HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3183 - 500 S Meadow Street - Decision Ltr
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3183
Applicant: Ben Gingrich of HSB Architects on behalf of project sponsor Key Bank and property owner
Wegmans Food Markets
Property Location: 500 S. Meadow Street
Zoning District: SW-2
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 5 and 12.
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Off-Street Parking and Other Front Yard.
Publication Dates: March 31, 2021 and April 3, 2021.
Meeting Held On: April 6, 2021.
Summary: Appeal of Ben Gingrich of HSB Architects on behalf of Key Bank and property owner
Wegmans Food Markets for an Area Variance from Section 325-8, Column 5, Off-Street Loading, and
Column 12, Other Front Yard, requirements of Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to subdivide the
property at 500 S. Meadow Street and construct a branch office for Key Bank on a portion of the site
currently used for overflow parking. The project will involve the construction of a 3,415 square foot, one-
story building and 59 parking spaces as well as landscaping and site improvements. The subdivided lot
will have two front yards: one on Meadow Street and a second on the access road that leads to the Wegmans
location. The proposed project will meet the front yard requirements along Meadow Street, where the
building will be located 29.6’ from the curb and will occupy 53% of the lot frontage along the street. There
will be a deficiency in the second front yard along the interior road. The building will be located 40’ from
that curb and must be located 15’-34’ from the curb to meet the requirement of the Zoning Ordinance.
In addition, the bank branch office is required to have 1 off-street loading space that is a minimum of 450
square feet. The project is proposing to construct no designated off-street loading.
The property is located in the SW-2 use district in which the proposed use is permitted. However, Section
325-32 requires that an area variance be granted before a building permit is issued.
Public Hearing Held On: April 6, 2021.
Members present:
David Barken
Stephen Henderson
Stephanie Egan-Engels
Suzanne Charles, Chair
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
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 site plan 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 February
23, 2021.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Board does not identify any long-term planning issues with this proposal and supports the appeal. Due
to its location in a floodplain, the building floor must be five feet above the existing grade. The setback is
therefore needed to accommodate an accessible entrance from the sidewalk. The Board also supports infill
projects such as this that replace an existing surface parking lot with a building.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Not applicable.
Motion: A motion to grant variance #3183 for 500 S. Meadow Street was made by D. Barken.
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board discussed the floodplain and grading challenges of the site, as well as the siting restrictions due
to the signal control box on the northeast corner of the site. The building design as been modified to
address the specifics of this site.
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 applicant proposes to construct a branch office for Key Bank on the surface parking lot located at 500
S. Meadow Street. 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. This type of structure is in line with both the zoning and the established characteristics of
the area.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The applicant meets the requirements for the site’s primary front yard. The applicant is creating an
accessible entrance along the second front yard, located off of the access road to Wegmans. Due to
requirements for construction in the floodplain, the building floor must be elevated five feet above grade,
and the building must be setback 40’ as proposed to provide sufficient spaces for the accessible entry ramp.
The applicant could design the project to provide a designated off-street loading space.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The applicant proposes to construct the building façade 40’ from the curb in the second front yard, which
is a greater setback than the 15’-34’ allowed by zoning. This is not a substantial request.
In addition, the applicant seeks a variance of 1 space or 100% of the off-street loading requirement for the
project. As it pertains to the utility of the structure, the off-street loading is not a particular need.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The proposed project underwent an environmental review with the Planning and Development Board acting
as lead agency. The Planning Board determined that the project would not have a negative impact on the
environment on February 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 meet the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance by providing a designated loading space and redesigning or relocating the accessible entry.
However, the Board determined that the benefits of the project, including infill of an existing underutilized
parking area, outweigh the fact that the difficulty was self-created.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by S. Charles
Vote: 4-0-0
David Barken YES
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, Columns 5 and 12 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.
___________________________ April 6, 2021
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals