If You Ask Me / By Martha Knight

“Did anyone think in 1973 that this law would affect an owner in 1990?”

That was the rhetorical question put to fellow Zoning Hearing Board members by Bill Potter in March of 1990, when he was a new member and that body was considering the plea of Mill Street property owners to allow use of a certain house as a multi-family dwelling.

At one time there had been somebody living on the third floor, in addition to the owners who had occupied the lower two stories, a previous owner declared.

Well, that didn’t make any difference, some hearing board members said, because since then there had been times that there were no tenants on the third floor.

And besides, were those other people tenants or roomers?

And how about parking?

And how would the neighbors like it if there were an apartment there?

And what about what was allowed over on Church Street?

And see, here on the tax rolls it was assessed as a single-family dwelling.

But who says the assessment listing is the proper document for defining a property use for zoning purposes?

There was off-street parking nearby, so why worry about the provision saying more parking would be needed for a multiple dwelling?

The neighbors were okay with creation of an apartment.

Back and forth, around and around they went.

Potter pointed out that the 1973 zoning ordinance had been put together in a “rush fashion,” by consultants who did not live in the area.

The Port Allegany Reporter Argus carried a big story about the Zoning Hearing Board meeting on Page One. It was the lead story. Obviously these were controversial issues.

The other matter had to do with the Grand Theater (or Theatre) building.

“Decision was also deferred in the case of the commercial building at Mill and Main, the lower floor of which now houses the Reporter Argus.

“Owner Jim Hosley argued that the only practical use of the second floor is for apartments.

“Hosley told the board he had surveyed a number of different people who rent offices and all had agreed that second floor businesses are impractical.

“He also contended that apartments in other Main Street buildings are common in Port Allegany and in ‘small-town America’ in general

“Hosley told the board he thought the space restriction in the zoning law was meant to apply to new construction, not existing structures.

“The owner also said the building was originally designed for either apartments or offices on the second floor and that the space had been used as apartments.

“According to Hosley the upstairs contains three separate bathroom facilities and three kitchen drains, proof of its prior use.

“Board member John Allen objected that three apartments in a building which has no yard space would not be suitable for children and that residences would create a parking problem.

“Hosley countered that people who rent apartments are usually young couples who are starting out and who do not have families.

“He also argued that to deny him the apartments because of parking would be unfair, since other buildings have living space in them and no parking spaces have been provided by their owners.

“Hosley startled the board by informing them that borough manager Dick Linn had told him he would have ‘no problem whatever I did,’ because ‘people of the town were so happy with what I’d done’ after he started to remodel the building, which had stood in disrepair for a number of years.

“Board members briefly discussed what effect such a statement, if true, would have upon the decision.

“They agreed to check out Hosley’s allegation and perhaps to inspect the building before coming to a conclusion.

“Both decisions must, by law, be delivered within 45 days.”

This was during a period when the borough’s zoning ordinance forbade residential use of second stories in the downtown area.

When he bought the old theater building from George and Althea Angell, Hosley probably had noticed that there were, in fact, apartment dwellers in that area. Apparently he did not realize those apartments had been “grandfathered,” so the new restrictions did not apply. The apartment use in the theater building had been discontinued, if ever it had existed.

Reading this old news story now, I am not convinced that Hosley was correct in assuming that three bathrooms and kitchen drains meant there had been apartments upstairs.

When Turtle Graphics, aka the Shirt Shack, had occupied parts of the building, some of the work had been done upstairs. There were restrooms there, and some lunch room facilities. There was even a kind of laundry area. Silk screening can be quite messy.

Before that, CEMP drug and alcohol counseling had occupied the upstairs front and middle offices in the building. The residential treatment center, Maple Manor, was on Maple Avenue in Coudersport. Outpatient counseling and some administrative functions were housed in Port, in the theater building. There were rest rooms and a staff lounge area. When Hosley showed me the areas he referred to, I could see the plumbing he had mentioned was accounted for by those most recent non-residential uses.

Earlier, while the theater was still in operation as a movie house, there were law offices in the front of the upstairs, and a dental practice farther back, and possibly another office of some kind.

After Hosley had been denied the variance for residential use, he tried to retrofit the building for offices again, I believe, then changed back to apartments when a new zoning ordinance was adopted allowing that. But it was too late. Unintended consequences had begun their inexorable effects.

Peace.