HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3097-202 E. Tompkins St.-Decision Letter-6-5-2018CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, &
Division of Zoning
Gino Leonardi, Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals
Telephone: 607-274-6550 Fax: 607-274-6558
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
E -Mail: gleonardi@cityofithaca.org
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3097
Applicant: Bettsie Park, Owner
Property Location: 202 E. Tompkins Street
Zoning District: R -2b
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: Section 325-8, Column 11 and Column 12.
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Front Yard and Other Front Yard.
Publication Dates: May 30, 2018 and June 1, 2018.
Meeting Held On: June 5, 2018.
Summary: Appeal of Bettsie Park for an Area Variance from Section 325-8, Column 11, Front Yard and
Column 12, Other Front Yard requirements of zoning ordinance. The applicant proposes to reconfigure
the interior of the two-family dwelling and demolish a one story addition on the rear of the building
located at 202 E. Tompkins Street. As part of the proposal, the applicant proposes to construct a second
story roofed entry deck, associated stairs, and landings for access to the second floor apartment. The
property, located at 202 E. Tompkins Street, is on a corner lot and the entry stairs and landings will align
with the existing facade along Utica Street. According to the zoning ordinance, corner lots must have
front yards on both street -facing sides. The address side of the parcel is considered the Front Yard and the
additional front is considered the Other Front Yard. The other front yard along Utica Street has an
existing deficiency and constructing the entry, stairs, and landings exacerbates this deficiency. Currently,
the building is 1'-6" from the other front yard property line and measures approximately 43 feet in length.
With the landing and stairs, the length of the building footprint will increase to 53', exacerbating the other
front yard deficiency by an additional 8 feet in length. In the R2b zone, the ordinance requires a 10' front
yard setback. There is also an existing deficiency in the front yard facing Tompkins Street that will not be
exacerbated by the proposal.
The property is located in an R -2b residential use district in which the proposed use is permitted.
However, Section 325-38 requires that an area variance be granted before a building permit is issued.
Public Hearing Held On: June 5, 2018.
Two letters of support were received: Claire Pastor of 405 Utica St. and Anne Hamilton of 318 Utica St.
No public comments in opposition
Members present:
Steven Beer, Chair
Teresa Deschanes
Steven Wolf
Lindsay Jones
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -I & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: N/A
Environmental Review: Type: 2
These actions have been determined 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).
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
Members of the Board do not support granting this variance as the project is designed and prefer to see a
design that is more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood.
Motion: A motion to grant the variance request was made by Lindsay Jones.
Deliberations & Findings:
Discussions concerning the Planning Boards recommendation were discussed. The applicant gave
testimony that many design alternatives were reviewed for the design of the porch and stairway. The
applicant decided on the current design which gives ease of access to the off-street parking and was more
in line with the character of 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 n No
There was no indication that there would be an undesirable change in the character of the
neighborhood. The new stairway and second floor porch would be an improvement and would be
a benefit to the nearby properties.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to
the variance: Yes 1 1 No
The applicant did review many designs for the stairs and landings, although because of the existing front
yard setback, there was no alternative where no variance would be required.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes n No
The variance is not substantial in that it is in line with the existing front of the building.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes n No
The redesign and replacement of the stairs would not have an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes ® No ❑
The difficulty is self-created but it is outweighed by the owners' desire to age in place and improve the
building in order to do so.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by Steven Wolf.
Vote:
Steven Beer, Chair Yes
Teresa Deschanes Yes
Steven Wolf Yes
Lindsay Jones 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
Determinant to the Neighborhood or Community. The BZA further finds that variances from Zoning
Ordinance, Section 325-8, Column 11, and 12 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.
Secret
of Zoning Appeals
June 14, 2018
Date