HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3186 - Campbell Avenue - Decision Ltr
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3186
Applicant: Brent Katzmann on behalf of property owner Sharon Center
Property Location: Campbell Avenue (Tax Parcel 38.-1-1)
Zoning District: R-1a
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: §325-8, Column 7
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Minimum Lot Width at Street.
Publication Dates: September 30, 2021 and October 1, 2021.
Meeting Held On: October 5, 2021.
Summary: Appeal of Brent Katzmann on behalf of property owner Sharon Center for an area variance
from Section 325-8, Column 7, Minimum Lot Width at Street, requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. The
applicant proposes to subdivide a vacant 5.78-acre parcel located at the southern end of Campbell Avenue.
The subdivision would create two new lots: Lot 1A (139,377 square feet) and Lot 1B (96,715 square feet).
The existing parcel is located adjacent to an abandoned road that remains City property and does not have
street frontage on Campbell Avenue. The City-owned property is located between the parcel and Campbell
Avenue, and the applicant will secure a license agreement with the City to create access from the subdivided
lots to Campbell Avenue. In addition, there will be an easement on Lot 1A to ensure access to Lot 1B.
Both Lot 1A and Lot 1B, however, will not meet the minimum lot width at street requirement of the Zoning
Ordinance. If the area variance and subdivision are approved, the applicant intends to sell the two
subdivided lots to allow the construction of two new single-family homes.
Campbell Ave (tax parcel 38.-1-1) is located in a R-1a 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: October 5, 2021.
Members present:
Stephen Henderson
Stephanie Egan-Engels
David Barken, Acting Chair
There were no comments 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 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 August
24, 2021.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long-term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
The lot is contiguous to the ‘Old Hector ROW’ that separates their property from Campbell Avenue. This
is not considered a public way and therefore the property lacks the required frontage. This is a fixed existing
condition. The applicant will provide a driveway that is adequate for ingress, egress and emergency access.
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation:
Not applicable
Motion: A motion to grant variance #3186 for Campbell Avenue (Tax Parcel 38.-1-1) was made by S.
Henderson.
Deliberations & Findings:
Planning Board has found no negative impacts. Property does not have any current frontage and there is
no way to provide that access. It is a huge lot within the city, and this allows for the construction of two
new homes.
Factors Considered:
1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties: Yes No
No physical change from existing condition. If approved, variance could allow development of
two single-family homes, in keeping with character of the neighborhood. Any development will
be subject to its own review.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The existing parcel is landlocked and there is no current street frontage. Old Hector Street was
abandoned by the City and there are no plans to reopen this roadway.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The subdivided properties have 0’ of street frontage; 75’ required in the R-1a; this deficiency
already exists. There is no feasible alternative and already deficient.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The lack of street frontage is an existing condition. The parcel is being subdivided into two lots,
but the physical characteristics remain the same. The Applicant will provide a shared driveway,
with easement agreement for second property, that will provide access to the property for daily use
and emergency response.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
The applicant could propose no change to the lot. However, any development of this property, as
a single property or as subdivided lots, would require an area variance for street frontage.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by S. Egan-Engels.
Vote: 3-0-0
Stephen Henderson YES
Stephanie Egan-Engels YES
David Barken, Acting 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 7 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.
___________________________ October 5, 2021
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals