HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3163 - Cascadilla Park Road - Decision Ltr1
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3163
Applicant: Rob Morache of STREAM Collaborative for property owners Lawrence Gibbons and Ritchie
Patterson
Property Location: 108 Cascadilla Park Road
Zoning District: R-2a
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 4, 6, 7, 10, 11,12, and 13; §325-25C.
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Off-Street Parking, Lot Area, Width in Feet at Street
Line, Lot Coverage by Buildings, Front Yard, Side Yard, Other Side Yard, and Location of Accessory
Structures.
Publication Dates: July 29, 2020 and July 31, 2020.
Meeting Held On: August 4, 2020.
Summary: Appeal of Rob Morache of STREAM Collaborative on behalf of property owners Lawrence
Gibbons and Ritchie Patterson for an Area Variance from §325-8, Column 4, Off-Street Parking, Column
6, Lot Area, Column 7, Width in Feet at Street Line, Column 10, Lot Coverage by Buildings, Column 11,
Front Yard, Column 12, Side Yard, and Column 13, Other Side Yard, requirements and §325-25C, Location
of Accessory Structures, of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to replace the recessed concrete
front porch steps with new wood steps and add screens to the existing covered porch. The new steps will
not be recessed and will project from the front porch into the required front yard. There is an existing front
yard deficiency, and the construction of the new steps will further reduce the front yard to from 13’ 10” to
11’ 10” of the required 25’. The applicant also proposes to construct a new accessory structure that will
provide enclosed bike storage for the owners. Section 32-25C requires accessory structures in the R-1a
district to meet the 25’ front yard setback and be located at least 6’ from any side or rear property line. The
bike shed will be set back 22’ 4” from the front property line and 1’ from the side property line. The
relocation of the porch steps and construction of the accessory structure will increase the percentage of the
lot covered by buildings from 24.5% to 25.2% of the permitted 20%, The property has existing deficiencies
in (1) off-street parking, (2) lot area, (3) width in feet at street line, (4) side yard, and (5) other side yard
that will not be exacerbated by the proposal.
The property is located in an R-1a 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: August 4, 2020.
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
2
Members present:
Suzanne Charles
Teresa Deschanes, Acting Chair
Stephanie Egan-Engels
Steven Wolf
Pete Diamessis, 114 Cascadilla Park Road, submitted a letter of support that was read into the
record.
There were no interested parties in opposition to the appeal.
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: The
Not applicable.
Environmental Review: This is a Type 2 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance (“CEQRO”), and State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), and is not subject to
Environmental Review.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
The Board supports homeowners investing in and improving their properties.
Motion: A motion to grant the variance request was made by S. Charles.
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board appreciates the applicants’ negotiation with the impacted neighborhood to arrive at an improved
proposal for the size and location of the bike shed. The neighbor now supports the proposal and has even
submitted a letter of support to the board. The applicant considered other locations for the bike shed that
would not require a variance; however, the existing side yard is already very narrow and the primary
structure itself is only set back six feet from the side property line. There is a significant grade changes on
the west side of the property as well as in the rear yard. If the bike shed was located to meet one or both
setback requirements, it would be more of an eye sore and would have a greater impact on neighboring
properties.
It is necessary to move the front stairs further into the front yard in order to screen in the porch. The grade
change in that area of the lot eliminates any impact of this change on neighboring properties.
Factors Considered:
1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties: Yes No
In terms of the porch, the proposed change is not a significant departure from the neighborhood context.
With regard to the bike shed, while deficient in both front yard and side yard setbacks, it is sited as far back
as functionally possible, given the unique configuration of the lot and the location of the existing house.
The current location was agreed upon with the adjacent neighbor who has expressed his support for the
proposal.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The bike shed could meet both the front and side yard setback requirements. However, the back yard is
currently landscaped with a stone retaining wall and has several older growth trees, making it difficult to
site the bike shed there. Alternative locations in the front of the house may satisfy one setback location or
the other but would have a greater visual impact.
3
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
While the one foot side yard is significantly less than the required six feet, the proposed location is off of
the street and concealed by vegetation.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The one foot side yard setback does not have a negative impact on the physical or environmental conditions,
given the unique layout of the lot, the proximity to the neighboring lot, and the s-curve of Cascadilla Park
Road.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
The property owners are choosing to construct a bike shed but the new structure will allow the owners to
use their bicycles more regularly, which aids in their use of their property and helps meet the City’s
greenhouse gas reduction goals.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by S. Egan-Engels.
Vote: 3-1-0
Suzanne Charles Yes
Teresa Deschanes, Acting Chair Yes
Stephanie Egan-Engels Yes
Steven Wolf No
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 deterimant to the neighborhood or community. The BZA further finds that the variances from the
Zoning Ordinance, §325-8, Columns 4, 6, 7, 10, 11,12, and 13, and §325-25C 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.
___________________________ August 4, 2020
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals