►
From YouTube: October 5, 2021 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Good
evening,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
I
hereby
call
the
order:
the
city
of
ithaca
board
of
zoning
appeals
meeting
for
october
5th
2021.
the
board
operates
under
the
provisions
of
the
ithaca
city
charter.
I
think
a
zoning
ordinance,
I
think,
a
sign
ordinance
and
the
board's
own
rule
is
a
procedure.
The
board
compromises
five
months.
Five
members
nominated
by
the
mayor
and
approved
by
common
council
board
members
present
tonight
are
stephen
henderson
and
stephanie
egan
engels,
as
well
as
zoning
administrator,
megan,
wilson
and
ray
hondati
staff
to
the
board.
B
I'm
david
barkin,
acting
chairperson
of
the
board,
the
secretary
to
the
board
megan
wilson,
will
call
each
case
in
order
listed
on
the
agenda.
The
appellants
will
then
have
a
maximum
of
five
minutes
to
present
new
material
or
highlight
aspects
of
their
appeal
board.
Members
may
question
of
balance
on
any
areas
requiring
clarification.
B
Full
consideration
of
appeals
requires
a
public
hearing
deliberation
and
then
voting
by
the
board.
These
actions
occur
only
after
the
appel
has
filed
appropriate
documents
with
the
zoning
division
and
the
planning
and
development
board.
Public
hearings
include
testimony
from
interested
parties.
Unquote,
the
board
considers
interested
parties,
persons
who
live
work
or
own
property
within
750
feet
of
the
property
who
are
authorized,
representatives
of
recognized
adjacent
neighborhood,
civic
groups
or
who
are
elected
city
officials
board
members
may
question
testifying
interested
parties
on
any
areas
requiring
clarification.
B
Let's
see
here,
persons
who
do
not
meet
the
board's
interests,
the
party
definition
will
not
be
heard.
Comments
are
limited
to
three
minutes.
Appellants
will
then
be
allowed
opposing
testimony,
but
appellant's
comments
must
be
limited
to
strict
rebuttal
of
the
issues
raised
by
those
opposed
and
will
be
limited
to
five
minutes.
A
timer
will
sound
at
the
end
of
each
speaker's
allotted
time.
B
While
we
do
not
adhere
to
strict
rules
of
evidence,
we
do
consider
this
a
quasi-judicial
proceeding
and
we
base
our
decisions.
On
the
official
record.
The
official
record
consists
of
application
materials
filed
with
the
zoning
division
correspondence
relating
to
cases
received
by
the
zoning
division,
planning
and
development
board's
own
findings
and
recommendations.
If
any
and
the
record
of
tonight's
meeting,
an
audio
recording
is
being
made
of
this
meeting,
therefore
it
is
essential
anyone
wanting
to
be
heard
speaks
clearly.
B
So
their
comments
are
recorded
and
heard
by
everyone
extraneous
comments
will
neither
be
recorded
or
considered
by
the
board.
We
ask
that
everyone
limit
their
comments
to
the
zoning
issues
of
each
appeal
and
not
common
matters
beyond
the
board's
jurisdiction
following
the
appellant
rebuttal,
the
appeal
hearing
will
be
closed
and
the
board
will
begin
deliberation.
B
The
board
is
required
to
render
a
decision
within
62
days
of
the
public
hearings
closure
once
the
hearing
is
closed.
No
further
testimony
will
be
taken.
It
takes
three
weeks
to
approve
a
motion
to
grant
a
variance
or
favorable
interpretation
in
the
event
of
a
tie
vote.
An
appeal
is
denied
tonight's
online
meeting
format
requires
us
to
manage
public
comments
differently,
but
the
board
still
welcomes
input
from
interested
parties.
Tonight's
appeals
are
excuse.
Me
are
available
for
public
review
on
the
city's
website
and
the
meeting
is
being
streamed,
live
via
youtube.
B
A
A
Okay,
our
first
appeal
is
appeal:
number
3186
for
campbell
avenue,
tax
parcel,
3811
appeal
of
brent
katzman
on
behalf
of
property
owner
sharon,
center
for
an
area
variance
from
section
325,
8
column,
7,
minimum
lot
width
street
requirement
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
The
applicant
proposes
to
subdivide
a
vacant
5.78
acre
lot
located
at
the
southern
end
of
campbell
avenue.
The
subdivision
would
create
two
new
lots:
lot:
1a,
which
was
139
377
square
feet
in
lot,
1b
96
715
square
feet.
A
The
existing
parcel
is
located
adjacent
to
an
abandoned
road
that
remains
city
property
and
does
not
have
frontage
on
campbell
avenue.
The
city-owned
property
is
located
between
the
parcel
and
campbell
avenue.
An
applicant
will
secure
a
license
agreement
with
the
city
to
create
access
from
the
subdivided
lots
to
campbell
avenue.
In
addition,
there
will
be
an
easement
on
lot
1a
to
ensure
access
to
lot
1b,
both
flat
1a
and
lot.
1B,
however,
will
not
meet
the
minimum
lot
width
street
requirement
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
If
the
area
variants
and
subdivision
are
approved,
the
applicant
intends
to
sell
the
two
subdivided
lots
to
the
allow.
The
construction
of
two
new
single
family
homes,
cable
avenue,
tax,
partial
38.1,
one-
is
located
in
a
r1a
youth
district
in
which
the
proposed
use
is
permitted.
However,
section
325
32
requires
that
an
area
variants
be
granted
before
a
building
permit
is
issued.
C
D
D
The
board
for
agreeing
to
listen
to
our
application-
I
am
representing
the
property
owner
for
this
5.45
acre
parcel,
that
is
at
the
end
of
campbell
avenue,
just
east
side
of
west
side
of
hector
street.
D
E
C
B
B
Doesn't
seem
anyone
has
any
questions,
I
I
don't
have
any
questions
either.
So,
if
not,
I
guess
we'll
open
it
up
to
public
hearing
megan
for
those
in
favor.
First.
A
We
have
no
one
signed
up
to
speak
in
support
and
no
one
that
submitted
comments
and
support,
and
the
same
is
true
about
opposition,
no
one
to
speak
either
in
person
or
submitting
written
comments.
A
The
planning
board
does
not
identify
any
negative
long-term
planning
impacts
and
supports
this
appeal.
The
law
is
contiguous
to
the
old
hector
right-of-way
that
separates
their
property
from
campbell
avenue.
This
is
not
considered
a
public
way
and
therefore
the
property
lacks
the
required
frontage.
This
is
a
fixed,
existing
condition.
The
applicant
will
provide
a
driveway
that
is
adequate
for
ingress,
egress
and
emergency
access.
B
F
Yes,
okay,
sorry
for
my
technical
difficulties,
but
I'm
I'm
not
sure
that
I
have
any
thoughts
necessarily
but
noting
that
there
are
other
properties
when
I
think
about
easements
and
sharing
of
driveways
for
again
egress
and
ingress
that
it
just
takes
the
right
buyer.
F
So
if,
if
if
it's
been
reviewed
that
there's
no
negative
impacts
that
they
can,
you
know
complete
the
project,
it's
I
don't
necessarily
have
any
concerns.
So
I'm
curious
if
there's
other
thoughts
that
anybody
else
has.
B
B
Yeah,
I
don't
see
the
home,
I
think
it'll
be
a
really
nice
offering
within
the
city.
These
are
huge
lots
for
city
property,
so
somebody
will
be
very
happy
and
it
allows
for
construction
of
two
new
homes
yep
with
that
are
people
comfortable
voting
or
any
other
questions
beforehand.
F
Just
looking
at
I,
while
this
is
kind
of
unconventional
that
I'm
calling
in
all
of
a
sudden,
I
can
see
some
more
of
the
plans.
So
I
just
had
a
quick
question.
Maybe
clarification
looks
like
on
only
one
of
the
parcels.
F
There's
an
easement
that's
proposed
for
some
sort
of
utility,
wondering
if
then
that'll
mean
that
they'll
have
access
for
the
other
property,
because
it
goes
all
the
way
to
the
other
property
line.
I'm
sure
that's
also
been
reviewed,
but
again
just
thinking
about
how
that
could
change
some
of
the
the
property
development.
C
C
A
Brent
might
be
able
to
speak
to
that.
What
is
that
is
for
the
one
that
to
tell
you
a
little
bit
more
about
it.
It
in
terms
of
the
access,
that's
not
for
access,
which
you
probably
figured,
but
that
can
probably
tell
you
more
about
the
utilities.
C
D
I'd
be
happy
to
know
that
yeah
thanks
for
the
question
stephanie.
Basically
it
is
a
an.
D
Allows
us
to
run
water
and
sewer
lines
servicing
the
second
house
and
taking
advantage
of
slope,
because
the
city-owned
water
and
sewer
run
underneath
old
hector
street
right-of-way,
and
so
the
house
that
would
get
built
or
could
get
built
on
b
would
tap
into
it.
If
you
know
along
the
length
of
that
easement
and
the
one.
E
Yeah,
I
can
make
that
motion
here
so
for
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
for
appeal:
number
3186
for
applicant
brit,
katzman
on
behalf
of
property
owner
sharon
center
on
campbell
avenue,
tax,
partial
31-1-1.
E
Zoning
district
r1a
like
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
that,
based
on
these
findings,
whether
an
undesirable
change
would
be
produced
in
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
or
a
detriment
to
nearby
properties.
A
E
I
mean
with
city
with
single-family
homes,
whether
the
benefits
not
by
the
applicant
could
be
achieved
by
feasible
alternatives.
No
there's,
no
there's
no
access
or
street
frontage
anyway,
whether
the
requested
variance
is
substantial.
E
No
it's
already
deficient
per
se.
Would
the
variants
have
an
adverse
impact
on
the
physical
or
environmental
conditions
in
the
neighborhood?
No,
and
whether
the
alleged
difficulty
was
self-created?
E
Nothing
else
you
could
do
about
it
so
yeah,
I
think
that's
it.
E
B
A
So
the
motion
carries
three
to
zero,
so
your
variance
has
been
granted
front.
You
should
receive
within
the
next
couple
of
days
the
written
approval
of
the
variants
to
help.
You
continue
with
your
subdivision
process.
A
A
Okay,
so
our
next
appeal
is
appeal:
number
3196
for
209
eddie
street
appeal
of
christopher
anagnos
on
behalf
of
property
owners,
mr
mrs
chang,
for
an
area
variance
from
section,
325,
8
column,
4
off
street
parking
column,
6,
minimum
law
area,
column,
13,
other
side
yard
requirements
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
The
applicant
proposes
to
convert
the
existing
two
family
dwelling
to
a
single
unit,
multiple
residence.
A
The
property
was
originally
constructed
as
a
single-family
home,
but
was
converted
to
a
two-family
dwelling
by
constructing
a
kitchen
in
an
existing
bedroom.
The
applicant
proposes
construction
will
revert
the
structure
back
to
a
single
dwelling
unit
with
seven
bedrooms
per
the
zoning
ordinance.
Any
single
dwelling
with
four
or
more
unrelated
occupants
is
classified
as
a
multiple
dwelling.
A
The
property
is
located
in
the
r-3a
zone
in
multiple
dell.
Multiple
dwellings
in
the
zone
require
a
larger
lot
area
than
single
or
two
family
dwellings.
The
property
has
a
lot
area
of
6600
square
feet
and
a
converted.
Multiple
dwelling
requires
7
000
square
feet,
resulting
in
a
deficiency
of
400
square
feet
of
lot
area.
A
In
addition,
the
property
has
an
existing
off-street
parking
deficiency.
That
will
be
exacerbated
by
the
proposal.
The
property
is
currently
required
to
have
two
off-street
parking.
Spaces
provides
no
off-street
parking
on
site.
The
change
from
two
three-bedroom
apartments
to
one
seven-bedroom
dwelling
increases
the
required
parking
to
four
off-street
spaces.
The
property
also
has
an
existing
side
yard
deficiency
that
will
be
not
will
not
be
exacerbated
by
this
proposal.
209
eddy
street
is
located
in
an
r3a
use
district
in
which
the
proposed
use
is
permitted.
A
G
You
hear
us,
I
can
see
you,
I
can
see
you
on
the
screen,
but
unfortunately
I
don't
have
a
camera
on
my
computer,
so
hello
to
the
bza.
I've
been
before
you
several
times
in
my
career.
I'm
doing
this
on
behalf
of
clients
that
have
purchased
this
property
in
1982.
G
G
I
realized
that
by
adding
there's
a
second
floor
bedroom
that
was
turned
into
a
kitchen.
The
second
floor
has
no
living
room.
It's
a
kitchen
three
bedrooms
and
a
bath
the
since
1972,
I
think
when
eden
slager
bought
it
from
the
people
that
were
living
there.
G
It's
been
rented
to
a
group
of
friends,
they've
rented,
both
units.
It
has
a
kitchen
upstairs
that
no
one
uses
because
it
was
a
bedroom
with
a
with
a
sink
put
in
a
closet.
So
my
thought
was,
and
they've
had
interest
in
a
group
by
a
group
of
seven
in
leasing,
the
property.
So
that's
why
I'm
making
this
appeal?
G
There's
a
lot
of
non-conforming
properties
in
the
area
on
both
sides
of
it
behind
it,
a
lot
of
parking
deficient
properties,
this
one
never
had
off
street
parking,
there's
no
convenient
way
to
provide
it.
It's
up
a
steep
slope,
there's
no
room
to
put
a
driveway,
and
I
realized
that
off-street
parking
could
be
provided.
G
My
thought
is:
if
tenants
want
it,
they
can
rent,
but
for
a
landlord
property
owner
to
control
renting
an
off-site
space
that
he
has
no
say
over
whether
somebody's
parked
there,
whether
it's
plowed
properly,
whether
somebody
needs
to
be
ticketed
and
towed
out
of
somebody's
space,
I
think,
is
an
impractical
application.
So
my
hope
is
that
the
bza
will
grant
this
variance
so
that
we
can
add
one
more
person.
That's
grandfathered
for
six
people,
adding
one
more
person
without
an
off
street
parking
requirement.
F
I
might
just
because
I'm
having
trouble
visually
seeing
some
of
the
documents
that
have
been
provided.
Can
you
describe
a
little
bit
the
floor
plan
layout
of
what's
currently
there
and
if
there's
going
to
be
any
changes
that
are
going
to
be
made.
G
Sure
the
first
you
walk
in
a
large
entry
hall.
You
walk
down
the
hallway
the
first
floor
apartment
is
this
living
room,
kitchen,
dining
area,
three
bedrooms
and
a
bath
has
access
to
a
legal.
G
G
E
Yeah,
so
if
the
argument
is
that
there's
not
a
living
room,
upstairs
wouldn't
the
easier
way,
wouldn't
the
the
easiest
way
to
accommodate
that
be
convert
one
of
the
bedrooms
into
a
living
room
except.
G
Don't
lose
you'd
lose
an
occupant
at
that
point,
so
it
would
be
a
financial
hardship
to
lose.
You
know
ten
thousand
dollars
a
year
in
income
just
to
give
a
living,
so
it
never
yeah.
You
could
do
it,
but
it
would
certainly
be
an
economic
hardship
to
an
owner
not
to
lose
a
bedroom
to
get
a
living
room.
G
Well,
no,
you
could
certainly
rent
it
to
five
people
and
we
can
go
on
running
it
to
six
the
way
it
is
without
needing
the
variance.
G
I
just
didn't
think
adding
one
more
person
would
be
an
impact
on
on
the
entire
area
which,
as
you
know,
is
developing
faster
than
well
been
a
lot
of
east
hill,
but
there's
a
development
all
over
town.
So
my
idea
was
to
increase
by
one
person.
I
didn't
think
it
would
have
any
impact
on
the
neighborhood
the
parking
requirements
in
the
neighborhood.
B
G
G
B
Okay,
chris
we'll
open
up
public
hearing,
starting
with
those
for
it
or
writing,
and
speaking
in
favor.
A
I
have
not
received
any
comments
in
either
support
or
opposition
to
this
appeal
and
there's
no
one
to
who
has
signed
up
to
speak
on
either
side.
I
do
have
comments
from
the
planning
board.
The
planning
board
does
not
identify
any
negative
long-term
planning
fact,
impacts
and
supports
this
appeal.
The
appellant
is
improving
the
interior
of
the
property
and
there
will
be
no
exterior
alterations.
A
The
property
has
existing
deficiency
new
and
exacerbated
deficiencies
as
a
result
of
a
reclassification
from
duplex
to
multiple
dwelling
and
not
to
exterior
changes.
The
board
asks
that
the
appellant
be
required
to
provide
an
exterior
bike.
Rack
and
also
the
property
is
located
in
the
east
hill
historic
district.
A
The
proposed
project
at
209
eddy
street
involves
no
exterior
alterations
or
new
construction
and
therefore
has
not
been
reviewed
by
the
ithaca
landmarks
preservation.
Commission
in
general,
the
ilpc
supports
the
return
of
historic
properties
to
their
original
configuration.
B
Thank
you,
megan,
we'll
now
just
do
a
brief
deliberation
ahead
of
a
vote.
If
we're
getting
to
that
point,
stephanie
or
stephen
any
thoughts,
comments.
F
I'm
just
thinking
about
this
now,
I'm
not
sure
that
I
think
we
might
have
to
involve
chris,
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
going
to
be
any
additional
code
requirements
that
need
to
be
met
for
converting
the
kitchen
to
a
bedroom.
If
there's
anything
else,
that's
going
to
be
addressed
at
that
time
or
if
the
project
is
only
inclusive
of
converting
the
kitchen
to
a
bedroom.
G
If
we'd
have
to
go
to
the
billing
department
for
an
application,
a
code
review
would
only
involve
interior
code
requirements
would
probably
just
be
an
additional
smoke
detector.
It's
a
two-story
dwelling,
there's
no
attic
a
third
floor
living
area,
there's
no
fire
escape,
so
it
would
be
just
a
matter
of
actually
just
adding
another
smoke
detector
in
the
building,
but
they
will
have
to
apply
for
a
building
permit
and
a
code
inspector
will
review
it
and
an
architect
may
have
to
write
a
code
report,
but
it
shouldn't
impact
the
two-story
dwelling
at
all.
B
See,
I
guess
if
it
helps
to
just
sort
of
go
through
the
list
on
it.
You
know
whether
it
changes
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
Your
thoughts
on
that
benefits
sought
substantial
adverse
impact,
self-created
those
types
of
thoughts.
Anybody
have
concerns.
F
We've
also
looked
at
several
other
properties,
and
you
know
in
various
ways
that
have
had
some
concerns
about
off-street
parking
or
you
know
changing
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
by
adding
bedrooms,
and
it
seems
similar
to
other
cases
based
on
its
location.
F
You
know
the
history
of
who
who
lives
there
again
kind
of
you
know
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
I
don't
necessarily
see
any
things
there
of
concern
it.
So
I'm
that's
that's
my
line
of
thinking.
F
B
Yeah,
I
think,
if
you're
looking
at
it
just
numerically
parking
spot
wise,
you
could
argue
it's
substantial,
but
I
don't
see
any
adverse
impacts
and
I
think
it's
a
good
thing.
I
think
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
and
overall,
the
parking
is
not
a
concern.
B
E
Are
we,
this
is
questions
for
megan?
Are
we
able
to
attach
the
bike
rack
to
this?
Is
that
I
think
that's
the
only
thing
the
planning
board
mentioned.
A
B
Ready
do
people
feel
comfortable
voting
for
this.
E
F
Yes,
okay,
I'm
having
a
hard
time,
remembering
if
I'm
muted
or
unmuted
just
wondering
then
to
that
point
of
the
bike.
Rack
just
thinking
about
safety-
and
you
know
I
don't
know
a
larger
larger
view
of
the
area
and
use
of
the
rack.
Does
anybody
have
yes?
Well,
I
think
it's
a
something
nice
to
have.
It
could
be
encouraging
to
students,
but
just
thinking
about
kind
of
the
neighborhood
area.
F
F
A
I
will
just
add-
and
I
don't
know
there
might
be
spaces
on
the
property
that
are
better
than
others.
To
add
this.
I
think
this
requirement
was
added
or
recommended
requirement.
I
should
say
it's
up
to
the
bca
whether
you
add
this
in
or
not
was.
This
is
a
pretty
common
request
for
a
project
that
would
require
this
number
of
parking
spaces.
A
If
it
did
go
through
the
planning
board
that
they
would
be
required
to
have
it
as
part
of
site
plan
review,
since
it's
not
going
through
the
planning
board
because
of
the
they
it
would
be
up
to
the
bca
to
add
it,
I'm
not
sure
that
there's
no
regulation
on
where
it
might
go,
if
there's
a
more
private
spot,
they
could
do
that
or
it's
up
to
the
board.
If
you
don't
believe
it'd
be.
B
The
property
itself
is
perched
up
on
a
hill,
so
you
have
to
walk
up
off
the
sidewalk
to
get
to
it.
So
that
means
someone
has
to
carry
the
bike
up
the
steps
to
where
then
I
presume
they'd
have
a
bike
rack
near
the
property.
G
If
you
walk
out
the
back
door,
I
realize
you're
crossing
on
somebody
else's
property,
but
there
is
a
parking
lot
right
behind
it
that
comes
off
catherine
street.
Somebody
could
actually
trespass
on
the
neighbor's
property
walking.
I
guess
I
shouldn't
use
that
word,
but
you
could
actually
carry
a
bike
at
grade
to
that
back,
porch,
which
I
think
people
probably
do
or
bring
it
up
the
stairs.
I
mean
they're
glad
to
provide
a
bike
rack
somewhere
near
the
porch,
if
you
prefer,
but
they're.
I
find
most
tenants
for
security
like
to
take
their
bikes
indoors.
G
G
B
G
B
As
far
as
making
a
motion,
I
guess
whoever
makes
it
can
decide
whether
or
not
to
put
that
language
in
I'm
comfortable
with
either
options
you
have
the
opponent
saying
they're
willing
to
pull
it,
put
it
in
if,
if
stephen
or
stephanie,
if
that
seems
like
something
you'd
want.
F
Like
I
said,
I
think
it
would
be
nice.
I
just
was
more
concerned
if
it
would
become
a.
I
guess
you
know
describe
well
like
almost
like
a
security
issue.
You
know,
is
it
going
to
be
a
place
where
bikes
be
abandoned,
but
if
it's
properly
placed
and
the
owner
is
mindful
about
that,
then
it's
again
probably
a
nice
thing
to
have,
and
it
might
not
be
such
a
concern
that
I
was
originally
thinking
of.
E
B
C
B
As
far
as
making
a
motion
stephanie
you're
not
able
to
do
so
correct,
that's
your
points
out.
F
A
B
B
Let's
see
here
in
terms
of
the
variance
at
hand,
the
factors
are
considered
number
one,
whether
an
undesirable
change
would
be
produced
in
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
or
a
detriment
to
nearby
properties.
The
answer
to
that
is
no.
B
The
use
of
this
property
is
in
line
with
the
character
of
college
town
and
the
area
as
a
whole.
This
change
does
neither
exacerbate
that
nor
deviate
away
from
its
intention
number
two,
whether
the
benefits
sought
by
the
applicant
can
be
achieved
by
a
feasible
alternative
to
the
variance,
not
in
terms
of
the
intended
use
and
configuration
that
they're
seeking
right.
B
If
this
is
the
new
layout
of
the
building
that
they
want
and
need
for
whatever
reason,
the
variance
was
triggered
and
there's
no
way
around
that
number
three,
whether
the
requested
variance
is
substantial
regarding
the
the
parking,
if
we're
going
by
the
exact
numbers
required,
and
yes,
it's
being
exacerbated
in
a
substantial
fashion.
However,
that
number,
when
analyzed,
did
not
seem
to
negate
the
merits
of
the
variants
as
a
whole
number
four:
will
the
variants
have
an
adverse
impact
on
the
physical
or
environmental
conditions
in
the
neighborhood?
B
No
again,
it's
it's
actually
making
it
less
car
centric
right
so
from
an
environmental
standpoint,
it's
an
improvement
and
again
no
exterior
alterations
to
the
building
are
taking
place.
It
is
strongly
advised,
should
the
applicant
be
able
to
find
a
suitable
location
that
they
place
a
bike
rack,
though,
if
there's
limitations
beyond
their
control,
that
it
shouldn't
negate
the
variant
and
then
number
five,
whether
the
alleged
difficulty
was
self-created.
B
Yes,
the
applicant
is
is
trying
to
do
something
different
at
their
own
volition
and,
of
course
they
could
have
left
the
configuration
as
is
and
rent
it.
Accordingly,
I
vote.
I
hereby
move
this
motion
and
that
we
grant
this
variance.
E
B
A
All
right,
so
the
motion
carries
kristen.
The
variance
has
been
granted
you'll
receive
written
documentation
of
this
variance
within
the
next
few
days
for
me,
so
that
you
can
continue
with
your
building
permit
process
and
now
that
the
board
has
voted,
I
do
have
to
say.
I
really
enjoyed
the
pictures
of
the
sink
in
the
closet
that
was
on
there.
G
A
So
david,
I
might
suggest
that
we
jump
around
a
little
bit
and
do
maybe
give
a
membership
update,
as
well
as
the
approval
of
minutes
and
then
kind
of
circle
back
to
that
item
number
three
on
our
list.
If
that's
okay,.
A
So
as
a
membership
update,
I
think
everyone
was
here
and
we
do
have
one
applicant
for
the
board
that
has
been
submitted
to
the
mayor
and
common
council
for
their
consideration
and
approval.
I'm
not
sure
that
this
will
be
that
it's
on
the
october
agenda,
but
hopefully
the
appointment
of
at
least
one
new
member
will
be
on
the
november
agenda,
which
will
give
us
four
members
for
our
december
meeting.
A
The
other
item
is
the
minutes
I
sent
them
out
by
email
today.
I'm
sure
you
all
really
enjoyed
reading
through
them
in
great
detail.
If
you're
comfortable
voting
on
them,
we
can
do
so
now
or
we
can
hold
them
to
the
next
meeting,
whichever
you
prefer.
E
A
C
A
And
hopefully
we
can
consider
that
a
friendly
amendment
that
I
still
name
correctly
from
now
going
forward.
Okay,
I'm
guessing
I
use
ph
instead
of
b.
E
C
A
C
C
All
right
so.
E
F
A
All
right
and
mr
barkin,
yes,
okay,
so
going
back
to
our
next
kind
of
circling
back
to
preliminary
presentations
in
board
comments,
I
wanted
to
talk
a
bit
about
in
general,
a
process
for
getting
input
from
the
board
for
on
projects
before
they
get
to
the
point
where
they've
almost
made
it
through
planning
board.
A
We've
seen
this
a
few
times
now,
the
board
has
maybe
provided
input
here
and
there,
but
they
get
to
the
bza
and
basically
we're
gonna
put
in
a
position
where
the
board
either
has
to
approve
a
variance
that
they
feel
is
significant
or
the
whole
project
has
huge
impacts
on
the
whole
project.
A
So
I
wanted
to
talk
with
you
about
some
ideas
for
getting
this
early
feedback
from
all
of
you
there's
a
couple
of
options,
one
I
do
think
it's
valuable
for
the
board
to
be
able
to
weigh
in
before
the
environmental
review
is
complete.
I
know
zoning
might
not
be
typically
what
a
lot
of
people
think
of
when
they
think
of
environmental
impacts,
but
broadly
it
is,
has
impact
on
community
and
neighborhood
character
is
often
the
source
of
of
controversy.
A
If
there
is
some-
and
so
it's
good
to
do
that,
so
we
can
circulate
those
by
email
once
well.
The
review
process
is
underway.
We
can
send
you
out
the
plans
that
are
distributed
to
circulate,
but
that
involves
you
all
kind
of
going
through
them
on
your
own
and
reviewing
them
and
then
providing
comments
either
as
a
group
at
a
meeting
or
independently
by
email.
A
So
I
guess
I
just
wanted
to
hear
from
the
three
of
you.
What
your
thoughts
are,
what
you
think
would
be
most
beneficial
to
you
and
if
you
had
any
other
ideas,
I'm
open
to
them
too.
F
E
F
Maybe
it's
easier
than
that.
I
go
first,
even
though
it'd
be
difficult,
probably
to
try
to
have
a
separate
meeting.
I
think
there's
some
benefit
to
having
a
meeting,
whether
it's
virtual
or
physically,
to
hear
from
the
applicant,
and
maybe
you
know,
troubleshoot
or
discuss
a
few
things.
F
I
know
that
I
myself
find
it
depending
on
what
material
is
provided.
If
it's
just
like
reviewing
a
packet,
it
can
be
challenging
to
really
understand
some
of
the
parameters
or
just
other
options,
without
kind
of
hearing
it
or
brainstorming
or
seeing
other
material
that
might
be
discussed
at
like
a
presentation.
D
E
Yeah,
I
would
agree
with
that
with
that
I
think
we
could
probably
maybe
yeah.
I
don't
know
that
we'd
have
time
to
do
it
at
the
start
of
meetings
or
at
the
end.
E
But
yeah,
I
think,
being
able
to
ask
questions
is
pretty
important
too.
The
larger
projects.
B
Megan,
there's
project
review
committee,
correct
where
maybe
there's
a
way
to
have
almost
like
a
liaison
to
that
where
you,
where
you
could,
where
you
could
identify
what
I
think
you
might
have
trouble
with
this
section
or
your
project.
You
know
I
guess
anyone's
allowed
to
go
forward
at
their
own
risk,
but.
A
Absolutely
and
they
are-
and
there
might
be
some
people
that
don't
want
to
take
advantage
of
an
early
conversation
with
the
board.
Most
project
teams
want
to
get
in
front
of
the
board's
sooner
rather
than
later,
because
if
their
project
relies
on
a
variance,
it's
a
lot
of
money
to
invest.
If
it's
going
to
fail.
A
These
are
both
great
ideas.
I
will
talk
with
other
staff
about
the
idea
of
a
liaison
to
the
project
review
committee.
They
are
conducted
by
zoom
and,
I
believe,
will
be
going
forward,
so
it's
possible
and
we
could
talk
about
even
if
the
board's
interested
in
doing
that
even
having
either
one
person
do
it
for
a
set
amount
of
time
or
rotate.
A
So
it's
not
too
much
burden
on
one
person,
but
certainly
the
the
preliminary
presentation
we
can
time
it.
So
it
doesn't
take
up
an
extreme
amount
of
time,
if
possible,
we'll
do
everything
we
can
to
combine
it
on
our
current
agenda
so
that
you
don't
have
to
dedicate
more
reading
time.
But,
for
example,
I
know
some
of
our
agendas
get
pretty
lengthy
and
it
could
be
hard,
but
we
can
see
what
we
can
do
about
that.
B
And
I
guess
my
concern
is
that
it
only
that
if
your
project,
if
you're
one
of
the
bigger
fish
that
you
get,
you
know
a
second
showing
in
front
of
you
know
so
so
long
as
it's
equitable
or
if
you're
really
concerned
about
your
porch
variants,
not
getting
accepted.
That
you're
also
able
to
ask
questions
beforehand
or
yeah.
A
A
I
think
too,
the
the
for
lack
of
a
better
words,
the
smaller
projects,
even
when
we're
not
comfortable
voting
on
them
in
one
meeting,
there's
often
a
chance-
and
we
don't
know
that
until
we
hear
all
the
facts
of
their
case
presented,
whereas
some
of
these
larger
projects,
we
kind
of
know
immediately
that
there
could
potentially
be
some
need
for
additional
discussion
or
just
the
size
and
scope
but
you're
right.
I
think
we
can
leave
it
open
to
anybody
who
wants
to
come
and
do
an
initial
presentation,
and
I'm
happy
to
do
that.
A
C
F
A
I
wonder
if
that
might
be
helpful
after
the
so
say,
a
project
team
comes
gives
a
preliminary
presentation.
A
The
board
gives
feedback
as
the
full
board,
and
if
we
have
somebody
sitting
in
on
a
smaller
meeting,
they
might
be
able
to
say
you
know.
I
think
you
missed
this
concern
that
one
of
the
board
members
raised,
or
I
mean
just
as
a
like
you
said,
as
a
liaison
kind
of
not
like
you're.
This
is
going
to
get
approved
but
kind
of
a
communication
bridge,
but
it
seems
like.
F
Some
more
specific
questions
that
are
related
to
you
know.
In
our
case,
the
zoning
board
could
be
asked
at
those
times
to
clarify.
You
know
right.
We
see
the
large
scope,
what
their
whole
project
encumbers
and
then
try
to.
If
we
hear
about
anything
right
or
if
there's
going
to
be
a
bullet
point,
that
involves
our
board
to
make
sure
that
we
ask
those
questions,
you
know,
how
is
it
and
it
will,
will
there
be
any
detriment
to
the
community?
How
does
it
fit
into
the
neighborhood?
F
Try
to
get
some
of
those
early
clarification
things
then
or,
like
you
said,
if
there's
any
things
that
we
would
like
them
to
consider,
like,
I
don't
know,
I'm
just
giving
an
example
like
screening,
maybe
adding
a
a
privacy
fence,
even
though
it
might
not
be
required
it
might
be.
You
know
I
don't
know
beneficial
in
some
way
and
that
they
should
consider
it
and
then
they
can
or
not,
based
on
that
preliminary
meeting,
whoever
is
the
liaison
at
that
point.
A
Yeah,
I
think
this
would
benefit
both
boards,
because
you
know
if
you
have
a
project
that's
coming
through,
and
it
goes
through
the
whole
way
to
the
point
where
they
do.
You
know
they're
a
month
or
so
away
from
doing
a
preliminary
site
plan
approval
and
it
gets
to
the
bza
and
the
bza
isn't
happy
with
the
design
and
wants
changes
or
isn't
going
to
approve
the
requested
variances.
A
A
So
I've
been
working
with
staff
to
the
planning
board
to
really
try
to
find
a
way
that
we
can
kind
of
improve.
This
communication
was
great
when
stephanie
was
on
planning
board
as
a
liaison.
A
That
communication
was
awesome
to
have,
but
so
we're
trying
to
do
as
best
we
can
as
staff
with
that,
and
I
think
also
this
preliminary
option
for
the
presentation
and
then,
if
we
choose
to
do
it,
the
project
review
committee
for
anyone
who
doesn't
know
is
a
subcommittee
of
the
planning
board
where
it's
usually
a
couple
members,
and
so
it
is
a
good
time
to
have
a
more
detailed
discussion.
But
I
I
like
the
point-
maybe
it's
more
of
a
follow-up.
A
So
we
do
the
preliminary
presentation
where
the
applicants
hear
from
the
entire
board
so
that
everyone's
opinions
are
represented.
So
I
think
we
should
try
that
we
might
need
to
tweak
this
process
as
we
go
along.
It's
certainly
a
you
know:
we're
trying
to
improve
our
approvals
process,
and
it
is
that
in
itself
is
a
process
that
we
can
continue
to
improve.
So
we'll
just
have
to
see
what
works.
What
doesn't?
A
I
think
I
understand
the
point
completely
about
the
written
materials,
because
you
know,
even
as
I
go
through
them
and
have
a
lot
of
time
to
dedicate
to
just
reviewing
a
project,
it's
still
hard
and
you
sometimes
get
a
different
opinion
and
understanding.
After
hearing
the
team
present
it
and
what
the
reasonings
behind
certain
decisions
are.
A
So
I
I
think
that's
a
great
idea.
So
what
we'll
do
is
we'll
kind
of
start
scheduling
some
of
these
larger
projects
for
preliminary
reviews,
I
think
the
first
one
coming
up
will
be
one
that
I
sent
out
previously,
but
then
was
significantly
revised,
which
was
325
dryden
road,
so
that
one
will
likely
come
for
some
discussion
as
early
as
next
month,
they're
also
eager
to
have
a
public
hearing
to
hear
from
interested
parties
around
the
subject
properties
to
see
what
the
feedback
on
the
variances
specifically
are.
A
Of
course,
if
they
make
any
changes
to
the
project
after
that,
they
will
be
subject
to
a
second
or
any
changes
to
the
project
that
change
the
variances
that
require
a
second
public
hearing,
but
they
they
do
want
that
info
early.
So
that's
we
can
do
that.
We
also
have
another
large
project
in
college
town
coming
forward
in
the
coming
months.
I
don't
have
a
date
set
for
that
one,
but
that
will
be
coming
we'll
do
a
similar
preliminary
presentation
for
that.
A
One
of
the
other
things
that
I
wanted
to
do
was
kind
of
get
give
the
board
the
opportunity
to
comment.
We
have
zoning
changes
come
forward,
you
don't
necessarily
have
to.
If
you
don't
have
any
comments
or
you
don't
want
to
that's
fine
too,
but
I
thought
you
know
a
lot
of,
because
this
is
the
board
that
sees
the
variances.
I
thought
it
would
be
great
to
give
you
guys
an
opportunity
to
weigh
in
on
some
of
the
proposed
changes
as
they
come
forward.
So
I've
sent
these
out
by
email
a
couple
times.
A
A
If
you
don't
have
any
comments,
that's
fine
too,
but
so
the
first
one
to
start
with
is.
A
There
are
two
proposed:
the
zoning
code
has,
of
course,
many
definitions
in
them,
and
two
of
them
are
grade
plane
and
two
family
dwelling,
and
I
wanted
to
get
your
feedback
on
proposals
for
a
couple
changes
there.
The
grade
plane
definition,
it's
pretty
basically,
is
how
we
the
first
step
and
what
we
use
to
calculate
building
height
is
to
establish
the
average
grade
plane,
but
right
now
we
do
it
one
way
under
building
code.
A
In
one
way
on
your
zoning
code,
the
methodology
is
almost
identical,
but
the
point
where
the
measurements
is
taken
is
different,
so,
for
example,
on
a
sloped
site,
the
measurements
taken
under
zoning
code,
six
feet
from
the
building
or
no
excuse
me
ten
feet
from
the
building
and
six
feet
under
building
code.
So
what
this
ends
up
on
a
sloped
site?
Is
you
have
a
building
code
height
and
a
zoning
height
and
would
really
like
to
make
this
consistent
so
that
there's
one
height
to
the
building
under
building
code
and
zoning?
A
The
six
feet,
which
is
state
building
code,
it's
much
harder
to
change
the
state
code
than
our
zoning,
so
we
just
to
keep
it
consistent.
We
wanted
to
switch
it
so
that
it
matches
building
code.
A
That's
an
interesting
question
because
it
really
varies
based
on
site.
In
some
cases,
the
building
code
is
more
than
you
know
more
beneficial,
so
to
speak.
In
other
cases,
it's
the
zoning.
I
guess
it's
all
in
how
the
site
is
laid
out.
So
if
it
has
a
steep
grade
between
6
and
10
feet,
then
yes,
it
might
be
beneficial
to
have
the
zoning
code,
but
in
other
cases
it
won't
matter
and
again
these
are
only
really
impactful
on
slope
sites.
F
But
this
I'm
not
saying
that
I
disagree
with
the
proposed
change,
but
again
just
to
clarify
that
this,
from
from
our
board's
viewpoint,
will
help
in
the
review
process
as
variants
come
forward
for
building
height
and
story
height
in
some
zones.
A
Yes,
I
would
say
the
biggest
benefit
is
it
helps
with
consistency
in
the
review
process
so
that
it
has
both
the
code
inspector
and
myself
measuring
building
height
the
same
way.
A
So
if
you
know
it's
good
double
checking
of
work,
it's
good
making
sure
that
we
meet
that
meet
both
codes.
So
if
something
needs
a
variance
in
one,
it
needs
it,
various
the
other.
That
kind
of
thing
it's
not.
I
guess
it's
just
consistency
and
to
eliminate
confusion.
B
F
F
B
It
expedites
staff
time
and
reduces
the
the
risk
of
confusion.
A
The
other
one
is
so
amending
the
definition
of
two
family
dwelling.
So
in
our
zoning
ordinance
we
have
occupancy
limits
on
two
family
dwellings.
So
it's
an
individual
or
family.
A
So
if
you
have
three
unrelated
people,
it
can
be
a
single
or
two
family,
but
if
you
get
four
five,
six
unrelated
people,
it's
it's
a
multiple
dwelling
and
is
only
allowed
in
r3
and
above
we're,
proposing
to
amend
the
definition
of
to
family
dwelling
because
it
currently
limits
this
occupancy
limit
on
a
two-family
dwelling
in
the
r3
as
well.
So
that's
really
confusing
for
staff
because
it
conflicts
with
the
fact
that
the
multiple
dwelling
is
allowed
in
an
r3.
A
But
then
we
also
have
this
definition
that
says
two
family
drawings
have
to
be
limited,
so
we
want
to
remove
the
occupancy
limited
in
an
r3.
It
doesn't
really:
oh,
it
doesn't
change.
What's
allowed
again,
it's
just
removing
conflicting
language
the
because,
if
like,
for
example,
if
what
the
duplex
that
came
forward
that
christina
ignos
presented,
if
they
they
have
more
than
the
three
unrelated
people,
it's
a
multiple
dwelling,
it's
allowed
in
the
r3.
A
It
doesn't
matter
and
that's
so,
but
we
we
just
see
that
as
a
conflict,
and
we
want
to
remove
that
for
consistency
and
eliminating
confusion.
A
Yeah,
so
I
would
say
a
lot
of
the
outskirts
of
college
town
in
east
hill
or
r3.
A
We
see
our
three
in
areas
downtown
court
street
north
cuga
street,
some
of
fall
creek
is
r3
also
some
of
the
south
side.
So
it's
not.
It
is
one
of
our
largest
zones
in
the
city
and
within
an
r3
you
can
still
have
a
single
and
two
family
home.
It
just
all
also
allows
multiple
dwellings,
so
a
home
that
has
four
apartments
within
it
is
allowed,
as
well
as
a
home
that
has
two
apartments.
A
Yes,
and
really
it
wouldn't
the
r2
and
r1
will
still
have
an
occupancy
limit
by
design
it
just
basically,
what
would
happen
would
be.
Somebody
would
come
in
and
say:
oh
it's
two
units,
but
they
have
four
people
per
unit.
Well,
it's
no
longer
a
two-family
classification,
it's
a
multiple
dwelling
classification,
so
it
doesn't
really
change.
What's
allowed,
I
would
say
it's
just
it's
just
confusing
for
all
of
us
to
have
including
property
owners.
I.
B
A
Okay,
the
next
one
is
a
little
bit
more
substantive
and
is
kind
of
interesting.
So
again
in
our
our
three
and
above
districts,
multiple
dwellings
are
allowed
within
multiple
dwellings.
There
are
several
categories,
so
we
have
rooming
and
boarding
house
cooperative
house,
townhouses
garden
apartments
and
dormitories
they're
all
considered
multiple
dwellings.
So
if
a
multiple
dwelling
is
allowed
generally,
unless
it's
specifically
prohibited
those
uses
are
allowed
as
well,
but
they're
called
out
separately,
which
the
reason
that
becomes
a
bigger
issue
is
because
it
comes
to
parking.
A
So
we
see
we
have
one
set
of
off
street
parking
requirements
for
like
an
apartment
building,
and
then
we
have
another
set
of
parking
requirements
for
rooming
and
boarding
house,
and
the
distinction
is
gets
fuzzy
at
times
and
we
see
that
developers
or
property
owners
say
no,
no,
I'm
not
an
apartment
building
and
we're
rooming
or
boarding
house
because
it
meets
the
parking
requirement,
is
more
advantageous.
A
So
what
we
really
want
to
do
is
make
sure
that
there's
one
consistent
parking
requirement
off
of
all
types
of
multiple
dwellings,
we're
not
changing
where
those
other
uses
are
allowed.
We're
just
saying
that
if
you
have
a
cooperative
house,
you
need
to
have
meet
the
same
parking
requirements
as
that
same
x,
numbers
for
the
first
three
bedrooms,
two
more
for
four
to
five,
that
kind
of
thing.
So
it's
really
again
to
eliminate
this
game
of
no.
A
No,
I'm
I'm
this
used,
since
I
only
have
to
provide
fewer
parking
spaces
and
that
kind
of
thing,
and
so
everybody
has
to
provide
the
same
number
for
a
multiple
dwelling.
A
It
also
changes
the
definition
of
dormitory
to
clearly
state
that
that
is,
a
dormitory
is
directly
affiliated
with
a
secondary
school
or
a
higher
educational
institution.
We
also
get
people
saying
no.
This
is
a
dormitory.
They
rent
a
room,
so
the
parking
requirement
there
is
even
lower
as
well.
So
it's
really
just
to
increase
consistency
and
kind
of
not
eliminate
this
kind
of
loopholes
within
within
the
definition.
So
I
I
think,
we've
seen
this
a
couple
times
even
within
the
past
few
months,
so
I
think
I
think
it
helps
again
for
consistency.
A
Everything,
it
would
be
the
same
as
say
a
building
with
three
or
four
units,
so
you
would
say
for
each
dwelling
unit,
the
first
one
to
three
bedrooms
have
one
parking
space.
If
it's
a
four
to
five
bedroom
dwelling
unit,
you
have
two
parking
spaces.
A
Beyond
five
bedrooms,
you
have
to
add
a
parking
space
for
every
bedroom.
So,
for
example,
we'll
go
back
to
209
eddie
street
that
chris
presented,
he
had
seven
bedrooms,
so
he
has
to
have
two
spaces
for
the
first
five
plus
a
second
another
space
for
six
and
other
spaces
are
seven
to
bring
them
up
to
four.
B
A
B
A
It's
not
advantageous,
I
would
say,
for
someone
that's
trying
to
get
classified
as
a
room
in
your
boarding
house,
but
I
would
say
also
most
of
the
rooming
and
boarding
houses
that
we
see
the
line
between
that
and
the
single
unit.
Multiple
residents
is
very
blurry
and
it's
hard
to
say
it's
hard
to
make
that
distinction,
which
is
part
of
the
problem.
A
A
cooperative
house-
I
don't
think
it
really
changes
it,
because
there
wasn't
a
specific
parking
requirement
for
a
cooperative
house.
They
would
still
be
allowed
in
all
the
same
zones.
They
were
still
subject
to
that
previous,
that
parking
requirement
that
they
would
be
now.
So
that
would
still
be
the
same
kind
of
thing.
A
Yeah,
I
don't
think
it
would
again
if
you're
trying
to
say
you're
a
boarding
house
it
could
I
mean
I
can
see
there
where
it's
going
to
impact
and
you
have
a
need
for
more
parking
again.
Everybody
that
already
has
that
designation
is,
has
established
rights
to
the
parking
that
they
have,
but
in
the
future
it
kind
of
eliminates
a
new
building,
saying
no
we're
a
rooming
house
when
it's
also
very
similar
to
what
we
just
saw.
F
Maybe
listing
examples
of
multiple,
multiple
dwellings
and
listing
those
options
like
garden
apartments
or
whatever.
A
That
is
an
excellent
point
stephanie.
So
what
I
propose
we
do
is
we
added
a
section
to
the
multiple
dwelling
definition
to
say
this
does
include
cooperative
houses,
rooming
or
boarding
houses,
garden
apartments
townhouses,
so
it's
very
clear
that
they're
still
allowed
and
so
again
for
several
of
these
uses
it
wouldn't
doesn't
really
have
an
impact.
A
A
A
Yeah
right
now,
they're
all
listed
separately
on
our
chart.
So
we
wanted
to
include
that
in
the
definition
so
that
they
knew
that
they're
still
allowed
it's
just
technically
per
code.
They
all
meet
the
multiple
dwelling
definition
anyway.
So
there's
there's
not
really
need
to
keep
listing
separate
subcategories.
F
And
this
I
can
think
there
was
a
a
multiple
dwelling
unit
that
we
looked
at,
that
was
in
the
fall
creek
area.
A
That's
another
one
yeah
that
was
a
similar
situation.
They
ended
up
switching
they
and
they
originally
said
they
wanted
the
classification
for
a
rooming
and
boarding
house,
but
they
didn't
meet
all
the
other
requirements
for
that.
But
that
was
a
great
example
of
that.
Originally
they
wanted
to
be
classified
that
so
the
office,
the
only
reason
being
it
reduced
the
off-street
parking
variance,
request.
A
A
Okay,
one
other
thing
before
david
is
gonna
step
away,
because
the
next
final
amendment
involves
an
area
that
he's
involved
with,
but
I
just
want
to
be
sure
again
until
we
have
more
members
on
the
board,
if
you
for
any
reason,
know
that
you
can't
attend
one
of
our
scheduled
meetings.
Please
let
me
know,
of
course
I
understand
people
get
sick
and
that
happens.
That's
not
a
problem,
but
if
you
don't,
if
you
do
know,
you
can't
make
it
please.
A
Let
me
know
we
do
have
a
really
full
agenda
in
november.
So
if
that
happens
to
be
a
meeting,
you
have
a
conflict
with
the
sooner
we
can
know
the
better
just
to
let
people
know
and
plan
accordingly.
A
A
A
So
the
final
zoning
amendment
that
we
are
considering
is
a
proposal
to
re-zone
certain
properties
in
the
downtown
area,
specifically
on
the
north
side
of
court
street
along
tioga
street,
and
I'm
going
to
put
this
on.
I
guess
steven's,
the
only
one
who
can
see
it,
but
I'll
put
it
up,
so
you
can
see
it
and
the
400
block
of
north
cayuga
street.
So
the
proposal
is
to
rezone
all
of
these
properties
to
b1a
and
I'm
going
to
find
a
map,
and
I'm
going
to
show
this
to
you
all.
C
A
A
This
is
the
site
of
the
former
library
where
the
library
place
project
is
happening,
so
we're
looking
at
those
blocks
directly
across
the
street
as
well.
Here
I'll
go
here.
A
This
is
actually
so
all
these
properties
shown
in
blue
so
across
the
street,
all
the
properties
included
in
the
courthouse
special
use
district
and
at
a
recent
meeting
at
the
request
of
several
property
owners,
this
area
in
the
400
block
of
north
cayuga
was
added
as
well,
so
these
properties
are
mostly
zoned,
r3a
and
r3
double
a
again,
with
the
exception
of
a
few
r2b
properties
in
this
courthouse
special
use.
A
They
actually
ended
up
withdrawing
because
they
wanted
to
make
some
physical
change
to
their
property,
a
small
addition
and
enhanced
accessibility
after
access,
some
things
like
that
to
their
property
and
because
they're,
a
non-conforming
use
that
was
considered
an
expansion
under
non-conforming
use,
which
would
have
triggered
the
need
for
a
use,
variance
so
we're
finding
that
a
lot
and
one
of
the
big
ones
has
been
accessibility
improvements
I
will
say,
and
without
the
use
variants
those
properties
can't
make
those
improvements
so,
and
it's
also
would
be
very
difficult.
A
Even
though
most
of
these
properties
have
a
long
history
of
being
office
use,
it
will
be
very
difficult
for
them
to
meet
the
requirements
and
criteria
for
a
use,
variance
they're
in
a
residential,
a
structure
that
was
originally
built
as
residential.
They
could
potentially
probably
be
converted
back.
It's
just.
It
is
a
difficult
case
to
make
the
reason
why
we
have
so
many
in
this
particular
areas
in
the
past
offices
in
general
were
allowed
in
the
r3
district
in
the
80s.
A
I
forget
the
exact
year
off
the
top
my
head,
that
was
changed
so
that
it
was
specifically
medical
or
dental
offices
and
then
later
it
was
completely
changed
so
that
no
office
is
allowed.
So
all
of
these
uses
are
non-conforming
mostly
office
with
established
rights,
so
they're
all
legally
existing,
but
they
any
changes
with
regular
use
grants.
So
the
proposal
is
to
rezone
those
properties
to
b1a,
which
is
allows
residential,
including
single
2
and
multi-family,
but
also
business
and
professional
offices.
A
A
So
it's
a
slight
increase
in
allowed
height,
but
we
don't
believe
that
that
five
feet
or
story
is
enough
to
encourage
people
to
tear
down
and
rebuild
also,
as
you
can
see
here
by
the
the
across
the
hash
lines,
the
much
of
the
areas
in
the
dewood
park,
local,
historic
district,
so
any
exterior
alterations
would
need
to
be
reviewed
by
the
ilpc
and
demolition
is
not
allowed
in
terms
of
existing
other
changes
in
what
would
be
allowed.
A
It
is
an
increase
in
lot
coverage,
so
the
b1a
allows
50
lot
coverage
is
the
only
the
others
allow
30
and
35.
I
actually
think
this
is
a
benefit
to
a
lot
of
the
property
owners
in
this
area,
because
many
of
them
already
exceed
the
allowed
lot
coverage.
So
expansion
of
front
porches
additions
of
bedrooms,
larger
garages
they'll
all
be
coming
to
us
for
an
area
variance
because
they're
already
over
so
again
the
goal
for
this:
it's
not
to
encourage
change
in
this
area.
C
Building
so.
A
A
Yeah
those
are
no
longer
allowed
either.
So
the
the
tricky
part
is
that
if
once
the
medical,
if
it
is
a
medical
office,
they
now
only
have
established
rights
to
medical
so
that
an
accountant
or
lawyer
couldn't
move
in,
because
it's
not
medical.
F
A
F
The
point
of
if
it
doesn't
already
exist
in
in
one
of
the
units
yeah.
A
Yeah,
so
if
you
had
say
a
multiple
dwelling
with
three
residential
units
with
this
change,
you
could
convert
one
of
those
units
or
potentially
all
three
into
offices.
I'm
not
sure
that
that
is.
I
don't
believe
that
is
likely
in
my
personal
professional
opinion,
and
that
from
what
I
understand,
I
believe
that
it's
more
profitable
to
lease
these,
as
is
residential
and
there's
a
greater
need
for
residential
than
office,
that
we
have
quite
a
bit
of
in
some
areas
of
office
vacancy.
So
but
yes,
it
is.
F
We've
talked
about
some
of
this
too,
and
you
know
adding
if,
if
the
city,
you
know
the
the
point
of
urbanization
and
densifying,
then
services
are
needed.
F
C
F
Right
again,
just
thinking
just
thinking
about
the
reapproach
or
coming
back
around
to
you
know
the
community
pharmacy.
Again,
all
those
kind
of
you
know
things
that
people
want
in
an
urban
setting
and
they
would
rather
walk
bike
than
drive
a
car
have
to
drive
outside
of
town
or
try
to
find
a
bus.
A
Yeah,
I
will
note
that
this
wouldn't
allow
retail
or
restaurants,
which
I
do
think
is
beneficial.
It's
not
like
you're
gonna.
C
Have
a
tavern
open
up
next
door
or
anything
like
that,
but
I
and.
A
A
Yeah
physical
therapy,
lawyers
and
accountants,
any
type
of
professional
service
too,
and
all
of
this
area
would
still
be
allowed
under
the
b1a
special
permit
for
neighborhood
commercial,
which
again
is
like,
which
is
what
gimme
coffee
has
at
the
corner.
They
have
a
special
permit
for
neighborhood.
E
Yeah,
I
think
this
allows
the
I
think
it
helps
a
lot
for
future
growth
of
the
downtown
and.
E
Yeah,
I
think
that
a
lot
helps
it
would
help
future
growth
of
the
downtown
and
make
it
more
accessible.
So
I
think
it's
a
good
change
of
zone.
E
A
C
F
A
A
I
sent
it
out,
I
think
first
thing
this
morning,
but
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
give
me
a
call
and
we
can
talk
further.
A
So
all
right!
Well,
that
is
the
conclusion
of
our
official
agenda
for
this
evening.
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
stop
us
on
youtube
and
thank
you
both
and
david
who's
stepped
away.
So
I.