HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200138 Gersin Shed Correspondance (2) Zoning Board of Appeals
City of Saratoga Springs,New York
Re: 20200138 Gersin Residence Application
July 1st, 2020
We are the owners of parcels 179.4-2-34.3 and 179.4-2-5, known as 25 Waterview Drive.
I, along with my husband and daughters, have owned the above-mentioned property for
over 35 years, well preceding the development of the Summer Wind and Lake Side at
Riley's properties. During the planning phase of these developments our family,
specifically my husband, attended numerous City Planning Board meetings to ensure that
there was a"no-cut buffer" established between the proposed homes that ran parallel to
the existing properties on Echo Ridge Drive, future Waterview Drive, and Crescent
Avenue. This no-cut buffer ranges from 100 feet wide to 30 feet, and abuts 21 properties
in Summer Wind along Waterview Drive specifically.
Our interest in this application is related to the fact that seven properties along Waterview
Drive are located along our property line. We believe that it is imperative that the Zoning
Board of Appeals maintain the integrity of the Approved Site Plan adopted by the
Planning Board on January 15th, 1997. As mentioned by Susan and Zealie Van Raalte in
their statement to the Board, we are extremely concerned that the applicant and/or the
Summer Wind Home Owners Association (HOA) have violated the no-cut buffer as it is
written in the deed restrictions.
The applicant has referenced (pg.5) that the Summer Wind HOA approved the
construction of the shed, and that the owners of the adjacent property"signed off' on the
project. This is a moot point because, if true, the HOA did not follow their own rules to
ensure that submitted requests complied with the no-cut buffer requirements. If the
HOA, and specifically the Architectural Standards Committee, did approve the
construction of this shed they should, via their mandate of control from their own bylaws,
cease to involve the city, and revoke their approval as the shed has never met the
provision in Article VI, section 6.01, ii "that such plans and any qualifications or
conditions attached to such approval of the plans do not violate any applicable
governmental law, rule or regulation, zoning, building, health or other code ordinance."
As illustrated most recently in the documents submitted by the applicant, the shed is in
clear violation of the no-cut buffer established by the Approved Site Plan. Any mistaken
approval from the HOA should not be considered valid, and the shed should be removed
immediately.
We request that the Zoning Board of Appeals rule against this blatant infringement into
the no-cut zone. This decision will protect the area from current and future
encroachments. Please, do not dilute the spirit of the original Site Plan Approval by
granting a self-inflicted need for a variance. No-cut buffers are an integral part of our
community, and it is our opinion that if not upheld it would continue to create a detriment
to nearby properties, and change the character of the neighborhood.
Thank you sincerely for your consideration,
Elizabeth Merena(owner)
Curtis Breedlove
Claire Breedlove
Nora Breedlove