HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA #3254 - 409 Willow Ave - Decision
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3254
Applicant: Firehouse Architecture Lab, on behalf of property owners Julie Wise and Jason Willig
Property Location: 409 Willow Avenue
Zoning District: R-2b
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 11 and 13
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Front Yard and Other Side Yard
Publication Dates: July 6, 2023 and July 11, 2023.
Meeting Held On: July 11, 2023.
Summary: Appeal of Firehouse Architecture Lab, on behalf of property owners Julie Wise and Jason
Willig, for an area variance from §325-8, Column 11, Front Yard, and Column 13, Other Side Yard
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. As part of a larger overall renovation of the single-family home, the
applicant proposes to construct a new deck off of the north-facing corner of the house. The proposed deck
will align with the existing home but will create a lateral extension of the property’s existing side yard
deficiency. Both the original home and the deck will be located 3.1’ from the north side property line.
The property has an existing deficiency in the required front yard that will not be exacerbated by this
proposal.
Public Hearing Held On: July 11, 2023.
Members present:
Michael Cannon
Joseph Kirby
Andre Gardiner
David Barken, Chair
There were no comments in support of the requested variance.
The following interested parties spoke in opposition of the proposed project:
- Susan Austern, 411 Willow Avenue
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law:
Not applicable
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
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 supports this variance as they
support owner-occupied improvements. The Planning Board finds no long-term negative impacts to
planning.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Not applicable
Motion: A motion to grant variance #3254 for 409 Willow Ave. was made by M. Cannon.
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board stated that they believe the project is a small request with minimal impact to adjacent properties
or the neighborhood. The deck is designed to be consistent with the existing structure and built environment.
The Chair noted that any agreement between neighbors regarding the location of the fence (which is not
subject to this appeal) has no bearing on the decision made by the Board and that any fence installed by
the applicant can be done so up to the side property line of the property.
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 increased building footprint from the added deck would not be a detriment to nearby properties. The
new deck is consistent with the current nonconforming conditions.
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 as the side yard
variance that provides a deck of the desired size.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The Board does not find the requested variance to be substantial as the proposed deck will only create a
lateral extension into an existing Side Yard deficiency. The distance to the property line will be
maintained at 3.1 feet.
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 new construction that does not meet the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. However, it is compatible with the existing conditions of the
property and neighborhood.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by D. Barken
Vote: 4-0-0
Andre Gardiner YES
Michael Cannon YES
Michael Cannon 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, Columns 11 and 13 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.
___________________________ July 11, 2023
Megan Wilson, Zoning Administrator Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals