HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3234 -121-125 Lake Street - Decision
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3234
Applicant: SWBR Architects
Property Location: 121-125 Lake St.
Zoning District: R-3a
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 8, 9, 14/15
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Height in Stories, Height in Feet, Rear Yard
Publication Dates: February 2, 2023 and February 7, 2023.
Meeting Held On: February 7, 2023.
Summary: Appeal of SWBR Architects on behalf of property owner Visum Development for an area
variance from Section 325-8, Column 8- Height in Stories; Column 9 – Height in Feet; and Column 14/15
– Rear Yard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to construct a new five-story,
77-unit apartment building on the east parcel of the former Ithaca Gun Factory site, located at 121-125 Lake
Street. Prior to construction, the applicant will remediate the site, under the review of the NYSDEC. The
project will include the construction of the apartment building and site improvements to create access to
the adjacent City-owned natural area. The R-3a zoning regulations limit the height of the building to four
stories and 40’. Due to the topography of the site, the proposed building is five stories in height, with the
majority of the lowest level located below grade. Additionally, the building will be 49’ above grade plane
in a district where a maximum of 40’ is permitted. The applicant also seeks a variance from the rear yard
requirement of 50’. The proposed building will be located 26’ 7” from the rear property line at the narrowest
point.
121-125 Lake Street is located in a R-3a district in which the proposed use is permitted. However, Section
325-38 requires that an area variance be granted before a building permit is issued.
Public Hearing Held On: February 7, 2023.
Members present:
Michael Cannon
Andre Gardiner
Donna Fleming
Joseph Kirby
David Barken, Chair
The following interested parties submitted comments or spoke in opposition to the request:
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Zoning
Megan Wilson, Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals
Telephone: 607-274-6550 Fax: 607-274-6558 E-Mail: mwilson@cityofithaca.org
Gamma Theta Property Association, 230 Willard Way
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law:
Not applicable.
Environmental Review: This variance is a component of an action that also includes site plan review.
Considered together, this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act for which the Planning and Development
Board, acting as Lead Agency, made a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance on
December 20, 2022.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Lead Agency supports the two height variances in feet and stories as the topography on the site is very
variable which has the effect of the building presenting primarily as a four-story building. They also find a
11’ floor to floor ratio is not outside the norm and is justified as it includes the interstitial space for
ductwork, lights, etc. This adds to the height of the building. The Lead Agency also indicates and
emphasizes the public access to the gorge, the public bridge and the overlook, the side walk extension up
Lake Street, and the clean-up of the site are all at the applicant’s expense so having a taller building helps
to offset the expenses of these community benefits. The Lead Agency finds the rear yard variance is
mitigated by the large grade difference between this site and adjoining property so that it minimizes any
impact to the adjacent property. The Lead Agency agrees with the logic presented by the applicants
provided it is in compliance with the requirements in the executed Development Agreement with the City.
They find no long-term negative impacts to planning.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Not Applicable
Motion: A motion to grant variance #3234 121-125 Lake St. was made by J. Kirby.
Deliberations & Findings:
Board members stated that they do not identify any significant negative impacts on the neighborhood or
nearby properties. The environmental clean up of the site will be a huge community benefit to both the
local neighborhood and the broader community. This site has proven difficult to clean up and develop in
the past, and the proposed project will be a positive change within the area.
The topography of the site makes it very difficult to develop. The additional height will not be readily
visible from the street or nearby properties. Several members noted that the site locations immediately
adjacent to the natural area helps mitigate the impacts of the reduced rear yard, as that area will not be
developed in the future. While the requests are substantial, the uniqueness of the site coupled with the
uniqueness of the project’s community benefits outweigh any detriment to neighboring properties or the
community. Board members also noted that the siting of the building and overall design reflect the
applicant’s goal of meeting the intent of the zoning and as many individual requirements as possible.
The Board also discussed that original factory on the site was a substantial structure in terms of both height
and lot coverage so the proposed building is in context with the historic character of the site.
Factors Considered:
1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties: Yes No
The proposed project is located on part of the former Ithaca Gun Factory site. The immediate vicinity is
home to single- and two-family homes, multiple dwellings (including a five-story apartment complex), a
large surface parking lot, and the Ithaca Falls Natural Area.
Regarding the building height variances, the Board finds that, due to the steep topography of the site, the
additional story and additional height in feet will not have a negative impact on the neighborhood or nearby
properties. The majority of the lowest story will be located below grade, and the additional 9’ in height
will not alter the character of the area.
Regarding the rear yard variance, the applicant is proposing a 26’ rear yard that will be located adjacent to
the Ithaca Falls Natural Area. The Board does not identify any detriment to nearby properties or the
neighborhood from this request.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The applicant has demonstrated that there is no feasible alternative to the variance. They have sited the
building to minimize the variance requests and reduce the impact of building height. Additionally, the need
to accommodate a fire lane and truck turnaround make it unfeasible to design a wider building that meets
the rear yard requirement.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The applicant is seeking one additional story and 9’ additional feet of building height. These are
deficiencies of 25% and 23%, respectively. While these are proportionally substantial requests, the
additional height is due primarily to the steep topography of the site. Due to the slope, only a portion of
the building exceeds the maximum height requirements, and visually most of the building will appear to be
a four-story structure.
The applicant is also seeking a rear yard variance of 23.4’ or 47% of the required rear yard. While this is
proportionally a substantial request, the rear yard is located immediately adjacent to the Ithaca Fall Natural
Area. The applicant is working with the City to create site connections to the natural area, and the Board
finds that unique location of this site alleviates the impacts of a reduced rear yard. Additionally, that portion
of the lot was donated to the City by a previous owner.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, acting as lead agency, has conducted appropriate
environmental review and determined that the project with the requested variances will have little to no
impacts on the environment and issued a negative declaration of environmental significance.
The Board does not identify additional adverse impacts on the physical or environmental conditions of the
neighborhood resulting from the increased building height or decreased rear yard. Rather the environmental
clean up of the site is a significant benefit to the community.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
The alleged difficulty is self-created as the applicant has designed new construction that does not meet the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. However, the applicant has attempted to mitigate the variance
requests and meet the spirit of the zoning.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by D. Fleming.
Vote: 5-0-0
Michael Cannon YES
Donna Fleming YES
Joseph Kirby YES
David Barken YES
Andre Gardiner, Vice-Chair YES
Determination of the BZA Based on the Above Factors:
The BZA, taking into consideration the five factors for an area variance, finds that the benefit to the
applicants outweighs the detriment to the neighborhood or community. The BZA further finds that the
variances from the Zoning Ordinance, §325-8, Columns 8, 9, and 14/15 are the minimum variances that
should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety,
and welfare of the community.
___________________________ February 7, 2023
Megan Wilson, Zoning Administrator Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals