
. Does he expect to cut part of the bank out?
A. Yes, I will cut out the bank,
HAROLD EMERY: 134 Pearsall Place. I am concerned about parking on the
street and there is a good bit of it there. I do not know
how many cars Mr. Bellisario has nor how many his garage
holds; there is usually one around, and if you are going
to take more of the bank away, this will make others loo
around for more parking.
-6-
MR. BELLISARIO: I keep one car on the street.
MR. ROGAN: How far is the garage door from the curb?
A. On that side there isn't any curb but I an planning on
going in 22 feet or so. The car will be off the stree .
MR. HARPER: How far will the garage be from the street line?
. A. Approximately 22 feet.
DONALD NIEWYK: 154 Pearsall Place. I have lived there for a year. I
is pleasant but congested. I would like to speak against
this to minimise the congestion in parking and on the
road. I know Mr. Bellisario has two feet, , possibly
three. Perhaps they will bring in tenants with two or
more cars and I think this would tend to change the
nature of the neighborhood. I think we should draw the
line here.
ORYEL CURTIS:. 138 Pearsall Place. My concern is about the off-street
parking. MY house is diagonally across the street and
in the winter time we do have problems, being on the
side hill, with no place to put the snow. We like the
neighborhood up there with mostly one-family houses,
and certainly with apartments it would be more congested.
-7-
THE CHAIR: The next case is No. 933, the Appeal of Bill Avramis,
139 Hudson Street, Ithaca, New York, for an exception
for front yard requirement for business at 319 College
Avenue, under provisions Section 79, Column 12, in a
B-2 district. Who is appearing?
STANLEY TSAPI3: I would like the record to show we have forwarded to
the Building Comad ssioner and Zoning Officer, Edison
Jones, the affidavit of service by mail to all the par es.
Appellant's Exhibits 1 through 4 marked for identification
The-purpose of the appeal is on behalf of Bill Avramis
of 319 College Avenue. He owns property at 319 Colleg
Avenue, property on the east side of Collegetown betwe
the liquor store and Cosmopolitan Restaurant across m
Collegetown Motor Lodge and the College Smoker. The
purpose of his request is for exception to front yard
requirement. Mr. Avramis proposes to construct commer
cial stores in the front of this building. Exhibit 2
is a photograph of the building as it presently exists
Exhibit 4 is a close-up of the area in front of which ire
intend to build. Exhibit 3 is a picture of the buildizg
to the south of the premises, showing its location to
the southwest. Exhibit 1 is a picture showing the bui d-
ing to the north of the building, which we expect to Wild.
To speak on behalf of my client we brought J. Victor
Bagnardi, who is designing the facade and addition, an
I would like him to present the drawings to the Board.
J. VICTOR BAGNARDI:
Being duly sworn, answered as follows;
BY MR. TSAPI3: Are you a licensed architect, licensed to practice in
the State of New York?
A. I am.
Is your office in the City of Ithaca?
A. Yes.
Were you engaged by Bill Avramis to draw plans for
the remodelling and a new facade for his building on
College Avenue?
A. Yes.
Are these the plans you have given to this Board?
A. Yes.
Will you describe briefly as to what is being constructed?
A. To extend the front of the building approximately 20 feet, and the
width of the building 35 feet. It will be of masonry construction
-8-
MR. BAGNARDI (continuing): fire-resistant, air-conditioned.
Q. You have a facade on the drawings - when you say of
"masonry, construction", what will the front portion be
A. Brick and the sides brick.
Q. Do you have any estimate of the cost of these renova-
tions?
A. I haven't gotten that far actually, but I would say around $259,000.
Q. Are you familiar with the neighborhood in which this
construction is proposed?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it a commercial area?
A. Yes.
Q. Are there buildings built to the southwest?
A. Yes.
Q. Across the street also?
A. Yes.
Q. And would there be in your judgment any change in the
character of the neighborhood if the Board permitted
this extension to the front lot line?
A. Not at all. I think it would be enhanced.
' MR. ROGAN: U13.1 you change the width?
A. No.
Q. Leave the driveway?
A. Yes.
MR. TSAPIS: On the north side will there be room for entry into
the apartment house?
A. Yes, that will remain.
Q. Is the only exception we are seeking that of the from
yard exception?
-9-
A. Yes.
Q. Do all other things comply with the Zoning Ordinance?
A. Right.
MR. ALO: What is going in here?
A. Up to this time they have not successfully negotiated any leases.
They have talked of a card shop and gift place, a travel agency, but
no leases yet. They are taking a wait-and-see attitude. If we can
get the front yard exception it would be much simpler to lease.
BILL AVRAMIS: Being duly sworn, answered as followsf
BY MR. TSAPIS: What is your full name?
A. Bill Avramis.
Q. How are you employed?
A. Self employed.
Q. Where do you live?
A. 139 Hudson Street.
Q. In the City of Ithaca?
A. Yes.
u
Q. Do you own the property at 319 College Avenue?
A. Yes.
Q. For Yaw long?
A. Seven months.
Q. Are you here requesting an exception to the front yard
requirement?
A. Yes,
Q. You have heard Mr. Bagnardi?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it your intention to construct such a structure?
A. Yes.
-10-
Q. Why do you find it necessary?
A. It would be good for the Collegetown, more stores can be there, and
for me, I hope now enough money with the premises.
Q. In order to amortize the loans on the building and mak
a profit, you can have additional income?
A. Yes.
THE CHAIR: Did he know this when he bought it?
MR. TSAPIS: Yes.
Q. How is the building presently used?
A. Storage,
Q. And this part you intend to use for commercial stores?
A. Yes, and storage.
Q. What about signs?
A. We would comply with the Zoning Ordinance.
Q. Are you willing to give to this Board a statement that
you would never come to this Board for a sign?
A. We have no present intention.
THE CHAIR: We have had this problem before and people do come back
in for a sign.
MR. TSAPIS: We knew we-were supposed to do it at the same time and
there is no intention to come back for size of sign.
We would comply.
MR. BORTZ: How many signs are you planning on?
A. One for each store, whatever the law allows. I assume they would be
on the building but if the law permits one over the sidewalk we would
request that.
THE CHAIR: I understood Mr. Bagnardi to say two stores.
MR. TSAPIS: Our plans call for two stores. If we are able to find
one tenant there would be just one store.
-11-
MR. PETITTI: One store building?
MR. TSAP1S: Yes, sir. I would like to point out to the Board that
there is a past experience on this subject with refer-
ence to the liquor store which has been constructed
further down the street and the buildings on the other
side of us also, and it would be a hardship if Mr.
Avramis were required to have a 10 foot set-back.
THE CHAIR: Is there any one who wishes to speak in behalf of this
application?
JOSEPH LEONARDO: 209 Dryden Road, right around the corner, and I think
it would benefit the community if he were able to ex-
tend this. There is a vacant spot in there and to ML
in would be better for the community.
BEVERLY EVERTS: 305 East Fall Street. I am here on behalf of Mr. and
Mrs. Harry Ryerson, and they, are in favor of this.
NICHOLAS
NESTOPOULOS: 7 Giles Street. I am property newt door, 315 Colleg
Avenue, and I think it will be a good idea for busines
up there - with no restaurant.
MARGARET
ANAGNOST: 312 College Avenue. I am much in favor. We have had
a bare spot across the street for many years. I have
seen the plans. They are excellent and an improvement
and we would like to go on record as being in favor
of it.
TONY DI SANTIS: 215 Dryden Road. We own property and so does Joe
Leonardo and we got into an argument with the neighbo
and I would like to do. something about it. It's all
right if they don't put a restaurant in. What will
they put in?
THE CHAIR: Not a restaurant.
MR. DI SANTIS: All right, if they want to put a store in, I am for it
THE CHAIR: Is there any one who wished to speak in opposition?
None.
-12-
THE CHAIR: Our nwct case is No. 934, the Appeal of Mrs. Hazel L.'
Soyring, 1977 Taughannock Boulevard, Ithaca, New York,
for an interpretation and variance at 614-618-620 West
Clinton Street, under provision of Section 7, Column 2
and provision of Section 99 in an R-3 district.
THE CHAIR: Reads the following Memorandum:
TO: Board of Zoning Appeals
FROM: City Planning Board
SUB: Request for an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance and
variance to Sec. 79 Col. 2 of the Ordinance at 614 and 618-
620 West Clinton Street in R-3 District - BZA Appeal #934
DATE: May 26, 1971
The Board referred the above request to the Codes and Ordinances
Committee for study and will forward its recommendation to the
Board of Zoning Appeals prior to the June 3 meeting.
THE CHAIR FURTHER READS LETTER RECEIVED CONCERNING SOUTH SIDE ZONING &
REPORTS BY PLANNING BOARD TO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.
THE CHAIR: In reply I would like to say that if Mr. Meigs had knovai
he was not able to do this he should not have sent to
this Board of Zoning Appeals the notice that we would
have this prior to this meeting tonight. Let me quote
to you: "This Board had asked for secret reports from
the Planning Board as to this memorandum". I have neve
heard this Board take any action asking for secret actin.
We only asked that we be advised as to the results of the
Planning Board as to matters coming before this Board.
We would like to be apprised of the Planning Board's
action so that we do not have to get it from the news
media. I called Mr. Weinstein the day after I got back
about this and I would like to refute this right now.
On WHCU Dave Stewart said "We were not present atyour
meeting last week. We were never asked to that meeting
and the implication that we did not give a damn is not
true. We were not apprised of this."
We have been critioised unlawfully. These are my own
comments. I was away three days last week and the reasoin
for moving this meeting up was because two of our members
would be out of town. It would be most beneficial to
every one if we could have a quorum at each and every
meeting.
-13-
MR. PETITTI: I think we should say something about this statement
by Mr. Nordheimer.
MR. ROGAN: This is the first time I have ever seen him at a meetirg
so I do not know where he gets his information about
what is going on at the Board of Zoning Appeals.
MR. ALO: I would prefer not to air our linen in public.
THE CHAIR: It was an intent to set the record straight. I came
back to hear that we had asked for secret information
from the Planning Board. It was reported that they asked
for a ruling from Mr. Weinstein.
PETE WALSH: It was reported that the rules came from the Planning
Board in private.
THE CHAIR: No, we asked for a report prior to the meeting of the
Board of Zoning Appeals if possible. The implication
in the paper was that this Board had asked for a privalle
report and this is not true. This was not the intent
of this Board. We objected to reading about the P1 g
Boards recommendations before we got them. If they
meet before that day we get it later. Why can we not
get the information at the same time as the papers do?
I think we have to have a meeting with the Planning
Board so that the procedural matters can be gone over.
We want to know why the Planning Board says they do no
have enough information. If we have been dragging our
feet, I want to know why we have been dragging our fee .
There has never been any intention to censor the Press
That we want this done in private is obviously a false;hood.
-14-
THE CHAIR: We now go to Case No. 934 With no recommendation from
the Planning Hoard.
WALTER J. WIGGINS:
Mr. Chairman, I feel somewhat like being in the center
of a storm. I assume of course that the application
will be reviewed on its merits.
Appellant!s ;Exhibit 1 marked for identification
This is just a City map. Very briefly the problem is
as follows: I am representing Mrs. Soyring, who owns
premises at 618 West Clinton Street shown on this map
as a black dot directly across from the Co-op Shopping
Center. What is intended is the construction of a
neighborhood parking lot. First, an interpretation of
the Ordinance arising from Section 9(h), and its ambigu
ity perhaos. (Quotes from Ordinance)
Taking that language alone we feel there is no need for
a variance because what is intended to be constructed i
a neighborhood parking area. Under your definitions it
defines neighborhood parking area as follows: (Quotes)
I believe what is intended by the definition means a
private parking area, and under 9(h) is intended to be
commercial use as a neighborhood parking area. In this
case, in an R-3 zone we do not need to proceed further.
What we ask is that you provide us with an interpretation
of the Ordinance. If you approve 9(h) we need go no
further. It is not our intent to provide a parking area
for persons who occupy adjoining areas.
(Board members refer to Zoning Ordinance)
The application has been made to the Building Commissioner
and has been denied because of the conflict in language
on page 5 and the language in 9(h). Perhaps we could
proceed with the proof for the reasonableness of the
variance.
THE CHAIR: Will you proceed?
MR. WIGGINS: All right, sir.
Appellant's Exhibits 2 through 11 marked for identification
-15-
MR. WIGGINS: I would like to show you photographs of the two dweUbkgs
in wuestion; it is the intention to demolish these
dwellings and construct a neighborhood parking lot.
(Exhibits 79899)
The lot is designed by Levatich & Miller, who designed
the addition to the Co-op some years ago, and it would
provide for a total of 45 parking spaces. The intention
is that the tenants of the Co-op, the stores, their
employees and employees of the Co-op would use this
facility during the day time and it would become available
for neighborhood use in the evening as used over the jNxt
number of years. I will ask Mr. Brill to describe the
basic character of the lot.
ROBERT BRILL: General manager of Co-op Food Store. The lot is approxi-
mately 130 by 140 feet; the depth is the greater measure-
ment. The lot would be on the north side of West Clinton
Street. The lot, as you can see, would be landscaped.
Ordinarily there would be room for approximately 60 ca s,
but by putting in curbs, grass areas and trees, a hedg
of yews along the back and a fence all the way around,
will out the capacity of the lot to 45 cars. The tree
would be three inch locusts, eight of them. They wool
be approximately 18 feet from the line, would extend o er
the sidewalk in the street area. The sidewalk would b
re-built as necessary.
MR. WIGGINS: Were the curb cuts designed in any way?
A. Yes, narrower so cars would not come in and go out the same driveway
at the same time. We have not yet decided on exit and entrance. They
would not be directly across the street from any driveways presently
there.
Q. What is your official capacity?
A. General manager of the Co-op.
Q. For how long?
A. With the Co-op 24 years, the past 7 years as manager, and the past
month as general manager.
Q. I show you Exhibit 11 - what are they?
A. These are signatures addressed to the Co-op Store Management, petitiDning
for more parking area by the customers. These came to us from one o
our tenants.
-16-
Q. Md a time come when the premises in question were
offered to you by Mrs. Soyring?
A. Yes, about a year ago.
Q. From that time to the present did another time come
when you entered into a contract to purchase the premises
• provided they could be used for neighborhood parking a
described?
NIR. ROGAN: What will you do at night with this?
A. It will be opened for neighborhood parking at night.
MR. ALO: How are you going to police this?
MR. WIGGINS: I think the employees are the most likely policemen.
It seems to be in every one's interest to have the em-
ployees park there, and it should not be a hardship fo
the employee to walk across the street. The reason we
have done this is to use this lot for employees rather
than customer parking.
MR. ROGAN: Can any one park in there?
MR. BRILL: I doubt if there would be room, and if a car were left
there two or three days, we would call the police.
THE CHAIR: Would you have signs up as to its being reserved during
the day?
A. We have not thought that far. We would rather not have signs.
THE CHAIR: I am sure if the employees get there early enough that
would solve the problem.
MR. WIGGINS: Gentlemen, with respect to the question of hardship, I
would like to call Mfrs. Soyring, but perhaps I could
outline generally what the problem is. As you can see
from Exhibit 1, the area is surrounded by commercial
zones so that the dwellings designed originally for one
family, also converted for two-family, become less and
less desirable for rental purposes and less desirable
become the tenants who are less interested in maintairitig
the premises and it increases the cost. Mrs. Soyring
intended that Andy would maintain the properties as he
did, but he recently died and Mrs. Soyring has been left
f to call upon tradesmen. As a result the properties are
_17_
MR. WIGGINS: (continuing): deteriorating, and the more they deteriorate,
the less valuable they become as a rental property. I
ask you to consider in evidence here the Internal Revemme
Service return Which will show the cost of maintaining
these properties is not commensurate with her income.
Also we have letters from adjoining neighbors, all of
whom favor this. Mr. and Mrs. Priori own on both side
of the property. I will read this letter from them,
which is marked Appellant's Exhibit 2.
"612 W. Clinton St.
Ithaca, New York 14850
June 2, 1971
Board of Zoning Appeals
City of Ithaca
108 E. Green St.
Ithaca, New York 14850
ATTN: Mr. Edison Jones, Secretary and Zoning Officer
Dear Mr. Jones:
As the owner of properties at 612 and 622 W. Clinton St., City of Ithaca,'
both properties which bound the properties known as the Soyring property
at 614-618, which are currently being considered for a zoning variance in
favor of the Cooperative Consumers' Society to be used as a parking lot,
be it known that I have absolutely no objection to the above mentioned
zoning variance and would welcome the change. The two properties involve
have greatly reduced the value of my properties and I feel that a nicely
landscaped parking lot would be desirable in place of them.
Sincerely,
Bruno Priori
Catherine Priori"
MR. WIGGINS: Call Mrs. Soyring.
Mrs. Soyring, being duly sworn, answered as follows:
Q. Are you the owner of premises at 614-618 West Clinton
Street?
A. Yes.
Q. For how long have you awned these properties?
A. Previous to 1966.
Q. Prior to his death, your son Andy, maintained these
properties?
A. Yes.
-18-
Q. Since that time have you been called upon to engage
the services of tradesmen to maintain these properties
A. Yes.
Q. I show you Appellant's Exhibit 12 and ask you if that
is the statement you signed in accordance with your ap al?
A. Yes.
Q. Are these facts which are set further in this statement
true?
A. Yes.
Q. If I were to ask you questions for the answers as set
forth in that statement are true, you would answer "Yes"?
A. Yes.
JOHN VASSE, being duly sworn, answered as follows:
BY MR, WIGGINS: What is your name and the nature of your profession?
A. John Vasse, realtor.
Q. For how long have you been a realtor?
A. Twenty-five years.
Q. Where is your office?
A. At 420 West Seneca Street in the City of Ithaca.
Q. For how long have you been engaged in this profession
in the City of Ithaca?
A. Twenty years.
Q. Did a time come when you made an appraisal of the
properties at 614-618 West Clinton Street?
A. Yes.
Q. Was this at the request of the Co-op?
A. Yes, requested by Robert Brill.
Q. Would you describe your findings?
A. MY appraisal was very low because of the physical condition of both
structuf8$--
-19-
Q. Could you determine from your examination of these
premises whether or not their state of destruction was
occasioned by tenant damage or general deterioration
of the buildings?
A. Both age and lack of needed repairs and over-crowded conditions.
Q. Have you had occasion to become familiar with the
general neighborhood?
A. I have bought and sold property in the area and have done work for
Bruno Priori, and I think in general the trend is up.
Q. Based upon your experience and general knowledge of the
area, do you have an opinion as to whether or not the
neighborhood parking lot as described in Exhibit 10 wovld
be an asset to that part of the Ithaca community?
A. I think it would enhance the entire neighborhood.
Q. Is it feasible in any way to -restore these as tenant
properties?
A. No, not economically sound.
Q. What is your best opinion of the best use of these
properties?
A. Some commercial use could be valuable.
Q. Is it my understanding that in your opinion, based on
your experience, to create the best possible use, would
be to demolish or raze the existing structures?
A. That is true.
MR. WIGGINS: Offer Exhibits 1 through 12 in evidence.
THE CHAIR: Received.
MR. ROGAN: Will there be any lighting at night?
MR. BRILL: We would install at least one high intensity light
near the back.
MR. WIGGINS: If the Board felt, in considering this appeal, that
ground lighting would be better for the best interests
of the neighborhood, than overhead lighting, would you
agree?
MR BRILL: Yes,
-20-
REVEREND CLARENCE CHRISTIAN: 318 South Corn Street, Ithaca.
I live three houses from the said properties and I taink
that the condition of the homes that are there makes
that side of the street an eyesore, and I think it the
best thing in the world if they were to change it to a
parking lot there, anything except what we have there nim.
I had friends recently come to visit me and they said
they liked my location - I have been here eleven months
- and they said the only thing was that there were two
houses there that were bad. I concur with the idea that
these should be removed and that the parking is the best
u thing to have in the neighborhood.
DURCEY STAFFORD: 303 South Meadow Street. Yq husband and I are very much
in favor of this as an employee or tenant of the Co-op,
for an employee parking lot but not as a customer parking
lot. The street is hazardous for a parking lot and if
they had customer parking over there it would be a hazard
but if for employees, we are much in favor of it.
JAMES DUNSTON: 508 West Clinton Street, and member of the Co-op. If
interpretation is made as to neighborhood parking lot,
it might make a difference. If it were a variance it
would be another problem. The people there are much
concerned about the value of the area, about spot vari-
ances. I know the two properties and I know they are
deteriorating. I know what they are wrestling with, so
the big question comes up with the interpretation of
neighborhood parking, but if it came to a change in com-
mercial zoning you would have a concern. The people ar
trying to upgrade the neighborhood. Yor main reason is
to tell you the people living in the south side are con
corned, so I think my main concern is the interpretation
as to whether it would call for a regular neighborhood
parking permit or a variance. Making a decision can
very well determine the character of that area.
THE CHAIR: We do not have the power to change the Ordinance. We
• are in effect changing the zoning by spot zoning, but
we do not have any legislative powers. We can not chan e
it but we can interpret it.
MR. DUNSTON: When two lots are zoned commercial it has seemed to
make it easier for those around it.
THE CHAIR: All I can say is that each time this is done it must be
done by a separate variance. Each case is supposed to
be judged on its own merits. These are in effect "spot
zonings".
-21-
MR. DUNSTON: The other question is as to future use.
BLANCHE THOMPSON: 226 Cleveland Avenue.
It will be just like where I am now. You can't rest
around there, with Kentucky Beef and Mr. Doughnut, and
it's 24 hours a day or night and you can't sleep and
you can't even rest. That was supposed to be closed
down at a certain time and I am going to see what I
can do about it. It will be another thing just like
it is now.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Brill said they might put the lights in the back
�•/ of the lot. How do you feel about that?
MRS. THOMPSON: I pity them if they suffer like I do. I can see any-
where in my house without putting an my lights.
SAM MhNEIL: 132 Clinton Street. I am a lessor from Co-op. I run
a Woman's Liberation type of business, washing and dry
cleaning. Because I rum this business, which is the
main source of my income, in this area, I would like
the community to express my business as I feel I can
brag about my clientele. I think the people in this
area are interested in a fine community and I do not
think this would be deteriorating in arty way in this com-
munity. I think it would enhance the area and I believe
they would take care of the parking lot. Therefore, I
am in favor of this action at this time.
THE CHAIR: Is there any one who wishes to speak in opposition to
this?
DONALD SLATTERY: West Court Street. If possible, I would like to ask
some questions. Is it possible for the Co-op to extend
its operation to the east?
MR. WIGGINS: Ido, the problem is that the people who own these pro-
perties have not met them for sale.
MR. SLATTERY: How many tines has the Co-op expanded in the last ten
years?
MR. WIGGINS: My recollection is three, two to the building itself d
and the construction of the Plaza Center.
MR. SLATTERY: Say that some time in the future you wish to expand ag1in?
MR. WIGGINS: It is possible of course.
-22-
MR. SIATTERY: Would you say that the Co-op has doubled its business
in the past ten years?
MR. WIGGINS: Yes, to five million dollars.
MR. SIATTERY: That is an expanding operation and mfr concern is com-
mercial parking on the other side of the street. Could
this become a commercial venture?
MR. WIGGINS: The Co-op has not requested a commercial use of this
property. They have just asked to construct a neigh-
borhood parking lot.
MR. SIATTERY: I would like to go on record as opposed to this.
CHARLES HAREK: Esty Street. I support Mr. Slattery's argument. It
seems they would expand further.
MR. WIGGINS: What is the nature of your interest?
A. I know a lot of the people in that area and I am inter
ested in the south side. Two houses may not seem a to
but you will, be displacing the people who live there.
THE CHAIR: Are there people living there at this time?
MRS. SOYRING: Two families and they are both looking now for places.
MR. HAREK: For the south side I say the parking lot is not there
for the community. It seems that the Co-op has expanded
and is now saying, "We need more parking." This is rather
than saying before "We need more parking." One furthe
point is that if the variance be granted as a parking
lot now, how can it be economically feasible to build
houses on an old parking lot?
DONNA WILCOX: East State Street. I own property on Cleveland Avenue
and am down there at least once a month; I know the
families; I see the pride they have in the area and they
desire to keep it residential. I know of the housing
shortage in Ithaca. Therefore I do not want a parking
lot where there are houses. Perhaps the houses should
be sold and other type of houses put on the land. Thai
land is valuable; they are near the grocery store, the
laundry, uptown, schools, other facilities. The house
to you and to me is undesirable but it is desirable for
housing in Ithaca, and I think that land should be use
for housing.
I
-23-
MR. WIGGINS: It is just not economically feasible to use it for
housing.
DONNA WILCOX: Perhaps we should find a use. Perhaps something could
be done.
L
-24-
THE CHAIR: The next case is No. 935, the Appeal of John Vasse,
420 West Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, as agent for
Nancy Clines for a variance for retail store at 613-61
West Green Street, under provisions, Sections 7, C01UML
2, in an R-3 district.
JOHN VASSE: Appellant's Exhibits 1,2,3 marked for identification
I am John Vasse and I am requesting a variance from a
residential R-3 zone at 613-615 West Green Street, knoim
as the Nancy Clines property, a commercial barn and an
old abandoned house. It is a big red barn, last occupied
by Shulman's Furniture, for warehousing. The property
`-� is in very bad physical condition; it was established
on a lot 66 by 132. It is across the street from a i-
ness zone occupied by Art Craft Printers, up the street
from Kentucky Beef and it lies between Meadow and Corn
Streets. I have tried before for a variance for resi-
dential purposes. They have had the property for sale
at least ten years. The Clines do not have a lot of
money; they are interested in seeing something happen.
You will say the place looks intolerable; but the buililingo
is not in such a state that it can not be saved. My
purchaser, Mr. Perry, has an intent to use this for goed
used furniture and antiques. He wants to eliminate thq
eaves; generally he wants to clean up the property and
make a retail outlet here, and I think it would enhance
the neighborhood. I think the Building Commissioner
might comment on it himself. I offer this Exhibit 39
which shows how the buildings lie (Exhibit 3 being plc
u
plan).
I think if this variance were granted it would solve
the hardship problem; and that it would help Mr. Hart
on the east and west. I think that is my case. I am
requesting this use for antique and good used furnitur .
Our wares will be under cover within the barn.
MR. ROGAN: Is this man planning on living in the house?
A. No, he wants to refurbish it and use it for an office.
MR. ALO: What are the hours of operation?
A. Strictly those of the other stores, such as nine to five, possibly
one night.
MR. PERRY: Mostly nine to five.
I
-25-
MR. ALO: Does he intend to put his wares out on the street?
A. No, it will be in the barn under cover. People will have to enter
the barn. He would be refinishing antiques as such.
THE CHAIR: What kind of equipment would be used for refinishing
and furnishing- would there be any noxious fumes?
A. There are sewer facilities.
RALPH PERRY: There is a commercial product for this. A vat made wi h
a water base in which you put a chemical and there are
no fumes. I intend to investigate further.
THE CHAIR: How do you intend to dispose of waste products?
A. It is a water base and will go down the sewer.
MR. JONES: If it is non-toxic it might be acceptable.
EEFORREST FORMAN: I believe this would help this neighborhood and
believe it has real good features and I would like to
see it go.
THE CHAIR: Is there any one to speak in opposition?
BLANCHE THOHPSON: I really don't want to see a residential section spoiled
by these chemicals and things. It will be just like
Kentucky Beef and Doughnut Shop. I don't want an antique
shop. Why don't they put up some houses? Ithaca is the
worst looking place, nothing but holes. If they have
parking lot they might as well have the antique shop and
everything will go haywire.
JAMES DUNSTON: I remember the last appeal was like a catalyst - sometking
trying to work with City Planning. Once this begins,
` this is a problem. There are enough commercial areas
in the City now for this type of thing. This sort of
thing is going to happen before they get a chance to
help the City. There are other areas suited. We have
a plaza with vacant stores, a shopping center going up
a lot of areas that could stand the development.
RALPH PERRY: East Lincoln Street. I would like to say on behalf of
myself that I realize W sentimentality these people
have for the south side. I want to show them I feel the
same; I own four pieces of property on Cleveland Avenue,
have had them for four and a half years, and most people
i
-26-
MR. PERRY: (continuing): know how much I have upgraded these
properties and it is my intent to do the same with
this piece of property; that I can make it attractive
MR. AIA: When did the Clines purchase this property?
JOHN VASSE: I think she inherited it from an aunt, and at least
twelve years ago. Mr. Dunston talks about saving that
south side. It is inevitable that it goes commercial
These people are paying money for these properties.
I think the highest and best use is commercial use.
I think the zoning should be spent in the back yard
instead of out in the street.
-27-
THE CHAIR: As to Case No. 928, the Appeal of Ignacio Serrano of
812 Hanshaw Road, asking for an exception to the Zoning
Ordinance under Section 7, Column 7, property located
at 209 Williams Street, Ithaca, New York.
We have an adjourned hearing now in regard to Appeal
No. 928, in furtherance of our request for more infor-
mation in order for this Board to act on this appeal.
Appellant's Exhibits 1 through 5 marked for identificatLon
RICHARD I. MULVEY: Offer Exhibit 1.
As you will recall, on May 4th I appeared before this
Board with respect to an exception at 209 Williams Street
in the City of Ithaca. At that time the matter was ad-
journed and I was advised to furnish more information.
I have discussed the parking situation with an official
from Cornell University, and refer to Exhibit 1, marke
for identification, and offer this into evidence.
Within 200 feet of the site is a large parking lot, an
Cornell University has assured me we may use this on an
annual basis. This communication is as follows:
" 313 East Court Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
1 June 1971
Richard Mulvey, Esq.
403 Seneca Building
Ithaca, New York 14850
Dear Mr, Mulvey:
Thank you for your call of 27 May. Your client can be assured of �
parking space for four automobiles in the lot at 401 Stewart Avenue for
an annual rental, payable in advance, not to exceed $100.00/year/automobile.
This is an outside figure and might not be quite that high, espeoialLy
for an annual rental payment.
If your client's apartments will be ready before 1 September and you
wish to enter into a more formal arrangement, I ask that you contact Mr.
M. R. Shaw, Deputy Comptroller, in Day Hall, ph. 256-4347. I will be out
of town until 1 September, but will look forward to serving you then.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Richard W. Arnold
Parking Lot Manager "
-28-
MR. MULVEY: I offer Exhibit 2, which is a survey of the property
by Carl Crandall., C.E.
I offer Exhibit 39 which is a photograph showing the
driveway into this property. After the hearing on May
4th I went to the premises with Mr. Jones, in my car,
and we measured the driveway, nine feet in its narrower
spot, and I could negotiate it with my oar. I have
spoken to Mr. Serrano and he has assured me he will
blacktop the driveway. It was recommended that the
lowest step be removed but I found no difficulty in
driving in. While I was there with Mr. Jones, we four
as shown on Exhibit 4, that two cars can be comfortably
parked, and perhaps three.
The other Exhibit is 5. Mr. Serrano owns the property
next door to the motel and in which he has a parking
lot which contains ten spaces, six of which he leases
out. Mr. Serrano advises me that in the last year in
the premises he owns at 207-209 Williams Street, only
one student resided there who owned a car. I think
this type of housing appeals to students in the lower
status, and they usually do not have cars. At this time
he has expended $99000 in the property and his total
investment in the barn will amount to $129000. I think
we paced this off and parking in the rear was about
30 by 30 in front of the barn shown on Exhibit 6. It
does appear that we have no problem in obtaining all
the off-street parking from Cornell University that we
�.,• wish, and it does appear there would be sufficient
parking and access to the rear through that driveway
if it is properly prepared. Cornell University has
given us a figure of approximately $100 per car per year.
MR. ALO: If they do not wish to pay this we would have the street
parking again.
MR. MULVEY: I think if the exception is granted and if the tenants
have cars, that the responsibility would be Mr. Serran 's
and that he would have to absorb it or pass it on. I
spoke to Mr. Shaw and he told me they would be happy t
lease them on a year to year basis and would give a
reduced rental.
-29-
MR. HARPER: What happens if Mr. Parke builds there?
MR. MULVEY: Cornell University owns it.
Q. How about Mr. Ruuspakka?
MR. MULVEY: I think he has been ill-advised. He has blaektopped
it for us. When I was here before I told Doctor
Baldini that I did not think I would drive my own car
in but I did.
u
I
EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF TONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
AIA: Move that this Board deny request in letter to Board
of Zoning Appeals, from The Firestone Tire and Rubber
Company, Inc., dated May 40 1971, and insist that
appellant complies with stipulations of the original
hearing on application for exception.
BORTZ: Second.
VOTE: Unanimous.
EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 39 1971
•www Mw Illw wa ww wwww••www-r w ww wwwwww wwww w rwsww r+gts�tlAtrM�twN�►wwrww�twl��lstf ww«.�MIIrsD
Case No. 931:
PETITTI: Move that the application for exception be granted.
ROGAN: Second.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) That grouting exception for side let requirement
would in no Way endanger the ingress and egress
of emergency vehicles;
2) Appellant has plenty of Width to build;
3) Appellant could build without appearing before
this Board if he would detach the garage and
therefore it seems impractical to require appel-
lant to build detached garage.
VOTE: Yes - 6 No - 0
Application granted.
3
EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
rrr+l►•••w•••r��•M••1�r•••wr••�1w•••rMw•••wrww•w••rr•w•rfq•wwr•/ill••r1,•w••M•• wr
M
• Case No. 932:
BORTZ: Move that application for exception be tabled pending
L further information, specifically as to survey map of
property is question.
PETITTI: Second.
VOTE: Unanimous.
I
I
i
EXECUUVE SESSION, BOARD OF TONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
• ..w•..••wrww•ww•r•wrwrww••••..••••r•••••A••••••w•wr••w•wr�11••w•••••w•w•�•ww
I
I
�i Case No. 933:
HARPER: Move that application for exception be granted, With
irestriction that property not be used for restaurant
�I purposes.
BORTZ: Second.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) That granting exception will enhance the area;
2) Will conform to other commercial properties in
i
f
area;
3) A definite need for type of building was demon+
strated.
I
VOTE: Yes o 6 No w 0
u Application granted
1'
EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
•ww••rww•w•r•rrrrr•rMwrwrr•rwrr••w•w••rww rwwwrrr•rrr•wrrwwrwMwwrrrr•w•w
Case No. 934:
This Board has decided that the terns "neighborhood parking area" and
"private parking area" do not apply to this case because the word
"dwelling" appears in both of these definitions and the Co.-op buildings
are not dwellings, and therefore this Board must act on the appeal for a
variance.
HARPER: Move that application for variance be granted with
the proviso that ground lighting be provided.
ROGAN: Second.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) That denial would continue a hardship;
2) That by granting variance the prospective owners
will improve the properties;
3) That it is economically not feasible to rehabili-
tate the buildings.
VOTE: Yes r 6 No - 0
Application granted
i
I
I
EXECIJPIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
s•ss•w•s••r•�ts•www ww•w .•wwwr. •w•w•I�ws•swsswrwswwsw•w�r•�s•w••swgll••wwwswws
Case No. 935:
HARPER: Move that application for variance be granted.
BORTZ: Second.
u I FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) That granting of variance will relieve owner of
hardship;
2) That realtor has had this piece of property on
market for 12 years and is unable to dispose of it
i 3) That granting of variance will improve the neighw
borhood.
VOTE: Yes w 3 No w 3
L
i
EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
June 3, 1971
y y----.r y---r-..----w1-y-r•------r--r-•r----------------------
Case
------Case No. 928:
HARPER: Move that application for exception be denied;
BALDINI: Second.
� I
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) That parking agreement is too untenable;
2) That property is not readily accessible to
emergency vehicle.
VOTE: Yes - 2 No 4
i
i
I