HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA Decision Letter - Appeal 3004 - 701 & 705 N. Aurora St. (Joseph Steuer) - 10-19-15 CITY OF ITHACA
o , C � 108 E. Green Street—3rd Floor Ithaca,NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Zoning
PHYLLIS RADI E, DIRECTOR OF ZONING ADMINISTRATION
RAI Telephone: Planning&Development—607-274-6550 E-Mail: cpyott@cityofithaca.org
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS (BZA)
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Applicant: Joseph Steuer
Appeal No.: 3004
Zoning District: R-2b
Hearing Held On: October 6, 2015
Property Location: 701 N. Aurora Street
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: The applicant requests a variance from Section 325-8,
Columns 4, and 14/15, Parking, and Rear Yard, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has
requested a Lot Line Adjustment from the Director of Zoning Administration for two contiguous properties
located at 701 and 705 N. Aurora Street. The existing property at 705 N. Aurora Street is a two-family
dwelling with a non-conforming accessory structure, located 2.9 feet from the rear yard property line. This
accessory structure was granted a variance on March 10, 1986 (Appeal #1678) to the former property owner
for an accessory use as a home office. As the new owner of 705 N. Aurora Street, the applicant wants to
convert this structure into a studio apartment, making it a second primary use on the lot. However, the lot at
705 N. Aurora Street does not have sufficient lot area for two primary uses. To resolve the lot size issue, the
applicant proposes to consolidate a portion of the lot at 705 N. Aurora Street and its accessory use with the
adjacent property at 701 N. Aurora Street. This will create an "L"-shaped parcel at 701 N. Aurora Street with
sufficient lot area for two primary uses.
The Director of Zoning Administration cannot adjust the lot lines of two contiguous lots, if it will create a new
buildable lot or create a zoning deficiency in either lot. Both properties in their current configurations have a
number of existing area deficiencies, but these deficiencies are not relevant to issuing a Lot Line Adjustment.
While the proposed Lot Line Adjustment would cause the lot size at 705 N. Aurora Street to be reduced from
4,080 SF to 3,010 SF, the lot area requirement for the two-family dwelling is only 3,000 SF. Furthermore, the
proposed Lot Line Adjustment would create two deficiencies at 705 N. Aurora Street, lot coverage and depth
of rear yard, with respect to zoning regulations.
Nevertheless, the proposed Lot Line Adjustment will create new deficiencies for the property at 701 N.
Aurora Street. The 4-bedroom single-family home at 701 N. Aurora Street requires two parking spaces. The
studio apartment will increase the parking requirement to three off-street spaces. The property at 701 N.
Aurora Street has no off-street parking. Furthermore, the Lot Line Adjustment will cause the property to
have a deficient rear yard. In its current configuration, 701 N. Aurora Street has a compliant rear yard with a
lot depth of 29' 6". Consolidating the rear portion of the lot at 705 N. Aurora Street with the parcel at 701 N.
Aurora Street would reduce the rear yard to 2.9 feet. 701 N. Aurora Street is required to provide a rear yard
that has a depth of 26 feet.
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: Section 325-8, Columns 4 and 14/15, Parking and Rear Yard,
requirements
Members Present:
Steven Beer, Chair
Teresa Deschanes
Steven Wolf
Marshall McCormick
Motion: A motion to grant the variance requests was made by Steven Wolf.
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -1 and -m of New York State General Municipal Law: Not
required.
Environmental Review: Type 2: Not Required.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation: As there are no physical changes to the neighborhood,
the Board did not identify any long-term planning issues and recommends granting this appeal. The Board
recognizes the need for new housing and supports the conversion of an existing structure into housing.
Factors Considered:
1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties: Yes❑ No
Reasons: The variance will not be undesirable as it will advance the City's housing stock.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance:
Yes❑ No®
Reasons: This is a clever redrawing of the lot lines to make the accessory dwelling useable as living space.
Variances are required for the Lot Line Adjustment.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes❑ No
Reasons: The neighbors have testified that there are sufficient on-street parking spaces in the neighborhood
and the request is essentially for existing non-conforming conditions.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes❑ No
Reasons: The increase in density will be at most two people in the new dwelling unit; and this will not have
an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
S.Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes❑ No
Reasons: The existing setback deficiencies were not self-created and the available parking on the street is
sufficient for the purposed dwelling unit.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by Marshall McCormick.
Vote: Steven Beer, Chair: Yes
Teresa Deschanes: Yes
Steven Wolf: Yes
Marshall McCormick: Yes
2
Determination of BZA Based on the Above Factors:
The BZA, taking into consideration the five factors, finds that the Benefit to the Applicant outweighs the
Determinant to the Neighborhood or Community. The BZA further finds that variances from Zoning
Ordinance, Section 325-8, Columns 4 and 14/15, Parking and Rear Yard, requirements, 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.
October 19, 2015
Secreta y, Board of oning Appeals Date
Directo Zo Administration
3