HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3269 - 210 Lake Street - Decision
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3269
Applicant: Whitham Planning and Design, on behalf of property owner DMG Investments
Property Location: 210 Lake Street
Zoning District: R-3a
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Column 4
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Off-Street Parking
Publication Dates: March 1, 2024 and March 5, 2024.
Meeting Held On: March 5, 2024.
Summary: Appeal of Whitham Planning and Design, on behalf of property owner DMG Investments, LLC,
for an area variance from Section 325-8, Column 4, Off-Street Parking, requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. The applicant is seeking a variance for 22 parking spaces to provide 99 parking spaces for the
Auden Ithaca apartment complex at 210 Lake Street. The property was originally constructed as a
“dormitory”; however, the Zoning Ordinance has since been amended to require a direct affiliation with an
educational institution in order to be classified as a dormitory. The off -street parking requirement for
dormitories is less stringent than multiple dwellings so the reclassification created an area deficiency for
the apartment complex. The property is now required to have 121 spaces but provides 115 on site.
Not all of the existing spaces dedicated to Auden Ithaca are utilized by tenants, and the property owner
would like to allow some spaces to be leased to their proposed multiple dwelling project at 261 Lake Street.
The applicant proposes to lease 16 parking spaces to the neighboring property, further reducing the site’s
vehicle parking from 115 to 99 spaces. This would increase the existing off-street parking deficiency to 22
spaces or 18% of the requirement.
Public Hearing Held On: March 5, 2024.
Members present:
Andre Gardiner
Donna Fleming
David Barken, Chair
There were no comments from interested parties in support of or in opposition to the appeal.
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
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: Not
Applicable
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.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation: The Planning Board finds no long-term negative
impacts to planning and strongly recommends this variance. The Board notes this is an underutilized
parking lot and as there are available paved open spots they should be used by nearby developments. As
the City requires sidewalks over curb cuts in large parking lots and as more people will be walking up the
hill to use the parking lot, the Board recommends the owners create a continuous, at-grade sidewalk across
the two curb cuts at the Auden parking lot.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation: Not applicable
Motion: A motion to grant variance #3269 210 Lake Street with conditions was made by A. Gardiner.
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board was supportive of this appeal and noted that they strongly encourage the shared use of existing
underutilized parking. The applicant has demonstrated that the property has a history of excess parking
capacity, with a maximum of 60 spaces out of 115 rented. The applicant will be providing a sidewalk to
create pedestrian access between the properties that would utilize the parking spaces.
The Board would like the spaces that are leased to the Lake Street Townhomes (or other future projects)
to be designated with a sign and the location of these spaces to be approved by the Planning and
Development Board.
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 requested area variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood
as the proposal is consistent with community plans. The parking lot associated with the proposal has
demonstrated underutilization and shared parking will be compatible with conditions of the neighborhood.
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 variances. The applicant has
maximized the amount of on-site parking and it is not possible to add more. The applicant is also providing
two spaces for every townhouse at the request of the Planning and Development Board.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No .
The applicant is proposing leasing 16 parking spaces to a nearby lot. The site already has a parking
deficiency of 5% and the loss of 16 more parking spaces would create a deficiency of 18%. The Board
finds this deficiency to be unsubstantial in a parking lot of this size with evidenced underutilization.
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 as the applicant is proposing to eliminate parking that is required by
the Zoning Ordinance. However, the Board finds that the variance will have minimal impacts and will
allow shared use of an underutilized lot. These benefits outweigh the fact that the difficulty is self-created.
CONDITIONS:
1. Staff shall review and approve the 99-year lease agreement between the two properties to
ensure it adequately meets the requirements of this variance and the parking requirements
of the proposed project at 261 Lake Street; and
2. The Planning and Development Board shall approve the location of the designated parking
spaces during site plan review.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by D. Fleming.
Vote: 3-0-0
Andre Gardiner YES
Donna Fleming 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 variances from the Zoning
Ordinance, §325-8, Column 4, is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and
protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
___________________________ March 5, 2024
Megan Wilson, Zoning Administrator Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals