HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONE-25-7 - 402 S Albany Street - Decision
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: ZONE-25-7
Applicant: St. John’s Community Services
Property Location: 402 S. Albany Street
Zoning District: R-3aa
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 4, 14/15
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Off-Street Parking, Rear Yard
Publication Dates: October 30, 2025 and November 4, 2025.
Meeting Held On: November 4, 2025.
Summary: Appeal of property owner St. John’s Community Services for an area variance from Sections
325-8, Column 4, Off-Street Parking, and Column 14/15, Rear Yard, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
St. John’s Community Services currently owns and operates a group home for individuals in recovery at
402 S. Albany Street. The home has 11 bedrooms, but the use of the property has been limited to 9 residents
due to a deficiency in required off-street parking. The applicant proposes to utilize all 11 bedrooms and
increase the building occupancy to 11 unrelated people. An 11-bedroom multiple dwelling requires 8 off-
street parking spaces, and the property provides 5 parking spaces onsite. No physical changes to the building
or the site are proposed.
The property also has existing deficiencies in lot coverage by buildings, front yard, side yard and rear yard
that will not be exacerbated by this proposal. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted area variances for lot
coverage by buildings, front yard, and side yard in November 2004, but the existing rear yard deficiency
was not included in this earlier appeal.
Public Hearing Held On: November 4, 2025.
Members present:
Michael Cannon
Donna Fleming
Andre Gardiner
David Barken, Chair
There were no comments from interested parties regarding the appeal.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Megan Wilson, Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals
Telephone: 607-274-6550 Fax: 607-274-6558 E-Mail: mwilson@cityofithaca.org
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: The
Tompkins County Department of Planning & Sustainability has reviewed the proposal as required by New
York State General Municipal Law §239-l, -m, and -n and has no comments or recommendations.
Environmental Review: This variance is a Type II Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is not subject to environmental
review.
Motion: A motion to grant variance #ZONE-25-7 402 S Albany was made by A. Gardiner.
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board discussed and confirmed the current 5 off-street parking spaces on the property. The Board also
discussed that the residents of the building have limited need for parking, and only one resident has ever
brought a car to the site. There is ample parking for the facility’s staff. The Board supported the request,
noting that they would like the property owner to be able to fully utilize the building and not be limited
based on parking requirements.
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 board finds that the requested area variance will not produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood as the project is consistent with existing conditions. The applicants
have sufficiently demonstrated that increasing the occupancy of the property, without the required
parking spaces, will not be a detriment to nearby properties. Because nearly all residents of the
property do not have cars, there is sufficient on-site parking and the request will not impact vehicle
congestion in the neighborhood.
• The property has an existing rear yard deficiency that will not be exacerbated by the proposal.
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 are no feasible alternatives to the variance to achieve the
goals of the project. There is no feasible area on the property to add additional parking spaces.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
• The requested variance is not substantial as it involves a small increase in the occupancy of the
property with no physical changes to the building or the site.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
• Based on the submitted application materials, testimony of the applicant, and observations of
existing conditions, the Board does not find any evidence of adverse physical or environmental
conditions.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
• The alleged difficulty is self-created in that the applicant is proposing to increase the occupancy of
the property without meeting the off-street parking requirement for the desired occupancy.
However, the benefits of the proposal to the applicant and the lack of negative community impacts
outweigh the fact that the difficulty is self-created.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by D. Barken.
Vote: 4-0-0
Michael Cannon YES
Donna Fleming YES
Andre Gardiner YES
David Barken, Chair YES
Determination of the BZA Based on the Above Factors:
The BZA, taking into 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 variance from the Zoning
Ordinance, §325-8, Columns 4, 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.
___________________________ November 4, 2025
Megan Wilson, Zoning Administrator Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals