HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3175 - 511 S Plain Street - Decision Ltr
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3175
Applicant: Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services
Property Location: 511 S. Plain Street
Zoning District: R-2b
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Columns 11 and 14/15; §325-20E(2)
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Front Yard, Rear Yard, and Parking in Front Yards.
Publication Dates: January 28, 2021 and January 30, 2021.
Meeting Held On: February 2, 2021.
Summary: Appeal of Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services for an area variance from Section 325-8,
Column 11, Front Yard, and Column 14/15, Rear Yard, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance as well as
Section 325-20E(2), Parking in Front Yards. The applicant proposes to construct a new duplex on the
vacant lot located at 511 S. Plain Street. Both units of the duplex will have two bedrooms and 1.5 baths
and will be sold to a low- to moderate-income, first time homebuyers. The units are offset and feature both
front and back porches. The front porch steps of one of the units project 5’ into the required front yard,
reducing the front yard to 5’. Similarly, the rear porch steps of the other unit project 5’ into the required
rear yard, reducing the rear yard to 20.15’ of the required 25.15’.
In addition, Section 325-20E(2) limits front yard parking on properties with a street frontage of less than
50’ to a single driveway. The applicant proposes to construct two driveways in order to provide separate
parking for each dwelling unit.
The property is located in a R-2b 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: February 2, 2021.
Members present:
David Barken
Steven Henderson
Suzanne Charles, Chair
There were no public comment either in support of or in opposition to the appeal.
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law:
Not applicable.
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
Environmental Review: This is a Type 2 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is not subject to Environmental Review.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long-term planning impacts, and in fact, feels that
the addition of well-designed affordable, for-sale family housing in the neighborhood has a positive overall
impact. The off-set design of the house allows both owners privacy and is visually appealing.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Not applicable.
Motion: A motion to grant the variance request was made by D. Barken.
Deliberations & Findings:
The rear yard setback of 25% in the R-2b 25% can often be challenging. In this case, adherence to the
requirement would force the applicant to remove the rear porch and/or align the units, which would
eliminate privacy. Porches add to the quality of life and encourage interaction. The house behind has an
equally large or larger rear yard so the new housing will not impact significantly the adjacent property.
Similarly, surrounding properties have little to no front yard and most are nonconforming with this
requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. The front yard variance would allow the construction of a front
porch on one of the units and is consistent with neighboring properties.
For the utility of project, the parking and second driveway is needed. It also removes cars from the street.
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 proposed construction of a new two-family home at 511 S. Plain Street will provide front and back
porches for both units and will offset the units for design appeal and privacy. The results in a front yard
deficiency of 5’ or 50% in front of one of the units. It also results in a rear yard deficiency of 5’ behind the
opposite unit, reducing the rear yard to 80% of the required setback. The duplex is designed to be
architecturally compatible with the neighboring houses, and the proposed front and rear yard, while less
than required, are comparable to surrounding properties.
The proposed project also includes 2 one-car driveways, which exceeds the single driveway permitted on a
lot less than 50’ wide. The Board finds that this will have minimal impact on the character of the
neighborhood but is essential to the functionality of the project.
Upon review of the proposed site plan and renderings 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. To the contrary, the Board finds that the addition of well-designed, for-sale affordable
housing is a benefit to the neighborhood and the entire community.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The applicant could construct a duplex that meets all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance by not offsetting
the units of the duplex or eliminating a porch. One two-car driveway could be constructed instead of two
one-car driveways. However, the proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood and the two one-
car driveways are more functional for two separate households). In addition, the reduced front yard is
comparable with surrounding properties, and the provision of porches will enhance the housing.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The requested front yard variance would allow a 5’ front yard or 50% of the setback required by the Zoning
Ordinance. The requested rear yard variance would reduce the rear yard to 20.15’ of the required 25.15’,
which reduces the rear yard by 20%. These requests are not substantial in comparison to the existing
context.
The request front yard parking variance would allow an additional driveway and is a 100% increase over
what is allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. However, the second driveway is an important feature for the
duplex and is much more functional than an end-to-end two-car driveway for two separate households.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The request for an area variance at 511 S. Plain Street is a Type II action that has been predetermined to
not have a significant impact on the environment. 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. In fact, the structure has been designed to mitigate
environmental impacts and reduce energy consumption.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
The alleged difficulty is self-created in that the applicant could construct a project that meets all of the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. However, the benefits of the proposed project to the future
homeowners and the neighborhood as a whole outweigh the fact that the difficulty is self-created.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by S. Henderson
Vote: 3-0-0
David Barken YES
Steven Henderson 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 11 and 14/15, and §325-20E(2) 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.
___________________________ February 2, 2021
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals