HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3079-413 S. Titus Ave.-Decision Letter-8-10-2017CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Zoning
Gino Leonardi, Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals
Telephone: 607-274-6513 E -Mail: gleonardi@cityofithaca.org
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3079
Applicant: Heidi Lux and David Spurgin, Owner
Property Location: 413 S. Titus Avenue
Zoning District: R -2b
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: Section 325-8, Column 4, 7, 11, 12, and Column 13.
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Off -Street Parking, Lot Width, Front Yard, Side Yard,
and Other Side Yard.
Publication Dates: July 21, 2017 and July 22, 2017.
Meeting Held On: August 10, 2017.
Summary: Appeal of Heidi Lux and David Spurgin for an area variance from Section 325-8, Column 4,
Off -Street Parking, Column 7, Lot Width, Column 11, Front Yard, Column 12, Side Yard and Column
13, Other Side Yard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to construct a 384
S.F. deck on the rear of the home located at 413 S. Titus Avenue. As part of this project, an existing 104
S.F. deck will be rebuilt and approximately 280 S.F. of deck will be added in the rear yard spanning the
full width of the rear of the home. Constructing the deck the full width of the home will exacerbate both
of the existing side yard deficiencies. On the east side, the existing side yard ranges from 4.4' to 6.2' from
the property line. The new deck will be positioned 6.2' from the lot line, the ordinance requires a 10' side
yard. The home was not built parallel to the property line and on the west side of the property, the existing
side yard is 1.5' from the property line. Therefore, constructing the new deck square to the home, will
reduce the west side yard from 1.5' to F of the 5' required by the ordinance. Additionally, the property
has existing deficiencies in off-street parking, lot width at street, and front yard setback that will not be
exacerbated by the proposed project.
The property at 413 South Titus Avenue is located in an R -2b zoning district where the proposed use is
pennitted. However, Section 325-38 requires that a variance be granted before a building permit maybe
issued.
Public Hearing Held On: August 10, 2017.
No public comments in favor or in opposition.
1
Members present:
Teresa Deschanes
Marshall McCormick
Moriah Tebor
Steven Wolf
Environmental Review: Type: Type 2
These actions have been detennined not to have a significant impact on the environment and are
otherwise precluded from environmental review under Environmental Conservation Law. CEQR Section
176-5 C 12.
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -1 & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: N/A
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Planning Board does not identify any long tern planning impacts with this appeal and recommends its
approval.
Motion: A motion to grant the variance request was made by Moriah Tebor.
Deliberations & Findings:
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 Board finds that installing the deck on the rear of the home would not produce an undesirable change
or detriment to the neighborhood. This is underscored by the absence of neighbors or property owners
presenting evidence that this proposal would be a detriment to the neighborhood.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes ❑ No
The variance is needed in order to provide adequate space for the applicants' goal for more usable space
in the rear yard.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes ❑ No
The deck will enlarge the footprint of the house, although it is mitigate by the fact that the applicant has a
very large rear yard with a significate amount of green space.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes ❑ No
The Board finds that the construction of the deck will not have an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes ® No ❑
This is a voluntary desire of the owners to improve their home but it is outweighed by the other factors.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by Teresa Deschanes.
Vote:
Teresa Deschanes Yes
Marshall McCormick Yes
Moriah Tebor Yes
Steven Wolf Yes
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
Detenninant to the Neighborhood or Community. The BZA further finds that variances from Zoning
Ordinance, Section 325-8, Column 4, 7, 11, 12, and Column 13 are 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.
Secreta�ryjlWrd of Zoning Appeals
August 28, 2017
Date
3