Syracuse Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - July 16, 2026
Syracuse Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - July 16, 2026
The Syracuse Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on July 16, 2026, to consider two variance applications: a use variance for a property at 1115 East Calvin Street and an area variance for a deck at 303 Buckingham Avenue. The board also elected a vice chair. Both applications were approved with conditions.
Public Comments & Testimony
-
First Application (1115 East Calvin Street):
- The applicant, Greater Syracuse Property Development Corporation (the land bank), stated the property had been marketed for residential use without success due to a small, oddly shaped lot and a 912-square-foot building originally designed as a florist. The proposed use as a residential leasing office (by appointment only) would not generate significant traffic and would improve curb appeal. The hardship was not self-created as the land bank inherited the non-conforming property.
- William Al Murphy Jr. (architect, representing an interested party) opposed the use variance, arguing that use variances have a high bar and that the property's unique character (including a greenhouse) and proximity to a cemetery made it unsuitable for an office. He urged the board to consider the difficulty of obtaining a use variance.
- Joseph Italiano (former owner, business address 1115 East Calvin Street) objected to the office use, stating it would change neighborhood character and could lead to further conversions. He noted the property had been non-conforming since 2008 and that the land bank had not successfully marketed it for a floral shop.
- The land bank representative responded that the property had been marketed for three years without success, that the previous non-conforming commercial use had expired, and that the greenhouse removal would improve appearance. He also noted that Mr. Italiano had filed multiple lawsuits, all dismissed, and that back taxes from 2008 to 2023 had not been paid.
-
Second Application (303 Buckingham Avenue):
- Mirza Teach (applicant, owner of 203 Buckingham) requested an area variance to build a rear deck that would encroach into the required 4-foot side setback. He argued the house was built in 1900 on a narrow lot (2.8 feet from side property line) and that the deck would not be visible from the street.
- Anne Ely (326 Kensington Road) opposed, expressing concerns about perpetuating the encroachment, potential for student rentals or party use, and noted that the front sidewalk had been paved (possibly a code violation). She suggested a patio instead of a raised deck.
- Tony Guides (324 Kensington Road) opposed, stating the deck would be high and close to his bedroom window, and that there was no room for additional encroachment.
- Beth Lawler Bailey (320 Kensington Road) opposed, citing privacy concerns. She said a six-foot fence already existed but the deck would overlook her yard; she requested a privacy fence or screening.
- The applicant responded that he was willing to add vegetative screening (8-10 feet tall) along the rear property line to address privacy concerns. He also noted that the deck would not be visible from the street and that the house had been vacant for 30 years.
Discussion Items
-
First Application (V2026-13 – Use Variance for 1115 East Calvin Street):
- Staff noted that the property had lost its previous non-conforming flower shop use because it had been taken by the land bank in 2023 and the use had expired. The board discussed the zoning district (R2) and the area's mixed character, but affirmed the need for a use variance.
- The board completed a short Environmental Assessment Form (SEQR) and voted to issue a negative declaration, finding no moderate to large impacts.
- The board then discussed the use variance standards: inability to achieve a reasonable return (residential use not viable), unique circumstances (small lot, commercial structure), no self-created hardship, and no adverse effect on neighborhood character (commercial use has existed for decades, greenhouse removal would improve appearance).
- The motion to approve the use variance included conditions: compliance with general conditions for use variances, any future expansion requires a separate variance, and site plan review for the proposed office use.
-
Second Application (V2026-14 – Area Variance for Deck at 303 Buckingham Avenue):
- The board discussed the feasibility of alternatives (patio vs. deck), the existing non-conforming structure, and the potential impact on neighbors' privacy.
- Staff noted that short-term rentals (Airbnb) are prohibited in R1 zoning districts, but long-term rentals are allowed. The applicant initially intended to use the property as an Airbnb but later stated he would either rent long-term or sell it.
- The board considered conditioning the approval on vegetative screening (8-10 feet tall) along the rear property line, and requiring a planting plan to be submitted with the building permit.
Key Outcomes
- V2026-13 (Use Variance – 1115 East Calvin Street): Approved unanimously (all in favor, none against, no abstentions). Conditions: comply with general conditions for use variances; any future expansion requires a separate use variance; site plan review for the proposed office use must be completed prior to occupation.
- V2026-14 (Area Variance – Deck at 303 Buckingham Avenue): Approved unanimously (all in favor, none against, no abstentions). Conditions: obtain a building permit; submit a planting plan showing location and species of vegetative screening (minimum 8-10 feet tall along the rear property line); any further encroachment requires a new variance.
- Board Election: Caitlin Wright was elected vice chair of the board (motion and second, all in favor).
- Meeting adjourned at 1:50 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Thank you. Any oppositions? Minutes are adopted. The board will now conduct the public hearings on today's agenda. First, the applicant or the applicant's representative will state the reasons for the requested variance and present any material or documentation which is to be considered regarding the proposal. Next, persons wishing to speak in favor of the proposal will be given the opportunity to address the board. Then persons who wish to speak in opposition will be allowed to address the board. Finally, the applicant or a representative will be given the option to make any closing arguments or comments to the board. Following the public hearings this afternoon, the board may make a decision on each application heard. The board may also decide to hold its decision until the next public hearing. If the hearing is closed, no additional information will be allowed into the record except for information the board may request. That information will be available for public viewing at the zoning office in one park place, 300 South State Street. Staff will now introduce the first application. All right. I'm from the Greater Syracuse Property Development Corporation, also known as the Greater Syracuse Land Bank. The land bank uh listed this property for sale and attempted to find a buyer uh who could convert the existing building into a use allowed in an R2 zoning district. We've been unable to find any buyer, uh willing to convert the 912 square foot building into a residence. If we were to demolish it, you could probably squeeze a small, like 1200 square foot uh two-story house, but it would cost about 450,000 to build. And the post-construction value would estimate, we estimate would be approximately 200,000. Um to demolish it and sell the lot as a side lot to the neighbor would also result in a negative ROI. It would cost approximately 25,000 to demolish the property, and the assessed land value is just about 10,000. Umable to find any alternatives, we all entertained an offer from a buyer who wishes to use the building as a residential leasing office. Uh the property is unique in that the existing building was designed to function as a florist and not for any other use allowed by right in the zoning district. The building is only 912 square feet. The parcel is also unique in that it is small and unusually shaped. While it is technically buildable without having to apply for an area variant since it's pre since it is pre-existing, the lot doesn't conform to the zoning ordinance requirements for 4,000 square feet of area for a single family house. It's also less than desirable for a new residence given that Calvin Street is a very heavily trafficked uh area and the property is located adjacent to a cemetery. Uh our buyer plans to demolish the greenhouse attached to the southeast uh facade of the building, but otherwise will not make significant changes uh to the exterior of the building. Uh we don't anticipate any significant visual changes uh from the existing conditions, uh other than repaving and restriping the parking lot and adding landscaping, which would actually improve the curb appeal of the property. Uh this use will not generate significant traffic. It will be open to the public by appointment only, and rental agents mostly meet uh potential tenants at the available units. One full-time and one part-time employee were work out of this location. Uh we believe this is not a self-imposed hardship because the land bank receives all the city's foreclosed properties, whether they're legal nonconformities or nothing else you wish to add? That's all. Any questions from the board for the applicant I'm just looking at the letter that you received in mentions the buyer living pretty far away. Do you guys still have the policy that if it's uh out of town purchaser that there has to be a property manager within like a certain radius? Yes. Um and they they do have that. Yeah, I just wanted to make a positive uh positive comment that um the propo the owner, proposed owner um is maintaining the building. Because it does, even though it's not um on the city's historic properties list, it does have an interesting history. I think it's the last it's associated with the dual greenhouses where the apartments are in the back. That's the whole reason you know that flower shop was put there. Um and it is somewhat of a neighborhood landmark um including the greenhouse on the side, which the person who wrote in um was just stressed about you know hearing that it would be torn down. So I was wondering if there is a way to encourage the owner to keep that. I realize it's sort of beyond the scope of our zoning, but we have uh would you like to speak to that? Yep, you might don't mind uh stepping up, and everybody if you choose to speak, uh stepping up to the mic stating your name and your address for the record. Thank you. My name is Vaughn Lang, uh 6838 East Genesee Street, Fayetteville, New York. I'm an attorney representing the prospective purchaser. Um the idea about taking down that area that you just referred to uh was it's not uh it'll create a parking space, it'll create the handicapped access, which does not presently exist.
openpublica.com