The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBZA 3257 - 510 W State Street - Decision-1 CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS Area Variance Findings & Decision Appeal No.: 3257 Applicant: Ithaca Office Space, LLC, Property Owner Property Location: 510 W. State Street Zoning District: CBD-50 & B-2d Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 9 and 14/15. Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Building Height in Feet; Rear Yard. Publication Dates: September 7, 2024 and September 13, 2023 Meeting Held On: September 12, 2023. Summary: Appeal of property owner Ithaca Office Space, LLC for an area variance from Section 325 -8, Column 9, Maximum Building Height in Feet, and Column 14/15, Rear Yard, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to consolidate the lots at 507 W. Seneca Street and 510 W. State Street and construct a new 4-5 story mixed-used building on the combined lot. The consolidated property will be a through-lot that spans the block and connects W. State Street, N. Corn Street, and W. Seneca Street. It will be located in two zoning districts, with the northern 70 feet of lot depth in the B-2d district and the remainder of the property in the CBD-50 district. The proposed building will be in both zones, and the building must meet the zoning requirements for the district in which it is located. The portion of the building in the CBD-50 district will be 5 stories and 52’ 7” in height, exceeding the maximum building height by 7”. The portion of the building in the B-2d district will be 4 stories and 44.5’ in height, exceeding the maximum building height by 4.5’. The applicant is seeking a variance from the Heigh in Feet requirements for an additional 7” in the CBD-50 and an additional 4.5’ in the B-2d. The purpose of the requested variance is to align the floor plates throughout the building while meeting the story height requirements of the CBD-50 zone; to provide taller ceiling heights in the apartments; and to address changing topography across the site. In addition, the applicant is seeking a variance from the Rear Yard requirements. The property will have frontage on three streets, with front yards on W. State Street and N. Corn Street and the rear yard facing W. Seneca Street. The applicant is proposing to treat this yard as a third front yard, and the proposed building will be located 10’ from the property line. The B-2d zoning regulations require a 10.5’ rear yard on this property, and the applicant requests an area variance for the 0.5’ rear yard deficiency. This project came before the Board of Zoning Appeals in 2021, and the area variances were approved by the Board on August 3, 2021. However, the applicant did not proceed with construction within two years, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, and the variances became void. The applicant is now seeking new variances for the project. No changes have been made to the August 2021 proposal. 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 The property is located in both the CBD-50 and B-2d use district in which the proposed uses are permitted. However, Section 325-38 requires that an area variance be granted before a building permit is issued. Public Hearing Held On: September 12, 2023. Members present: Michael Cannon Joseph Kirby Andre Gardiner, Vice Chair The following interested parties submitted written comments in opposition to the requested variances: • Ishka Alpern, 514-516 W. State Street • Chris Kim, 512 W. State Street There were no comments in support of the appeal. Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: The Tompkins County Department of Planning & Sustainability had no recommendations or comments on the proposal. Environmental Review: This variance is a component of an action that also includes subdivision and 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 July 27, 2021. Planning & Development Board Recommendation: The Planning Board does not identify any negative long-term planning impacts and supports this appeal. They determined that the height variances are not impactful to the site as there is a two-foot drop on the site and it is important to maintain consistent floor levels across the building and ample ceiling heights for future tenants; as well, the rear yard variance is not impactful as it is a thru site and the character of the neighborhood is such that houses are close to the street line. Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation: Not applicable Motion: A motion to grant variance #3257 for 510 W. State Street was made by M. Cannon. Deliberations & Findings: Board members stated that they do not identify any significant negative impacts on the neighborhood or nearby properties. The Board noted that the topography of the site is a challenge, and the height variance is necessary to maintain a consistent floor level throughout the building. The Board also stated that both the variances for height and rear yard are minimal and will not create an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood. The proposal is consistent with development as outlined in the comprehensive plan. Factors Considered: 1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties: Yes No This area is an evolving neighborhood with several new mixed-use buildings. The proposed building will be in keeping with this changing character, and the building design and treatment of street frontages will create a positive change. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance: Yes No This particular site face several challenges including topography and a location split between two zones. The variance is required due to the different zoning requirements, particular the CBD-50 floor-to-floor requirement, and the grade change across the block. In addition, the funding for the affordable housing project requires additional ceiling heights that are difficult to accommodate with the zoning without negatively impact design and construction. 3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No The Board finds the 7” height variance in the CBD-50 and the 6” rear yard variance to be unsubstantial. The 4.5’ height variance in the B-2d is more significant but is warranted in this particular case and the impacts are mitigated by the project as a whole. 4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood: Yes No The Planning Board has completed an appropriate environmental review and has determined that there will be no significant impacts on the physical environment. In addition, the appellant has worked extensively with the Planning Board to ensure less impactful construction practices. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No The alleged difficulty is self-created, as the appellant could build a smaller building or pursue a different design. However, the Board finds that the benefits of the project to the community and the appellant outweigh any impacts of the requested variances. Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by A. Gardiner Vote: 3-0-0 Michael Cannon YES Joseph Kirby 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 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. ___________________________ September 12, 2023 Megan Wilson, Zoning Administrator Date Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals