Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA Decision Letter - Appeal 2957 - 402 S. Cayuga St. (INHS) - 05-15-15° °i 0 11 :14N 00i oCti �,►° ° . O 0 ollo H � RR1 ° ° °. 000(01 0 ° ° o��j CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green Street 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850 -5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Zoning PHYLLIS R.ADKE, DIRECTOR OF ZONING ADMINISTRATION Telephone: Planning & Development — 607 - 274 -6550 E -Mail: cpyott@cityofithaca.org CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS Area Variance Findings &Decision Applicant: Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INNS) Appeal No.: 2957 Zoning District: R -3b Hearing Held On: May 5, 2015 Property Location: 402 S. Cayuga St. Requirement for which Variance is Requested: Front yard requirement. Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: Section 325 -38, Column 11. Public Hearing: No persons spoke in favor or against the proposal. Motion: A motion to grant the variance requests was made by Teresa Deschanes. Environmental Review: Type 2 Action, Section 176 -5 C. (11) Planning & Development Board Recommendation: The Board fully supports granting this appeal as it furthers the goal of providing more housing within the City of Ithaca and brings a vacant lot into active use. Furthermore, the Area Variance is needed to allow full front porches for each unit, which improves the design and makes it contextual with the neighborhood. Factors Considered: 1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties: Yes F-] No Reasons: Evidence was provided that the project will improve the neighborhood. Also, two- thirds of the neighboring properties have front yard deficiencies. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance: Yes F-] No Reasons: The Planning Board requested the applicant provide front porches to all units. This only could be achieved by requesting a front yard variance for one of the units. 3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes ❑ No Reasons: The variance is not substantial. The request is for a small deviation on one corner of the property. 4. Would the variance have an adverse ampact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood: Yes ❑ No Reasons: There are no adverse impacts. As stated before, the project will improve the neighborhood. 5. �A /J hethar the alleged dFi oculty was self- created: Yes ❑ No Reasons: Difficulty was not self - created. In trying to meet the Planning Board's recommendations, the applicant provided full porches for four units. One porch causes a front yard deficiency. The rest meet setback regulations. Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by Marshall McCormick Vote: Teresa Deschanes: Yes Steve Beer: Yes Marshall McCormick: Yes Determination of BZA Based on the Above Factors: Taking into consideration the five factors, the BZA 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, Column 11, Front Yard, 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. VARIANCE GRANTED May 15, 2015 Secreta y, Board of oning Appeals, Date Direct'�r of Zoningf dministration 2