HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3181 - 238 Dryden Road - Decision Ltr
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3181
Applicant: STREAM Collaborative on behalf of property owner Lux Ithaca Holdings, LLC
Property Location: 232-236 Dryden Road
Zoning District: CR-4
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Column 10.
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Lot Coverage by Buildings.
Publication Dates: March 31, 2021 and April 3, 2021.
Meeting Held On: April 6, 2021.
Summary: Appeal of STREAM Collaborative on behalf of the owner Lux Ithaca Holdings, LLC for area
variance from Section 325-8, Column 10, Percentage of Lot Coverage by Buildings of the Zoning
Ordinance. The applicant previously proposed to construct a four story 8-unit apartment building at the
property located at 232-236 Dryden Road. The property has two existing buildings on the parcel and the
applicant would like to construct a third building on the eastern portion of land, between Dryden Road and
Summit Avenue, to be known as 238 Dryden Road. The addition of the third building created a deficiency
in the lot coverage by buildings and rear yard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. A variance was
previously granted on October 1, 2019 for the percentage of lot coverage and rear yard requirements for the
proposed building. The building was then reconfigured to accommodate a Fire Department a ccess area
which encroaches into the rear yard. The applicant sought new area variances for the reconfigured building,
and the Board granted these variances on February 4, 2020.
The applicant now wishes to subdivide the property to create two lots. Lot 1, 232-236 Dryden Road, will
include the two existing multiple dwellings, and Lot 2, 238 Dryden Road, will be the site of the new multiple
dwelling. The proposed subdivision creates new zoning deficiencies for both lots. Lot 1 will have a lot
coverage by buildings of 55.5%, which exceeds the 50% allowed in the district by 5.5%. This lot will now
meet the rear yard requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. Lot 2 will have a lot coverage by buildings of
53.6%, exceeding the allowed amount by 3.6%. The rear yard deficiency will remain and is allowed under
the February 2020 variance (BZA #3150).
The property is located in a CR-4 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 and the property can be
subdivided.
Public Hearing Held On: April 6, 2021.
Members present:
David Barken
CITY 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: 607-274-6550 Fax: 607-274-6558 E-Mail: gleonardi@cityofithaca.org
Stephen Henderson
Stephanie Egan-Engels
Suzanne Charles, Chair
Edward Crossmore, Attorney for Chi-Kay Cheung and Barbara Cheung, property owners of 109 Summit
Avenue, submitted a letter in opposition to the variance.
Raymond Schlather, Attorney for ENP Associates, property owner of 320 Dryden Road, submitted a
letter in opposition to the variance.
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law:
Not Applicable.
Environmental Review: This variance is a component of an action that also includes subdivision review.
Considered together, this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act for which the Planning and Development
Board, acting as Lead Agency, made a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance on March
23, 2021.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Board does not identify any long-term planning issues with this proposal and supports the appeal. The
Board approved the new building in 2020 and the applicant has agreed to establish an easement for public
access for the pedestrian stair from Summit Ave to Dryden Road.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Not applicable.
Motion: A motion to grant variance #3181 for 232-236 Dryden Road was made by S. Egan-Engels
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board discussed that the construction of the new building can move forward with this variance or the
proposed subdivision. The purpose of the subdivision is to make the accounting for the project easier and
clearer. D. Barken noted that the owner already has an approved project and accounting ease does not meet
the requirements for a variance. Other members noted that the proposed subdivision and associated
variance does not change the built environment. The type of development proposed is consistent with the
zoning and the area.
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 granted area variances #3136 in October 2019 and #3150 in February 2020 to allow construction
of a 4-story residential building on the eastern portion of the lot located at 232-236 Dryden Road. The
applicant has since decided to subdivide the lot with no changes to the proposed project.
Upon review of the proposed site plan and the Board’s review of existing conditions, the Board finds that
the proposed project will not result in an undesirable change on the character of the neighborhood. The
Collegetown zoning is design to allow infill projects such as this. The area serves as a transition from the
higher density in central Collegetown to the lower density residential neighborhoods further east and south.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The requested variance allows for the subdivision of the site and this action cannot proceed without the
variance. The applicant could choose not to subdivide. The Board previously granted area variances for
the project, including the new building, and physical development of the site as previously proposed could
occur.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The previously-granted variances allowed lot coverage by buildings of 55.29% for the entire site. The
requested variances would allow a lot coverage by buildings of 55.5% for 232-236 Dryden Road and
53.62% for 238 Dryden Road. This is not a substantial request and the proposed project has not changed
since the original variances were approved.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The proposed construction underwent an extensive environmental review with the Planning and
Development Board acting as lead agency. The Planning Board has also reviewed the proposed subdivision
and determined that the project would not have a negative impact on the environment on March 23, 2021,
Furthermore, the Board’s review of the submitted site plans, testimony from the applicant, and
consideration of existing conditions have not provided evidence of adverse physical or environmental
impacts.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
The alleged difficulty is self-created in that the applicant could have designed a new building to meet the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. However, in consideration of the previous variances, the Board
determined that the benefits of the project outweighed the fact that the difficulty was self-created. The
project has not changed and these benefits will still be as part of this project.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by S. Henderson.
Vote: 3-1-0
David Barken NO
Stephen Henderson YES
Stephanie Egan-Engels YES
Suzanne Charles, 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 applicant outweighs
the detriment to the neighborhood or community. The BZA further finds that the variances from the Zoning
Ordinance, §325-8, Column 10 is 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.
___________________________ April 6, 2021
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals