Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
20151102_1_001_165.84-1-22_39_MURPHY_NA
,, z ...< . . :r X im7 e, } -i 't. k r'.r,:.�r. e •^• •h r i'4c;;�,.^v, - .:a+M Y`S ••;y �rsne'�.•. 4 1=Y:' .,<., ,.._.r ,^.,Sf€ ,.rm.,.:, 'c�.. .,,7.,.- >-...• ..... .--,:... ..�.a'ti..'•4t ,'f:P::}::i 4... _ •�.°,�a S .,$. .r:..,,..; 5'.... -,.v 4t ,'::^ _.:'=..,5....�..,,.-. ,f-.i !. .,..:-r,... ,.. ----.'"--',#--- ..€•, v3. Y '..r ,,:. :^q� h _�. ' : .� x,_ d :�-v:) .a.. .,i .,r.. l�- ,.. .a,.-..,.,r,.:.. f. n.,.....`S ..)„.:.:... :i-,',:,.. _r , ....t .. 4� ria:. �.. /;�' .Y 1�.: -'�4:.....��-}}, �^.: ..a.� t..}�.... :..,w.,.r .zzS .+,�:�1 v� .. .c ..i'' < � �. . _ ': :. ... ai. 3.,�?..;,t t``+'4 h �:..t F, '-(' ���s�` .. .• .i„a-.. `Y� ,. � :.n.,, .. 1 _ .zr .�::.., ..., fit..((��..-,r ?•� 4 4 � 5. :7.;�.f,� _ .4 ,-.t.,. ,.. .:S' .5• .v .:S t _.n .....W.. ,x ..7� �>:,.,y.. ,,, {QS:. ..., t_) � a'G.�:, .f.?� $� t �2.y k-�. .'K. � {. � :�., ..+...•n y L. ., x v f C }ir; j:.L' '::G S h_., r e j_ � . P- *. ,#? ..� ..+, y .x,.. . ,pa's � � ',:, .n...5. "tri t� -� z_. h#_ _•...f ..;:• t r- k_ .: .' l•- r ::>•+ -x},€u f. •t '� . k�s-r '>`:.�. , r., y , 'a •;,� <v rr, <.... _.v....i.T Yio, r< t :... .... r: r, ,. _,ti. .s.:. i s-, i• n° m}.. -y: ,�;, A,. A <...;5'.l `},r,:, :.a r._.ak,. , `:ftv .o-- r,r:?+#. -...-. .:: ..>4' f .:.: __.. `}. '3,�.'t,y.,:k z :s. �,'..,{._ ,�Y pp .� �r. �' ..N+ �. .�.k't-�..:. ..}} +•�i€. � da h u.._.P:T �,_�i, ..`r..., t w..� �':'}', Y'GK'..Y. O .'y i'T:5' �'}:. '. t � Y '. .•.sl. �,.-. ,.,e }.. I S. rA I d :d.... •...: ,.., .».• ,:` £:.9 .,.� .r -•. -n^ a.. ': '.. Y ..:>. t$`�� ;. ..� /-. Y. '.-F c ::N .4w u4,. ; ,. ,6 3-, 't #::.r. �,4.�•,d. �..:_i...�...Y -, rl�� ,sk_.,-, �. 6 .} ,:. z_,,.... .`.... ..,. � r'�1': t, :.r; '� ,.. t� Y. ^2(w. �' .c..,....,.k��{{ r.,.¢�,. .x• �t....+ •.� :,.x: v .,fir ,.,,. r ..::r�; 't}�.J, :. <�' $'",} .� t. t.� r �5.i'�ko'' }:�. t,.+y , , ). x F .:, r - . v. .G..:.. .,. .., .: rn} ,,:a,.r. .t, -:..Y: ,,r., : { '>,...:', !, U %r ...i :t:. Y7,et r €: �. x_ �,1,,_7� i. i,. ,• ^7- '� -� C .�' � x�,.tk .{,.,� .,7 r�._ <�'.} i.y M s:�, r.(. :, } .;/ -..;,,- :�3�f;day EE-e ,}{ �^.. .. � �t.., . � -:-i f P ..�S ��X', �•� r�... ,«5 ,7 •.,€., i ,„-y, :;.. 3 -. {'..r 1[ �Y ':i%^ rl l..t'4 S 2 '• h ) .42_ - t&F.'.� -.y�:. �'h,:. - r. >,.,,. "7i .f.:. a. t:.,,,,:, •,...xi. :,n: j " •K..a: 4 S f!.,,r,.. .2 S ::a 1., a+', i 1.y� t.:'� ti.Y-. .. '.. �....{{pp. :,.. .,. , e-a. -z..:'�. , a€P•.',.Y,7= '�:�',.. 1..1 , .,.t..,.. r }. .,. .... �.; -a, .}. -n... ... F .�, d.`: .4 ;{;-,. ,7:R :.. .:....: ....'"f.� ..�1� .'_ «. ,. , :,a.. ...._,...»., e_ ..it., .. ... � �.. <....,.�". � #.._ -i. a� .',5.. _t c:7r.•, x ,"s:..:. ..a3 Yi' 2 :.�.•�, ��,a: ai.-n.a'f r�..,: 7.2 r?a..z ,.r ,r., -... =..If ` k �£ .;7`.';'.3':": .�,-. .:;� d...x-: ,.. ,,. .n. -;.{� ,. 3'�}*1rS ' ,k�.. ..r, `�, •,�"i,. ,i srff.k. 4... ,++ .. ': .. e,.{{,766, .. ,.... f <..; ps > .:. �<:•. �.- .. ....�-. r€ <5:s T - .-.�•'i � a - v 5• .�'. X': ti y...,<.;..., -...,. �, 4-P;k. . .. 7 S f :'e ,., )...: 1�: _.. ..:..,. '@' }..{....}:' .y .-:. s-. F } :e .:7. .�Yi'iT 4,e- (!v }}. . ..:3,r•.. .ti l:',..r._ H l •:,_%,.!: ✓:,. ,.; S k..:.. 1h.Tt "\.. i: T. A, j. 1S+' ,j.i. .n3.:v�< t ,.t-.+.:. f i .,(.,5., v.{ y ::,..._;.y.1,-% � ;+.. !' 7 1 :3±'�'.;. .ry.#� .Y� •�.�,dtf s.A ,: '�rk.:1:;,L�.�L�^F��".9!T. ••.� ft'.''T"b,s'� L p.. ?ta - ,::�. €•.{t � �.. , �Y.•,} ...:v :. �: i 41. .. ": � - ;; '� l ,1:: {�:..r.3�L;ddS #�'S.C$� '�Z:R... `�`t;.:�,.,,..�srr,�.},a-?:�.ti. Y,<:..:. 2� :'v�x.:•.`F�, _ -q,.7Ps,Y_€.<zr,�'F�,�a�. :,a �.,.... _. .�.rF,.. .,.ve,�.,.,;s3#aF� .,.x ,_,,:t _ .,�:;-7� a ^ A l ' - , .. .. . , j1j ~ : I ' fes' ro • 1 l - ill . • . , , Z 0 , . , 15 , . . , „ , , 0, s 5 8LI , _ . , __ ,, AM r Bid5 ice; . , - 1 1 ) ) � ” f 2oP8®1,48 t s; .. to1,i l& - mow; _ , , y - . 'v a . £, ' as '.�.. _ , `k'' ,Y. 4 e' `'« " y .. bn. 4 rte; �' ". yx : • • • • a 4, T 0C 4 5, fiAt CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK M. (,- .Q.4,I .L,4. Certificate of Occupancy No. 20191729 Date Issued: 11/07/2019 Application No. 20150700 Building Permit No. 20151102 Owner SOUTH ALLEY LLC Address 39 MURPHY LANE Tax Map I.D. Number 165.84-1-22 This is to certify that the RES ADDITION/ALTERATION named above is in compliance with applicable codes, ordinances and approvals and is ready for occupancy as a R-3 OCCUPANCY, RENO VA TION OF BARN TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE The following items are conditions on issuance of the certificate: Basement Unfinished, Not Habitable A/C Condenser to be re-installed in rear yard, not permitted in side yard Zoning & Building Inspector 9/6/2019 Zimbra Zhnbra mike.carison©saratogia,springs.org 39 Murphy Lang From : Mike Carlson <rnike.carlsonesarotoga-springs.orp Fri, Sep 06, 2019 01:38 PM Utica ; 39 Murphy Lane 02 attachments To ;jeandagustinoehowardhanne.com Cc ; Patrick Cagan <patrick.coganap,aratogaignngs,srp, pone Mi Her cluane.millerQsaratoga-springsoorp 7pan, Here are the 4 items that we need resolved before Wo Can issue the C.0, A es 1) : e survey shows your air conditioner within the 5' side yard setback. Yu either need to ove it te the backyard and provide Lis with another survey that shows it there or you will need to go to the zoning board for a variance. 06 /Your fireplace bumpout is shown at 15,2' while the variance you received for rear yard setback is for 15.7' - you will need to modify thebumpout and provide us with another survey that shows the bumpout being 15.7' or more or you will need to get a zoning variance. Olk "Please ask your engineer to write us a stamped letter regarding if the living space above folt the carport is properly protected with the sprayfoam in the floor and vinyl soffit covering WO° it. have attached the spec sheet fOr the spray foam for your use. -he 6x6 post at the carport needs to look like the attached picture with the stone veneer. Da.v.41 d 14.04- rtittut If you have any questions please let me know, 4/like Carlson Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga 5PringS2 N (518) 587-3550 x2541 39 murphy pdf L71 spray foam,pdf 'PI' 2 MB c.rm Xcikr pod- rsis riAtrA, & 064, r;fc, 6,vatvt so u.f. c So ig,t, #4••• sr-4y „, care5,-1-- hitpeRIPPriataga4prinocgrelprirdm0400g0017504igPAFitpripaiNevOtrMhirriR1 .%• ` 111111111 • 28162282 F 12/20!2017Pa 124955 ILED PM es 22 535.00 1111111111 Saratoga County Clerk STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SARATOGA Application of ' C� p SOUTH ALLLEY, LLC, PETITIONER, _ _t o':,„ - Against - 0 STIPULATION yl and ORDER OF STEPHEN R. SHAW, as Building and Zoning SETTLEMENT Inspector for the City of Saratoga Springs,and the CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, RESPONDENTS. Index No.2016-2282 WHEREAS, Petitioner, South Alley,LLC is a Limited Liability Company formed under the laws of the State of New York; and WHEREAS, Stephen R. Shaw is the Building and Zoning Inspector for Respondent City of Saratoga Springs; and WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) is the municipal board charged with the lawful determinations of appeals of decisions from the City's Building and Zoning Inspector; and WHEREAS, Petitioner has filed a Petition/Complaint pursuant to CPLR Article 78 to review the determination of Respondent Stephen R. Shaw in issuing a Notice of Violation/Stop Work Order and the determination of Respondent ZBA which upheld the determination of the Building and Zoning Inspector; and v WHEREAS, Petitioner has also claimed in said Petition/Complaint incidental relief in the form of money damages against.Respondents pursuant to CPLR 7806; and t t WHEREAS, Petitioner is the owner of real property located at, Saratoga Springs, New York,tax map number 165.84-1-22, commonly known as 39 Murphy Lane(the lot); and WHEREAS, the lot is located in residential zone UR-3, as defined by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Springs. UR-3 is zoned for single family residences; and WHEREAS, the lot in question is currently a "legal non-conforming lot" as defined by the City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Ordinance 5.4 and 5.5; and WHEREAS, the current dimensions of the lot are 50 feet by 50 feet; and WHEREAS, Petitioner was granted area variances by resolution dated April 2, 2015. Attached hereto in Exhibit A is the resolution granting the variances; and WHEREAS, based upon those variances granted, on October 7, 2015, The City of Saratoga Springs Building Department issued Building Permit No. 20151102 to Petitioner for which the required fee of$150.00 was paid(attached hereto in Exhibit B); and WHEREAS, based upon the granting of the variances and the issuance of the building permit,Petitioner commenced construction; and WHEREAS, construction has not been completed due to Respondent Shaw issuing a Notice of Violation/Stop Work Order on or about January 21, 2016, and Notice of Violation and Stop Work Order on July 8, 2016. At no time after the issuance of the first Notice of Violation and Stop Work Order did construction ever recommence; and WHEREAS, Petitioner has disputed the issuance of the Notices of Violation and Stop Work Orders; and 2 WHEREAS, Petitioner filed an interpretation appeal of the Notices of Violation and Stop Work Orders with the ZBA; and WHEREAS, the ZBA has denied said appeal and has otherwise upheld the Notices of Violations and Stop Work Orders by written decision dated August 2, 2016 (attached hereto as Exhibit C); and WHEREAS, Petitioner has appealed said ZBA decision by filing the instant Article 78/Declaratory Judgment action; and WHEREAS, the Respondents deny the various allegations against them in the above mentioned Article 78/Declaratory Judgment action and have served an Answer to the Petitioner/Complaint with Affirmative Defenses and Objections in Point of Law; and WHEREAS, the Parties wish avoid further litigation, to amicably resolve their differences regarding the claims at issue and to settle all disputes concerning the subject matter of the claims; NOW, THEREFORE,the Parties hereby stipulate and agree and is it hereby ORDERED that: 1. This Stipulation of Settlement is entered into by the Parties for the purposes of settling and resolving the issues between the Parties in this action. 2. This Settlement represents a compromise of disputed claims, and nothing in this Stipulation of Settlement shall be construed as an admission of any fact, liability or wrongdoing by any Party hereto in connection with the transaction or occurrences that gave rise to the action. 3. The Petition,Answer,Record, and all papers filed are incorporated by reference. 3 4. The parties agree that the Petitioner is a vested owner of the lot and that the lot is a legal non-conforming lot. 5. The Notices of Violation and Stop Work Orders shall, upon the signing of this Agreement, be vacated, and Petitioner's Building Permit shall be reinstated upon the signing of this Agreement. 6. No other approvals or variances are required from the ZBA by Petitioner or which are not already granted. i 7. Petitioner shall not have to re-appear or otherwise submit any application to the Zoning Board of Appeals in order to recommence construction upon the parcel. t j 8. The variances granted and the Building Permits issued to Petitioner shall not have lapsed by reason of the issuance of the Notices of Violation/Stop Work Orders, the filing of the Interpretation Appeal, and the filing and pendency of this action and shall remain valid until construction is recommenced and completed, so long as construction is completed within one year and nine months from the date of execution of this Stipulation by the Parties and the Court. 9. Petitioner shall not be required to re-apply for, or pay a fee for, additional Building Permit(s)before construction upon the lot shall recommence. 10. Petitioner shall not be required to alter the foundation that currently exists upon the parcel. 11. Petitioner shall be allowed to install or create one front/side entrance/door into the proposed structure to which entrance shall be in the area of the car-port as depicted on the drawing(attached hereto as Exhibit D). 4 12. There shall be no front entryway/door to the structure which was previously depicted in drawings. Nor shall there be front steps,landing,railings or overhang. 13. The original front door shall be replaced with a fixed barn door type installation. 14. Petitioner shall be allowed to install asphalt singles to the roof. 15. Petitioner shall use a composite type(wood/cement board) siding on the structure which installation shall also cover the concrete foundation and be carried to within 8"of grade. 16. Petitioner shall complete construction of the structure in accordance with the drawing(Exhibit D). • A 17. Notices. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Stipulation of • j Settlement, all notices, requests and demands to or upon the respective Parties hereto shall be given by First-Class,Registered or Certified Mail,Return Receipt Requested,postage prepaid, as follows: If to PETITIONER: James A.Fauci,Eq. Attorney at Law,PLLC 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa,NY 12020 If to RESPONDENTS: Vincent J.DeLeonardis, Esq. City Attorney 474 Broadway,Room 7 Saratoga Springs,New York 12866 18. Amendments and Waivers. This Stipulation of Settlement may not be changed, waived, discharged or terminated, except by an instrument in writing signed by all of the Parties hereto. 5 19. Applicable Law. This Stipulation of Settlement and the obligations of the Parties hereunder shall be construed and interpreted under the laws of the State of New York. 20. Binding Effect. This Stipulation of Settlement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the Parties and their respective successors, assigns, members, officers, directors, agents, employees,heirs,devisees and grantees. 21. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Stipulation of Settlement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not invalidate this Stipulation of Settlement as a whole,but this Stipulation of Settlement shall be construed as though it did not contain the particular provision or provisions held to be invalid or unenforceable and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall be construed and enforced only to such extent as shall be permitted by law. Headings. The headings used herein are for convenience only and do not constitute matters to be considered in interpreting this Stipulation of Settlement. 22. Waiver of Claims and Release. The Parties hereby waive any claims, causes of action or proceedings against the other as raised in the Petition, Answer, or other pleadings filed. The Petitioner agrees to discontinue the Petition/Complaint (Index No. 2016-2282) with prejudice and with no cost. The Parties shall promptly file this Stipulation upon execution. The Parties knowingly and voluntarily agree to release and forever discharge each-other and their respective heirs, employees, servants, officers, agents, successors, assigns, insurers, administrators, and all other persons, firms, corporations, associations, or partnerships affiliated with them, of and from any and all claims, cross-claims, counter-claims, declaratory judgment claims, damages, losses, injuries, demands, rights, and causes of action of whatever kind or nature, at law or in equity, whether known or unknown, asserted or that might have been asserted in the above action. 6 23. Authorization. Each Party certifies, and the undersigned representatives of each Party certify, that they are fully authorized by the Party for whom they are signing to enter into the terms and conditions of this Stipulation of Settlement and to execute and to legally bind such Party to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation of Settlement. 24. The drafting of this Stipulation of Settlement was a joint effort by the Parties' respective counsel. As such, the language used herein shall be deemed the language chosen by the parties hereto to express their mutual intent, and no rule of strict construction shall be applied against any party. 25. Good Faith. The Parties stipulate, warrant, represent and agree that this Stipulation of Settlement has been entered into in good faith, at arm's length, without collusion, and is the product of negotiation amongst the Parties. • 26. Execution;in Counterparts. This Stipulation of Settlement may be executed for the convenience of the Parties hereto in one or more counterparts, each of which for all purposes shall be deemed to have the status of an executed original and all of which together constitute one and the same agreement. 27. Effective Date. This Stipulation of Settlement shall be effective upon the Parties' - execution of it and upon when it is so ordered by a Justice of the Supreme Court. Dated: December 18,2017 es Fauci,Esq. .. Attorney at Law PLLC Attorney for Petitioner 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa,New York 12020 (518) 885-5011 7 • Ilk Dated: December 18, 2018401‘1.1k ae•'\--Ogg e 1 D''Agos,ino, Member, So th A , LC, Petitioner 7Dated: December 18, 2017 _-----, Vincent.J. DeLeonardis, Esq. City At Onley City of Saratoga Springs Attorney for Respondents City Hall —Room 7 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 Dated: * v7 ,, Hon. Robert Jr nau.vin J.S.C. ENTERED • *,.. Craig A.Hayner3 dor,.". dAel",,, Saratoga County Clerk • 8 EXHIBIT A r j Bill Moore •Su A so) Chair 4� =. "Is' �� CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith B.Kaplan ryq �' a f � Vice Chair �' �'.} N ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Adam McNeill •r1f_.' c.2015 j. a C�,�,�,,., ;.:~ Gary Hasbrouck • CITY l-IALL-474 BROADWAY George"star Carlson SARATOGA SPRiNGS,NEW YORK 12866 C E N T E N N I A L PH)518-587-3550 FX)518-580-9480 JamSusansheer ' WINW.SAPATOGA-SPNNGS.ORG /N THE NATTER OF THE APPEAL. OF Jean D'Agostino 38 Warren St Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving a lot on the south side of Murphy Lane between Clark Street and Stratton Street, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.84-1-22, in the Inside District,on the Assessment Map of said City. I The appellant having applied for an area variance under.the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single family house on the above-referenced lot In a UR-3 District and public I notice having been duly given of a hearing on saidapplication held on the 23rd day of February and the 9th and 23nd days of March 2015. IIn consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health,safety and welfare oldie community,I move that the requested area variances for the following amounts of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED i REUEF REQUESTED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6600 SF 2500 SF •- I 4100 SF,OR 62.1% MINIMUM AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 60 FT 50FT. -" 1 (0 FT,OR 16.7% MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK 10 FT 3.1 FT - 1 6.9 Fr,OR 69% MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 25 Fr 15.7 Fr- ' 9.3 Fr,OR 37.2% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 12 FT 11.4 Fr--- 0.6 Fr,OR 5% MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL BUILDING COVERAGE 30% 46.5% _ 16.5%,OR RELATIVE REUEF OF 55% _ MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT 2 PARKING I ' PARKING' I SPACE,OR 50% SPACES SPACE As per the submitted application materials, be approved,after weighing the following considerations: 1. The Board notes the applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The board notes that there is a permitted use for this structure,that of an accessory building. However,the applicant is a contract vendee who is seeking the benefit of a principal residence;the board has evaluated this application based on that benefit. There are seven variances in question here,so the board's conclusion on the consideration of other feasible means is based on the consideration of the individual variances as follows: a, Principal building coverage:the lot size,at 2500 square feet,is such that the footprint of a house conforming to the 30%coverage requirement would be small(750 square feet Including overhangs).This can be done if the barn is removed,which may be an undesirable effect as noted by the applicant on page 66 of the application"Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the,neighborhood and community character."The applicant does not seek to do this in the proposal as submitted. b. Setback encroachments(front,rear,side). Given the rear-to-front dimensions of the property of 50 feet if fronting Murphy Lane,and the district requirements of 10 feet in front and 25 in back,conformity to both is quite difficult and would result in a very small structure. Total side setback of 12 feet could also be theoretically achieved with a smaller structure. A smaller structure obviously requires a removal of the existing barn,discussed above. It also would result in diminished utility as a single-family residence. c. Lot width and parking: Per the applicant,land is not available to purchase on either side and that a parking easement on the western side of the property has been specifically ruled out after consultation with neighbors. d. Lot size:The subject parcel is greatly undersized as a prindpal building lot;allowing it to be considered for a principal building on it cannot be done without a variance since It is held in common with the adjacent parcel.Land on the south boundary line is currently owned in common on a separate parcel,however,a potential transfer of land appears to the Board to be not feasible due to the placement of a pool on that parcel.Per the applicant,"There is no adjacent land available for purchase." i 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the barn has been in 1 . existence since 1900 and that the position of the building relative to the neighbors would result in it being less noticeable as a residence than otherwise,and that the barn and surrounding yard are visible now. The board. also notes that the renovation work would improve the outward appearance of the structure,currently in disrepair. 3. The Board considered the substantiality of the proposed variances. The number of variances sought,and the substantiality of four of these in particular,when taken with the other considerations noted in this motion, are found to be large in this case. There are seven variances that would need to be granted to enable this project to move forward,and the lot size,building coverage,parking,and front setback relief would all need to be at least 50%. The rear yard variance of 37%is found to be substantial as well. The applicant notes,and the Board agrees in this case,that these are pre-existing conditions of the lot,and are therefore not avoidable. The board lot width relief sought of 16.7%is not substantial in this case, nor is the total side variance of 5%. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical and environmental effect on the neighborhood/ district. Permeability requirements of 25%would be met. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created as the applicant wishes to designate this parcel as a principal building, however self creation by itself is not fatal to an application. 1 _ 3 Adopted by the following vote: AYES: 4(B. Moore,A. McNeill,G.Hasbrouck,S.Carlson) NAYES: 3 (K.Kaplan,J.Helicke,.S.Steer) Dated: March 23,2015 This variance shall expire 18 months following the filing date of such decision unless the necessary building permit has been issued and actual construction begun as per 40-8.5.1. 103 Date Chair I hereby certify the above to be a full,true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Saratoga.Springs on the date above mentioned,seven members of the Board being present. RECEIVED APR 022015 ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT B �A s= BUILDING PERMIT 0 .00 .r. TO CONSTRUCT .) MAJOR ALT/ADD-1&2 FAMILY • Number: � Permit 20151102 'vR �gy �etATE9 Date:October 7,2015 Permission is hereby granted to the below owner or contractor for construction in accordance to application 20150700 together with plans and specifications hereto filed and approved and in compliance with the provisions { of the Codes of City of Saratoga Springs,New York. Permit Issue Date:10/07/2015 Permit Expiration Date: 10/06/2017 LOCATION PERMIT CLASSIFICATION Sect/Block/Lot: 165.84-1-22 Permit Type: B BUILDING Street 39;.MURPHY LANE(SOUTH ALLEY) Work Type: 07 MAJOR ALT/ADD-1&2 FAMILY E Zoning District:UR3 UR3 Prop Usage: R-3 RESIDENTIAL-1 &2 FAMILY Occupy Class: R Const.Class: VB OWNER CONTRACTOR SOUTH ALLEY LLC JEFFREY L BABCOCK 38 WARREN STREET 38 WARREN ST SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 518-857-4006 518-708-0923 APPLICANT SOUTH ALLEY LLC 38 WARREN STREET SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 518-857-4006 Total Value of Worlc$125,000 Total Square Feet: 1888 Number of Dwelling Units: 1 Number of Bedrooms:3 Application Date:07/31/2015 Permit Issued By:DM Permit Fee:$383.20 I ' Scope of Work: R-3 OCCUPANCY, RENOVATION OF BARN TO HOUSE Comments/Conditions: • { i -yam, Assistant Building Ins Inspector I : EXHIBIT C • J Bill Moore Chair iftiG'A (,e��y • CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith B.Kaplan StT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Vice Chair y ;; ..r �. to Adam McNeill -91' D7 ., Secretary Cmr HALL.-474 BROADWAY "` Gary Hasbrouck "_:• SARATOGASPRINGS,NEWYORK 12866 George"Skip"Carlson PH)518-587-3550 Fx)518-580-9480 CENTENNIAL �a"'�k�ic°Ce WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG Susan Steer #2807.2 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF RECEIVED JEAN A.D'AGOSTINO/SOUTH ALLEY,LLC 38 WARREN STREET M.111 0 3 2016 SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT FROM A"NOTICE OF VIOLATION/STOP WORK ORDER"ISSUED BYTHE ZONING&BUILDING INSPECTOR BACKGROUND: In March of 2015 the Applicant applied for and received approval for seven(7)area variances"to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single-family residence"on a lot on the south side of Murphy Lane between Clark Street and Stratton Street,in the City of Saratoga Springs,New York,being Tax Parcel 165.84-1-22 in the Inside Tax District on the City's assessment map.The Applicant thereafter began the project.On January 21'of this year the Zoning'and Building Inspector issued a"Notice of Violation/Stop Work Order"(NOV) for the project,stating the"scope of work you are performing at 39 Murphy is outside the scope of your permit," The Zoning and Building Inspector'issued a supplemental NOV on July 8''providing additional details about the bases for the NOV.The NOV issued in January and the supplemental NOV issued in July have been consolidated for this appeal and are hereafter collectively referred to the"NOV". The Applicant is appealing the issuance of the NOV.Through the Applicant's attorney;Applicant submitted an interpretation request/appeal form on May 20,2016,initially requesting that the Board interpret sections 5.4.4, Extension or Expansion of Structure,and 5.5,Non Conforming Lots,of the City's Zoning Ordinance.After the Zoning and Building inspector issued the supplemental NOV on July 8th,the Applicant's attorney raised other points in support of Applicant's appeal in a subsequent letter to the Board dated July 13,2016,which this Board has treated as amending the appeal. DECISION: Whereas,Applicant's attorney has submitted an appeal form and supporting correspondence and has appeared before this Board regarding the appeal of the NOV.and Whereas,the Board opened a duly-noticed Public Hearing on this appeal on June 20,2016 which was continued to July 18d'and further continued to July 25,2016,and then closed,and Whereas,this Board has reviewed Applicant's appeal form and supporting letters from Applicant's attorney and has considered all of the facts and circumstances relating to the approval of the variances and the issuance of the NOV,and Whereas the Board has also considered the work that the Applicant has performed to date on the project, along with information provided during the Public Hearing, The Board now ands as follows: 1) The points raised in the appeal form submitted In April citing sections 5.4.4 and 5.5 of the City's Zoning Code are irrelevant to the NOV and it is therefore not necessary for the Board to Interpret those Code sections In deciding the appeal.The Board further notes that the Applicant's counsel,during the July I8"'meeting of the Board,acknowledged that,he had speculated about the bases of the NOV when he prepared the appeal form. The bases of the NOV were clarified in the supplemental NOV issued on July 8th,which makes no reference to sections 5.4.4 or 5.5 of the Zoning Code. 2) As to various points raised in the July 13"' letter from the Applicant's counsel, responding to the July 8'" supplemental NOV,the Board finds as follows: a) As to Paragraph 2 of supplemental NOV of July 8th—regarding the fact that Applicant was allowed to proceed with foundation pour on December 22, 2015, on condition that Applicant submit revised foundation plans showing that the changes were acceptable to Applicant's engineer:The required revised plans had not been submitted as of January 21,2016, the date that the Zoning and Building Inspector issued the initial NOV.The failure to promptly provide the revised plans thus supported and justified the issuance of the initial NOV on January 2I st.In fact,the revised plans were not provided to the City until May 10,2016,well after the Applicant's appeal form was submitted. b) As to Paragraph 3 of supplemental NOV of July 8th—regarding the fact that Applicant changed the foundation,which, together with a State Building Code requirement, led to fill being brought in,thus raising the elevation of the site and making it higher than neighbors'properties,thereby creating potential issues with storniwater and melt water runoff onto neighbors'properties:Applicant had already increased the elevation of the site before backfilling was allowed in order to stabilize the Foundation and prevent damage. The Board rejects Applicant's apparent suggestion that the City's allowance of backfilling somehow constituted an after-the—fact approval of Applicant's increase in the elevation of the site.The increase in the height of the renovated / converted barn will not be ;consistent with the project as • described and represented during the variance application process.This aoard relied on the application materials and Applicant's representations, including that the height of the structure would remain the same,during the variance review process.That the elevation of the site and the increase in structure height will Increase the visual impact and mass of the property relative to neighbors,detrimentally impacting the character of the neighborhood,was highly material to the Board's consideration of the variances and justifies the issuance of the NOV.The Board concludes that these changes from the project as it was submitted and represented during the variance application process constitute a significant deviation from the application for the variances and from the bases upon which the variances were approved and justified the issuance of the NOV.Furthermore,had the Applicant proposed a change in the elevation of the site during the variance application process,this Board would have required such a stormwater review at that time.The potential for damaging runoff due to the increase in the elevation of the site further and properly justified and supported the issuance of the NOV. c) As to Paragraph 4 of supplemental NOV of July 8th—regarding change in the elevation of the first floor as a result of foundation change,deviating from original structure and from plans submitted for Building Permit The Board notes that the height increase was initially going to require additional steps at the front landing,which would have required greater variances than previously approved. Subsequently,the building plans have apparently been modified to eliminate the need for additional steps and the increase in the size of the front landing. If so, this would appear to alleviate the need for greater variances for the steps. However, at this point, as noted above, the overall increase in the height of the structure would be inconsistent with the Applicant's submissions and representations during the variance application review process and upon which this Board relied to ensure the variances would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the neighborhood. Consequently, this Board finds that concern with regard to the increased elevation of the first floor justified and supported the issuance of the NOV. d) As to Paragraph 5 of supplemental NOV of July 86-regarding the fact that the variance approvals of March 23,2015 did not authorize removing or tearing down the barn,and citing major changes to the exterior and framing: Consistent with the Board's findings in subsections b and c above,the Board finds the original variance application was highly specific to "renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure".The Applicant's submissions and representations during the variance application and review process all indicated to the Board that she wanted to convert the barn into a residential structure without altering its size or exterior character or appearance as a barn. In this Board's variance approval Resolution, adopted March 23,2015,it was stated repeatedly that that the retention of the existing structure was what the applicant requested.The Board relied on the submissions and representations of the Applicant in concluding that the variances needed to convert the barn to residential use would not detrimentally impact the character of the neighborhood, where the barn had been a fixture for 115 years.The Applicant's submissions and representations were therefore central to this Board's approval of the variances requested by the Applicant. The fact that the pre-existing structure was a long-standing barn was specifically cited when the Board was considering: • Whether it was feasible to attain the desired benefits with fewer variances,or smaller amounts of relief(principal coverage and setback amounts); i • Whether the project was adversely impactful to neighborhood character;and • Whether the variances were substantial. A core principle stated repeatedly by the Board in its approval of the variances was that the renovation project would avoid demolishing the barn structure.The Board drew a dear distinction between the relief granted and the"removal"or"tearing down"of the then-existing barn structure. The Board drew a dear distinction between the relief granted and the"removal"or tearing down"of the then-existing barn. The application was specific to the?'renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure". However,in the work to date,the Applicant has removed,by any reasonable definition,all but a very small remnant of the pre-existing barn structure and is now engaged in what amounts to new construction.If the Applicant had proposed demolition and replacement of the barn with new construction when applying for the variances,the results of the Board's review of the variance criteria would have been very different as follows: • As to minimizing the relief granted,for coverage and setback variances,without the pre- existing barn setting the outer dimensions of the structure,it would have been possible for the applicant to propose a building footprint smaller than currently proposed,with fewer and smaller dimensional variances; • As to impacts on neighborhood character,the barn's presence as a fixture in the neighborhood since 1900 could no longer be cited as a factor mitigating the visibility and position of the structure relative to neighbors;and • As to the substantiality of the requested variances,the barn's existence,with all of its long- standing nonconformities,could not be cited as preexisting conditions to mitigate substantiality, if a new structure was being proposed. The Applicant's work to date in removing the vast majority of the original barn is fundamentally contrary to the submissions and representations by the Applicant during the variance application and review process and upon which this Board relied in approving the variances.We therefore find that the fundamental changes to the structure and character of the barn observed by the Zoning and Building Inspector properly justified and supported his issuance on the NOV. For all of the reasons set forth above,this Board finds that the Zoning and Building Inspector was properly justified and acted appropriately in issuing the NOV. The appeal to lift the Stop Work Order is denied and the NOV should remain in effect and no further work should be done on the project until and unless new or additional r ` Should the Applicant wish to seek new or additional variances,she may submit an application to this Board. The Board notes that such a request was made in March of this year and was subsequently withdrawn. • Adopted by the following vote: AYES: 5 (B.Moore, K.Kaplan,S.Carlson,J. Helicke,S.Steer) NAYES : 4 Dated: July 25,2016 //IRO444, : Date Chair 1 , j I hereby certify the above to be a full,true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Saratoga Springs on the date above mentioned,five members of the Board being present. EXHIBIT D - CUPOLAOPTIONAL 7 IMtMNYIYRI(INt1LL WIWIN!VIM II111fR WI fY.l nlu IVIYRI IL'1WIN Y.I AU ifp VARA iv now' 1 IY•1 rim!VIM MOM I�IllfTi1111YN 11111 1..44k faiK11 111• I nrn'aw'nLIUMEIUZILI�'aLEILI EMILI 'AIw'LKINI r U 1 r "W '�'�'eM 'ac�IIrIUr�W'1i1,111PLEMIcnUarIMzlrill' 1TTiWii WiRT1111100W{f21RIT21Wii'.Wi�TJiWW1WIt}P,iWILt 1 R IIM11 1WUl'a71Wilti7lWittalWiiTRiINtN7IIMA INWIWitIiTlM7114.1 ZI LIIIIM11ZI1LlZiWZ1 CTIIILIU11111 L7 LI La<u4WIAlruuall'MULIEN'1MCNZI LIWZIWZIWZ1fIUZiLIIIIItOZl .TITI{7Mi:t7lWiif2lWItLT1WW1 Wi1L11Wt INA71Wit1311WirlWW1Wiif7!IWiITP1W IMITtSIWit1111WIIT171W0711 iMILINN11W{tT171W1iVIWilt IMMIWdLTiLINTI 1 ZILIMIL1111:1111134111123LIIIXIMILIEZUZIMIZIEXIMILIIIIIMILIELL10 1 ECM 4111111EIREILMILELLICEMIELIIILMILEJZIEFLIZILIIZILIIE ARCHITECTURAL 1111Nikt71Wit11llWitTiW'1Ti1117ilitMINIVIRMIIWitiPiWii ILLS tL7fl IMINWIVII INFILMII IVII II IIIIIK 2ILM71WIVIIN VIIIVIIVIIMMINAFILWVILIN? SHINGLES TBD 1 1.IEa'LILIZZIUM1WZI 1a EMILE' W'LIW'IIMILIW11121LIMIL1CI IC111L70N'L1ti11LIMI ZILEIZIW'L1WIAL nURI'LIFZIZL ' nEJ1 TiWiLSTIWitT2lIMI:t711110711MIV'IMI inWfitlFIWiilailVi1i111Wil?al W4 INOVp�Wii)fWlttt111YIit17Wiitpp��Wiit.WutPIWIITFiINT/1WiIIMINTIRIWiE117ilitPiWuT 1 '13 LiII' LILIIIMTLlia1r11TLIiLIZI Z1WX1 :aWi� 7Jr1'1»TL1 111W'LIEEMI MEILIM ELI'Lir![T 1 n 1T1 W4tFirWit illw FIW�1L71Wit71W�ttFiLIKVIWit11TIWItU71 1PiW8TFf , IN IMIWIL AIII lCi ILIMMINEIV1WI TILI!MINi1tn__ tIFlWG t 1 1 I. rn�; arn�Ia'uu'r�uuaquu r�rr�nni r 'sgrn�'nuuarnri4cn��n?.!.._"rl!!'"mi�ca�; cn� r 'as�ont1 g 'inr �cmJ,MIl, i_1,RI'_..._. 48-METAL ROOFING i ALUMINUM FACIA . ■■� `8'FINISHED ROOF RAKE �■■ ' OVERHANG ALONG SiDES a� 111:4 8'FIBERCEMENT , IiX ' CORNER WARD FIBERCEMENT • ANDERSEN 400 SERIES OR W000 BARN STYLE SHUTTERS SIZED `�- - Ilium 4FIBERCEMENTBOARD TRIM iI1lI!IIiiiIIlLiiiui.iiii _--._ .__. .._. __..___..._._ t FIBERCEMENT80AROSIDING (2)28x54'CASEMENT WINDOW 10'FIBERCEMENT BOARD FRIEZE -� iM 'FIBERCEMENT TRIM1011M I„ ii -.i:::...:.:.:............FIBERCEMENT TRIM ` �. . = - HORIZONTAL SIDING � lellIN 10•STAINED 00 R WO O WHITE PAINTED FIBERCEMENT = IIMI • :. .. Effignindal BOXED COLUMN fi 2'STONE/CONCRETE CAP 10'FIBERCEMENT \ .:*H-:. {1�e' /2"POST BASEWIT'H BASEBOARD \'\ i _ �'��STONE VENEER :�� GRADEATALLEY ' / �GRADEATHOUSE •.♦.�SLOPED GRADE / GRADE AT HOUSE 8'(+F)f CARRIAGE HOUSE RESIDENCE 6,ABOVE ALLEY UNDER CARPORT 6'FOUNDATION REVEAL JJJ ABOVE ALLEY #39 MURPHY LANE GRADE AT ALLEY SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY PROPOSED •-' . .. •.. ,�Jc OI'V 1 cmc�/A TiOI V NOTE:ISNOCL DIMENSIONS WERE USED WHEN DETAILINGPER THIS PLAN. ACTUAL DIMENSIONS MAY VARY SUGHTLY PER PRODUCT. (IE.NOMINAL 10•IS TYPICALLY 9 1/4-,ETC). REV.10/17/17 SCALE:310'=i'0" DESIGN BY: • ENGINEERING AMERICA CO SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY r • r. rr 1�i77��yy��. y yy��,��LL.��4114 rv��pp p�v��y�p[�,y�p�,�,�(��[�,�y�7 y�(�f y� It n "I _____��il�l1.1�7i1____ _ 174_'1_'9,, 1PL�71' T,L 1 ail 9 '� WGiVIWI:TPttNil1TTlA�1Pfl 7YliNi7JiliAtt 1,RIWl1Pi44�1 Ji '1 t ' 1 ' 4 h ' t ' t 2 �' • a ,"1" a •4 ign { METlffWii Aft1W]Taf REEM iI1DT17W:i IFliEITAE fM is 1 a I ' t I ' '1 GN'ld[�J'Jtl[a' Ld' k'i 'h d'h/ i'Z1En174't 'lA[111Z7CN17C�1Z1I�1'LICQ)L1111!'L1tZJ.lalll�dllLll!'Z1IN 1 i i 1�i 4 `1x117 T'1Wi1 Tl I'MTi WI Ti Wiit;FllHi�TL<IYMSh7W'. Wil diW'11MWd1P11M11211h117lWi17211 MITT.IWitF1IN111/1WUT1fIW{Iti71Wi11d1WL'T,7JW17,1711ilig711Ni 7Mitt ARCHITECTURAL rEl'Z1(nZILIIIVER Ii[11LItIllia1�1'L t 11E111/ .i M!E11�IZ1UNl1rlP'LIfJIIIIL/llIfl[:QiLIEN'�it�l'Ill[!U'I1lltlLIrzumun1'L7[f'LIL i f SHINGLES 11la.+ T / y 2I ` r to �ndd t i ` a , i a �rTv ,1�+ .r 1 TaWtT Tal a 2 'h , t h t ha h0 d 11 �61.0 .d h h�tl'h t 4I, 'h� h' ��`"+"i "� N/hj�t�I1Tjl��(1rj� �'tj�(j((��7(j�j1j�•S11jjj[Jy 1 � •j��]�,�Jjp(r:fir j��J�7y1�W111i7j1(�[Wei(tJ,TSI](Wjijtjl "y11T�1Wju�Jt�(�'yi�t(NjGJ 2'Will 'Y ' 1111Ah11iFIMAlU11fIWti11I1L'fi:T d.ItlW.ltt'i1N41fPRWi111F1f+lf'T , �1iF1WlIITiW{�1i7f411i1�Ff1N{:1TiLLa1►A11Ti711A1i1 WLLtPf174+l�iflWV1i77L4�1'1�_FIB RCPLBOARD&6A77F1U � t. FIBERCEMENTSIDING t t , ' t ' h MN A t t '1 t ' 1 1 ,y�'t 2I• EgEfith1 .1 ' ALUMJNUM �� Croy h 7 t, ate W ' 'M t�� ai ' SigatirtPTt�7,4��jTa '11 ' 'a '] a f 9yOt ta Y' b. , •III S•t,,f A 74 Yi' 'l�i t Il 0,, .1 Af IS L. • , •t 1,6 t( FACIA 6•ROOF OVERHANG -- -- CORNEREMENT I ANDERSEN 400 SERIES — - 24x24'AWNING WINDOW • 4'FIBERCEMENT TRiM • ANDERSEN 400 SERIES I I 1111 1111 36x80'DH WINDOW HORIZONTAL FIBERCEMENT SIDING 10"FIBERCEMENT FRIEZE , - _ ■■ 8"FlBERCEMEnlTTRIM .............. ! 4"FIBERCEMENT TRIM ■■i ANDERSEN 400 SERIES 36x60'DHWINDOW MEr — , ■■ 10"FIBERCEMENT BASEBOARD J _ �,I( 1�•s'llil. rig QBa'r siali- lli.inoa•. , ahn 121::'0 1211:70 itl `0 --.._.-. (2)RISERS UP TO HOUSE CARRIAGE HOUSE RESIDENCE BASEMENT WINDOW T GRADE AT REAR YARD STONEPA710 #39 MURPHY LANE C. (No FouNDArlonq . SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY THISPLAN.INAL.ACTUALDIMIONS ENSiONS MAY VE USED ARY WHEN PROPOSED PRODUCT. (iE.NOMINAL 10"IS TYPICALLY 91/4:ETC) REAR ELEVA TION REV.10.1747 SCAW 3/16'=I'0' DESIGN BY. ENGINEERING AMERICA CO SARATOGA SPRINGS,NV ENGINEERING AMERICA CO . 76 WASHINGTON ST . S A R A T O G A SPRINGS , NY 1 2 8 6 6 518 / 587 - 1340 518 / 580 - 9783 ( FAX ) TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Steve Shaw,Building Inspector Tonya Yasenchak COMPANY: DATE: City of Saratoga Springs April 28,2016 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 2 PHONE NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE: YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER: #39 Murphy Ln.Foundation Saratoga Springs,NY 0 URGENT Q FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 AS REQUESTED Mr. Shaw— A modified foundation detail sketch for the structure under construction at#39 Murphy Ln.is attached. This full foundation detail is a revision to the crawl space foundation detail proposed& discussed with the building dept.September 16,2015. Please note that as Engineering America Co.was not contacted to perform any site visits or inspections during construction,the foundation installation was not observed by myself or any EACo.representative. The information depicted in the attached sketch was provided to EACo. by the contractor who installed the foundation. It is the understanding of EACo.that the foundation was inspected by the City during construction. Please feel free to contact me with any questions you have. Thank you for your time and cooperation. Sincerely, T. ya enc.� ,PE Enc. Cc: D'Agostino ENGINEERING AMERICA CO . 76 WASHINGTON ST . SARATOGA SPRINGS , NY 1 2 8 6 6 518 / 587 - 1340 518 / 580 - 9783 ( FAX ) TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Mike Carlson,Building Inspector Tonya Yasenchak COMPANY: DA'Z'E:: City of Saratoga Springs Building Dept. OCTOBER 30,2019 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 1 PFIONE.NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE: YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER: #39 Murphy Ln.—Carport Ceiling ❑ URGF.:NT Q FOR REVIEW ❑ PLIi:ASIE.COMMENT ❑ Pl..l:•:ASE REPLY ❑ AS REQUESTED Ivir. Carlson, • Engineering America Co. has recently witnessed the carport ceiling at#39 Mu phy Lane. Gypsum board has now been installed per the stamped permit plan details on the ceiling of the carport for protection of the floor joists. The gypsum board also now provides protection for the installed spray foam. The protection is consistent with the spray foam specifications provided. Please contact the EACo.office should you have any additional questions. ��� .41108 Thank you for your tim . a.gip;4)-�, , �Doeb 4. 0000000 V °/fes/' 0 )�✓)✓)✓^�:yyy '2 a / ty,/ 1! _,�j,/��.Y_.... Tonya Yasenchaka fAt •oz iE `n, OF i91 P,/ 944/2019'x. Zimbra Zimbra mike.carlson@saratoga-springs.org Fwd: 39 Murphy Lane - Need the Co From : Patrick Cogan <patrick.Cogan©sar-atoga-springs.org> Mon, Sep 23, 2019 08;17 AM Subject Fwd; 39 Murphy Lane = Need the Co To :Mike Carlson <mike.Carlson@saratoga-springs.org> Just to keep you in the loop, after discussing with Vince and Jean's lawyer, there shouldn't be any changes to the required items for CO. Thanks, Patrick Cogan Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs (518) 587-3550 x2491 From: "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga-springs.org> To: "Jim Fauci" <jim@ballstonlaw.com> Cc: "Patrick Cogan" <patrick.cogan@saratoga-springs.org>, "trish bush" <trish.bush@saratoga-springs.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2019 4:07:41 PM Subject: Re; 39 Murphy Lane - Need the CO Jim, I have conferred with our Building Inspector Patrick Cogan and reviewed the Stipulation of Settlement and Order entered into on December 20, 2017. The items identified in the e-mail below will need to be complied with in order to have the C.O. issued. Best regards, Vince Vincent J. DeLeonardis City Attorney Saratoga Springs City Attorney's Office 474 Broadway- Room 7 Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 (518) 587-3550 ext. 2414 From: "Jim Fauci" <jim@ballstonlaw.com> To: "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vince.deleonardis@saratoga-springs.orga, "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga-springs,org> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 12:30:33 PM Subject; Re: 39 Murphy Lane - Need the CO Vince - any chance you give me a call on this? My cell is: 51.8-269-1738. Thanks. On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:04 AM Jim Fauci <jim@ballstoniaw.corn> wrote: I Vince; http://m,5arotoga=springs.org/h/printrnessageid-1RO44&t RAmerika/New Yerk&xim=1 1/3 9/Z4/2019., Zimbra We are still trying to get the CO for the above. See below email - can you please give me a call back (I'm going to call you now) to discuss. Thanks. Jim F. From: "Mike Carlson" <mi((e.carlson@saratogasp,rings.org> To: "Jean D'Agostino" <jeandagost_ ino@a hoyvardhanna.com> Cc: "Patrick Cogan" < atric . oggn@saratogaasprings.org>, "Duane Miller" <duane.millerf saratogaa-sp_rings.org> Subject: 39 Murphy Lane Jean, Here are the 4 items that we need resolved before we can issue the C.O. 1) The survey shows your air conditioner within the 5' side yard setback. You either need to move it to the backyard and provide us with another survey that shows it there or you will need to go to the zoning board fqr a variance, 2) Your fireplace bumpout is shown at 15.2' while the variance you received for rear yard setback is for 15.7' - you will need to modify the bumpout and provide us with another survey that shows the bumpout being 15.7' or more or you will need to get a zoning variance. 3) Please ask your engineer to write us a stamped letter regarding if the living space above the carport is properly protected with the sprayfoam in the floor and vinyl soffit covering it. I have attached the spec sheet for the spray foam for your use. 4) The 6x6 post at the carport needs to look like the attached picture with the stone veneer. If you have any questions please let me know. -Mike Carlson { Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs, NY (518) 587-3550 x2541 James A. Fauci Attorney at Law, PLLC 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa, NY 12020 (518)885-5011 (518)885-5298 fax Confidentiality Notice: This message (including any attachments) is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer. It is intended exclusively for the named recipient. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, or are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone at.( ) 885-5011,and delete the original message(including any attachments) without making any copies. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client,work product or other applicable privilege. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=18044&tz=America/Newyork&xim=1 2/3 9/,,4/2019.; Zimbra James A. Fauci Attorney at Law, PLLC 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa, NY 12020 (518)885-5011 (518)885-5298 fax Confidentiality Notice: This message (including any attachments) is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer. It is intended exclusively for the named recipient. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, or are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone at,(518) 885-5011,and delete the original message(including any attachments)without making any copies. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client,work product or other applicable privilege. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice; This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice; This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/pnntmessage?id=18044&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 3/3 Bill Moore .06 SA* Sp Chair .TItt �' CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith B.Kaplan ;:z vke Chair y �$ �.•'' Dr- in ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Adam McNeill Gary Crrf HALL-474 BROADWAY ` SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 George Jamskip"Carlson CENTENNIAL PH)518-587-3550 Fx)518-580-9480 i��S� W W W.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG /,V THE HATER OF THEAPPEAL OF jean D'Agostino 38 Warren St Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving a lot on the south side of Murphy Lane between Clark Street and Stratton Street, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.84-1-22.in the Inside District,on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single family house on the above-referenced lot in a UR-3 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 23rd day of February and the 9th and 23"'days of March 2015. In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health,safety and welfare of the community, I move that the requested area variances for the following amounts of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6600 SF 2500 SF 4100 SF,OR 62.1% , MINIMUM AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 60 FT 50 FT— 10 FT,OR 16.7% MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK I 0 FT 3.1 FT -9 6.9 FT,OR 69% MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 25 FT "` -15.7 FT-- 9.3 FT,OR 37.2% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 12 FT 11.4 0.6 FT,OR 5% MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL BUILDING COVERAGE 30% 46.5% 16.5%,OR RELATIVE 'RELIEF OF S5% MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT 2 PARKING I PARKING' I SPACE,OR 50% SPACES SPACE As per the submitted application materials, be approved,after weighing the following considerations: 1. The Board notes the applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The board notes that there is a permitted use for this structure,that of an accessory building. However,the applicant is a contract vendee who is seeking the benefit of a prindpal residence;the board has evaluated this application based on that benefit. There are seven variances in question here,so the board's conclusion on the consideration of other feasible means is based on the consideration of the individual variances as follows: a. Principal building coverage:the lot size,at 2500 square feet,is such that the footprint of a house conforming to the 30%coverage requirement would be small(750 square feet including overhangs).This can be done if the barn is removed,which may be an undesirable effect as noted by the applicant on page 66 of the application"Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the neighborhood and community character."The applicant does not seek to do this in the proposal as submitted. b. Setback encroachments(front,rear,side). Given the rear-to-front dimensions of the property of 50 feet if fronting Murphy Lane,and the district requirements of 10 feet in front and 25 in back,conformity to both is quite difficult and would result in a very small structure. Total side setback of 12 feet could also be theoretically achieved with a smaller structure. A smaller structure obviously requires a removal of the existing barn,discussed above. It also would result in diminished utility as a single-family residence. c. Lot width and parking Per the applicant,land is not available to purchase on either side and that a parking easement on the western side of the property has been specifically ruled out after consultation with neighbors. d. Lot size:The subject parcel is greatly undersized as a principal building lot;allowing it to be considered for a principal building on it cannot be done without a variance since it is held in common with the adjacent parcel.Land on the south boundary line is currently owned in common on a separate parcel,however,a potential transfer of land appears to the Board to be not feasible due to the placement of a pool on that parcel.Per the applicant,"There is no adjacent land available for purchase." 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change In neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the barn has been in existence since 1900 and that the position of the building relative to the neighbors would result in it being less noticeable as a residence than otherwise,and that the barn and surrounding yard are visible now. The board also notes,that the renovation work would improve the outward appearance of the structure,currently in disrepair. 3. The Board considered the substantiality of the proposed variances. The number of variances sought,and the substantiality of four of these in particular,when taken with the other considerations noted In this motion, are found to be large in this case. There are seven variances that would need to be granted to enable this project to move forward,and the lot size,building coverage,parking,and front setback relief would all need to be at least 50%. The rear yard variance of 37%is found to be substantial as well: The applicant notes,and the Board agrees in this case,that these are pre-existing conditions of the lot,and are therefore not avoidable. The board lot width relief sought of 16.7%is not substantial in this case, nor is the total side variance of 5%. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical and environmental effect on the neighborhood/ ' district. Permeability requirements of 25%would be met. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created as the applicant wishes to designate this parcel as a principal building, however self creation by itself is not fatal to an application. f , R Adopted by the following vote: AYES: 4(B. Moore,A. McNeil,G. Hasbrouck,S. Carlson) NAYES: 3 (K. Kaplan,J. Helicke,S. Steer) Dated: March 23, 2015 This variance shall expire 18 months following the filing date of such decision unless the necessary building permit has been issued and actual construction begun as per 40-8.5.1. 1/05 Date Chair I hereby certify the above to be a full,true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Saratoga Springs on the date above mentioned,seven members of the Board being present. RECEIVED APR 0 2 2015 ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT Ruh inv --1--6teAe.acr • — (A11'1°11-'4.4/. /11 • )1A-) VCCK,`C.A.--1 KILQA4 • \5•\1 . I . I • 1 1.,. 1 p-- i f j { j I I i i I { . Bill Moore $ �•,6A Chair . aIt `� , CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith B.Kaplan t :fit irks Chair v, -`�` v, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Adam McNeill w1;9'15 ZOlS l7 Secretary CITYHALL-474 BROADWAYGary Hasbrouck ellck CENTENNIAL SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 George James HCarlsoe PH)518-587-3550 Fx)518-580-9480 Sri,Steer W W W.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG 0/1/ THE HAT7-EP OF TNEAPPEAL OF JBan D'Agostino 38 Warren St Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving a lot on the south side of Murphy Lane between Clark Street and Stratton Street, in the City of Saratoga Springs. New York being tax parcel number 165.84-1-22, in the Inside District,on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single family house on the above-referenced lot In a UR-3 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 23rd day of February and the 9th and 23ed days of March 2015. In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health,safety and welfare of the community, I move that the requested area variances for the following amounts of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED REUEF REQUESTED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6600 SF 2500 SF 4100 SF,OR 62.1% MINIMUM AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 60 FT 50 FT 10 F7,OR 16.7% MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK 10 FT 3.1 FT 6.9 FT,OR 69% MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 25 FT 15.7 FT 9.3 FT,OR 37.2% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 12 FT 11.4 FT 0.6 FT,OR 596 MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL BUILDING COVERAGE 30% 46.5% 16.5%,OR RELATIVE RELIEF OF 55% MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT 2 PARKING 1 PARKING I SPACE,OR 50% SPACES SPACE As per the submitted application materials, be approved,after weighing the following considerations: 1. The Board notes the applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The board notes that there is a permitted use for this structure,that of an accessory building. However,the applicant is a contract vendee who is seeking the benefit of a prindpal residence;the board has evaluated this application based on that benefit. There are seven variances in question here,so the board's conclusion on the consideration of other feasible means is based on the consideration of the individual variances as follows: a. Principal building coverage:the lot size,at 2500 square feet,is such that the footprint of a house conforming to the 30%coverage requirement would be small(750 square feet including overhangs).This can be done if the barn is removed,which may be an undesirable effect as noted by the applicant on page 66 of the application"Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the neighborhood and community character."The applicant does not seek to do this in the proposal as submitted. b. Setback encroachments(front,rear,side). Given the rear-to-front dimensions of the property of 50 feet if fronting Murphy Lane,and the district requirements of I 0 feet in front and 25 in back,conformity to both is quite difficult and would result in a very small structure. Total side setback of 12 feet could also be theoretically achieved with a smaller structure. A smaller structure obviously requires a removal of the existing barn,discussed above. It also would result in diminished utility as a single-family residence. c. Lot width and parking Per the applicant,land is not available to purchase on either side and that a parking easement on the western side of the property has been specifically ruled out after consultation with neighbors. d. Lot size:The subject parcel is greatly undersized as a principal building lot allowing it to be considered for a principal building on it cannot be done without a variance since it is held in common with the adjacent parcel.Land on the south boundary line is currently owned in common on a separate parcel,however,a potential transfer of land appears to the Board to be not feasible due to the placement of a pool on that parcel.Per the applicant,"There is no adjacent land available for purchase." 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the barn has been in existence since 1900 and that the position of the building relative to the neighbors would result in it being less noticeable as a residence than otherwise,and that the barn and surrounding yard are visible now. The board also notes that the renovation work would improve the outward appearance of the structure,currently in disrepair. 3. The Board considered the substantiality of the proposed variances. The number of variances sought,and the substantiality of four of these in particular,when taken with the other considerations noted In this motion, are found to be large in this case. There are seven variances that would need to be granted to enable this project to move forward,and the lot size,building coverage,parking,and front setback relief would all need to be at least 50%. The rear yard variance of 37%is found to be substantial as well. The applicant notes,and the Board agrees in this case,that these are pre-existing conditions of the lot,and are therefore not avoidable. The board lot width relief sought of 16.7%is not substantial in this case,nor is the total side variance of 5%. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical and environmental effect on the neighborhood/ district. Permeability requirements of 25%would be met. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created as the applicant wishes to designate this parcel as a principal building, however self creation by itself is not fatal to an application. Adopted by the following vote: AYES: 4(B.Moore,A.McNeill,G. Hasbrouck,S. Carlson) NAYES: 3 (K.Kaplan,J. Helicke,S. Steer) Dated: March 23,2015 This variance shall expire 18 months following the filing date of such decision unless the necessary building permit has been issued and actual construction begun as per . 40-8.5.1. z/�� Date Chair I hereby certify the above to be a full,true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Saratoga Springs on the date above mentioned,seven members of the Board being present. RECEIVED APR 022015 ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT A BM Moore Q°G; .s461' CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGSChair Keith B ,gyp lan qv F 0$ ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS like Chair o Adam McNeill u 045: o:zsy,, Crir HALL-474 BROADWAY Seaietary Gary Hasbrouck SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 George"Skip"Carlson CENTENNIAL PH)S18-587-3550 FX)518-580-9480 James Hacks WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG Susan Steer #2807.2 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF RECEIVED JEAN A.D'AGOSTINo/SOUTH ALLEY,LLC 38 WARREN STREET AIM 0 3 016 SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT FROM A"NOTICE OF VIOLATION/STOP WORK ORDER"ISSUED BY THE ZONING&BUILDING INSPECTOR BACKGROUND: In March of 2015 the Applicant applied for and received approval for seven(7)area variances"to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single-family residence"on a lot on the south side of Murphy Lane between Clark Sweet and Stratton Street,in the City of Saratoga Springs,New York,being Tax Parcel 165.84-1-22 in the Inside Tax District on the City's assessment map.The Applicant thereafter began the project.On January 21'of this year the Zoning and Building Inspector issued a"Notice of Violation/Stop Work Order"(NOV) for the project,stating the"scope of work you are performing at 39 Murphy is outside the scope of your permit." The Zoning and Building Inspector Issued a supplemental NOV on July 8th providing additional details about the bases for the NOV.The NOV issued in January and the supplemental NOV issued in July have been consolidated for this appeal and are hereafter collectively referred to the"NOY'. The Applicant is appealing the Issuance of the NOV.Through the Applicant's attorney,Applicant submitted an interpretation request/appeal form on May 20,2016,initially requesting that the Board interpret sections 5.4.4, Extension or Expansion of Structure,and 5.5,Non Conforming Lots,of the City's Zoning Ordinance.After the Zoning and Building Inspector Issued the supplemental NOV on July 8th,the Applicant's attorney raised other points in support of Applicant's appeal in a subsequent letter to the Board dated July 13,2016,which this Board has treated as amending the appeal. DECISION: Whereas,Applicant's attorney has submitted an appeal form and supporting correspondence and has appeared before this Board regarding the appeal of the NOV.and Whereas,the Board opened a duly-noticed Public Hearing on this appeal on June 20,2016 which was continued to July 18'"and further continued to July 25,2016,and then closed,and Whereas,this Board has reviewed Applicant's appeal form and supporting letters from Applicant's attorney and has considered all of the facts and circumstances relating to the approval of the variances and the issuance of the NOV,and Whereas the Board has also considered the work that the Applicant has performed to date on the project, along with information provided during the Public Hearing, The Board now finds as follows: • 1) The points raised in the appeal form submitted in April citing sections 5.4.4 and 5.5 of the City's Zoning Code are irrelevant to the NOV and it is therefore not necessary for the Board to interpret those Code sections In deciding the appeal.The Board further notes that the Applicant's counsel,during the July 18th meeting of the Board,acknowledged that,he had speculated about the bases of the NOV when he prepared the appeal form. The bases of the NOV were clarified in the supplemental NOV issued on July 8th,which makes no reference to sections 5.4.4 or 5.5 of the Zoning Code. 2) As to various points raised in the July I 3th letter from the Applicant's counsel, responding to the July 8th supplemental NOV,the Board finds as follows: a) As to Paragraph 2 of supplemental NOV of July 8th—regarding the fact that Applicant was allowed to proceed with foundation pour on December 22, 2015, on condition that Applicant submit revised foundation plans showing that the changes were acceptable to Applicant's engineer:The required revised plans had not been submitted as of January 21, 2016, the date that the Zoning and Building Inspector issued the initial NOV,The failure to promptly provide the revised plans thus supported and justified the issuance of the initial NOV on January 21st.In fact,the revised plans were not provided to the City until May 10,2016,well after the Applicant's appeal form was submitted. b) As to Paragraph 3 of supplemental NOV of July 8th—regarding the fact that Applicant changed the foundation,which, together with a State Building Code requirement. led to fill being brought in,thus raising the elevation of the site and making it higher than neighbors'properties,thereby creating potential issues with stormwater and melt water runoff onto neighbors'properties:Applicant had already increased the elevation of the site before backfilling was allowed in order to stabilize the foundation and prevent damage. The Board rejects Applicant's apparent suggestion that the City's allowance of backfilling somehow constituted an after-the—fact approval of Applicant's increase in the elevation of the site.The increase in the height of the renovated / converted barn will not be consistent with the project as described and represented during the variance application process.This Board relied on the application materials and Applicant's representations, including that the height of the structure would remain the same,during the variance review process.That the elevation of the site and the increase In structure height will increase the visual impact and mass of the property relative to neighbors,detrimentally impacting the character of the neighborhood, was highly material to the Board's consideration of the variances and justifies the issuance of the NOV. The Board concludes that these changes from the project as it was submitted and represented during the variance application process constitute a significant deviation from the application for the variances and from the bases upon which the variances were approved and justified the issuance of the NOV.Furthermore,had the Applicant proposed a change in the elevation of the site during the variance application process,this Board would have required such a stormwater review at that time.The potential for damaging runoff due to the increase in the elevation of the site further and properly justified and supported the issuance of the NOV. c) As to Paragraph 4 of supplemental NOV of July 8"'—regarding change in the elevation of the first floor as a result of foundation change,deviating from original structure and from plans submitted for Building Permit The Board notes that the height increase was initially going to require additional steps at the front landing,which would have required greater variances than previously approved. Subsequently,the building plans have apparently been modified to eliminate the need for additional steps and the increase in the size of the front landing. If so, this would appear to alleviate the need for greater variances for the steps. However, at this point, as noted above, the overall increase in the height of the structure would be inconsistent with the Applicant's submissions and representations during the variance application review process and upon which this Board relied to ensure the variances would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the neighborhood. Consequently, this Board finds that concern with regard to the increased elevation of the first floor justified and supported the issuance of the NOV. d) As to Paragraph 5 of supplemental NOV of July 8th-regarding the fact that the variance approvals of March 23,2015 did not authorize removing or tearing down the barn,and citing major changes to the exterior and framing: Consistent with the Board's findings in subsections b and c above,the Board finds the original variance application was highly specific to "renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure".The Applicant's submissions and representations during the variance application and review process all indicated to the Board that she wanted to convert the barn into a residential structure without altering its size or exterior character or appearance as a barn. In this Board's variance approval Resolution, adopted March 23,2015,it was stated repeatedly that that the retention of the existing structure was what the applicant requested. The Board relied on the submissions and representations of the Applicant in concluding that the variances needed to convert the barn to residential use would not detrimentally impact the character of the neighborhood, where the barn had been a fixture for 115 years. The Applicant's submissions and representations were therefore central to this Board's approval of the variances requested by the Applicant. The fact that the pre-existing structure was a long-standing barn was specifically cited when the Board was considering: • Whether it was feasible to attain the desired benefits with fewer variances,or smaller amounts of relief(principal coverage and setback amounts); • Whether the project was adversely impactful to neighborhood character;and • Whether the variances were substantial. A core principle stated repeatedly by the Board in its approval of the variances was that the renovation project would avoid demolishing the barn structure.The Board drew a dear distinction between the relief granted and the"removal"or"tearing down"of the then-existing barn structure. The Board drew a clear distinction between the relief granted and the"removal"or tearing down"of the then-existing barn. The application was specific to the"renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure". However,in the work to date,the Applicant has removed,by any reasonable definition,all but a very small remnant of the pre-existing barn structure and is now engaged in what amounts to new construction.If the Applicant had proposed demolition and replacement of the barn with new construction when applying for the variances,the results of the Board's review of the variance criteria would have been very different as follows: • As to minimizing the relief granted,for coverage and setback variances,without the pre- existing barn setting the outer dimensions of the structure,it would have been possible for the applicant to propose a building footprint smaller than currently proposed,with fewer and smaller dimensional variances; • As to impacts on neighborhood character,the barn's presence as a fixture in the neighborhood since 1900 could no longer be cited as a factor mitigating the visibility and position of the structure relative to neighbors;and • As to the substantiality of the requested variances,the barn's existence,with all of its long- standing nonconformitles,could not be cited as preexisting conditions to mitigate substantiality, if a new structure was being proposed. The Applicant's work to date in removing the vast majority of the original barn is fundamentally contrary to the submissions and representations by the Applicant during the variance application and review process and upon which this Board relied in approving the variances.We therefore find that the fundamental changes to the structure and character of the barn observed by the Zoning and Building Inspector properly justified and supported his issuance on the NOV. For all of the reasons set forth above,this Board finds that the Zoning and Building Inspector was properly justified and acted appropriately in issuing the NOV. The appeal to lift the Stop Work Order is denied and the NOV should remain in effect and no further work should be done on the project until and unless new or additional • Should the Applicant wish to seek new or additional variances,she may submit an application to this Board. The Board notes that such a request was made in March of this year and was subsequently withdrawn. Adopted by the following vote: AYES: S(B.Moore, K. Kaplan,S.Carlson.). Helicke,S.Steer) NAPES : 0 Dated: July 25,2016 43/12J11(0 Date Chair I hereby certify the above to be a full,true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Saratoga Springs on the date above mentioned,five members of the Board being present. .,,: ,,. w c ® r slyl ionCertificate .....f,,,t,,,,,„,... ® POST NEAR p��g spy, DO NOT REMOVE. PLEASE POS ■ AELECTRICAL ■ ANEL. This form must be filled out and posted to comply with building code requirements. Meets IRC requirements: 2006 IRC- N1101.2, N1101.4,N1101.8 2009 IRC- N1101.2, N1101.4,N1101.8 2012 IRC- N1101.3, N1101.7,N1101.12 The following spray polyurethane foam product(s)has/have been installed. ❑Classic 0 Classic Plus 0 ProSeal [l ProSeal Eco O ProSeal LE 0 MD-C-200 C) Other Please consult International Building Code(IBC), Chapter 26- Plastic and International Residential Code(IRC)2006 IRC R314, 2009 IRC R316, 2012 IRC R316- Foam Plastics for specific requirements.The aforementioned Icynene spray polyurethane foam insulation system(s) has/have been installed in accordance with manufacturer's processing guidelines to provide a thermal resistance of: Area Insulated Aged R-Value Thickness* Attic Area R- 1 at inches Sloped Ceilings Ceiling under plywood R- 313, ' at [ 1 inches Proseal LE Walls(location): I Carport Ceiling I R- II. at [ 1,5 j inches �_-- Proseal LE Walls(location): i Carport Ceiling R- 1. 24..._......._............... at L..............._6.................... inches Classic Plus Floors(over an unheated crawl space) R- ; at r inches Crawl Space Perimeter R- 1 at inches Basement Walls R- I i at inches Other(location): t . I R .... at ( ( inches `Nominal thicknesses are representative of*ieid,spray-applied foam material. Jobsite Address [ 39 Murphy Lane Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 Date of Insulation Installation I ¢3/28/18 Building Contractor South Alley LLC Insulation Contractor Collins&Co Insulation Contractor Phone 518-456-1297 Installed By [ Joey Makashwar Icynene Inc. 6747 Campobello Road Mississauga,Ontario L5N 2J Canada , ,,,.:,0 IcyNENE. Ph: 1.800.758.7325 • ICYNENE.COM SL-601 • Updated May 2017 The Evolution of Insulation ICC. Most Widely Accepted and Trusted .,EV EVALUATION SERVICE • ICC ES Report .ESR 1826 ICC=ES :(800) 423 6587>I (562) 699..0543 -www ice es org .... Reissued 02/2016 his report is subject to renewal 02/20181 DIVISION:07 00 00 7THER PIAL A11ND IVdOISTURE PROTECTION SECTION„07 2100 THERIMAL.INSULATION REPORT HOLDER ; ICYIfNE, INCo 6747 CAMPOBELLO RQAD MISSISSAUGA,ONTARIO LSN ZL7 CANADA EVALUAT - N'SUBJECT: ICYNENE CLASSIC, CLASSIC MAX, CLAS IC MAX SELECT AND CLASSIC PLUS F • ICC.(*,,e7Ef§44 $ alc .0..:,, ., ,, Vit.: ' 'jffl*W• : Look for the trusted marks of Conformity! �. "2014 Recipient of Prestigious Western States Seismic Policy Council li (WSSPC)Award in Excellence" A.Subsidiary of �9 wci ICC-ES Evaluation Reports are not to be construed as representing aesthetics or any other attributes not .77'',' specifically addressed, nor are they to he construed as an endorsement of the subject of the report or a ✓� ANS' . recommendation for its use. There is no warranty by ICC Evaluation Service,LLC, express or implied, as AGe. P`T£4 j: iei7�ec sroes to anyfindingor other matter in this report, or as to any product covered by the report. #4c,=° '`00,, ,_....,'.._,....n „ Copyright IP 2016 ICC Evaluation Service, LLC. All rights reserved. - „•. t. MOST Widely Accepted arid Trusted ICC-ES Evaluation Report ESR-1826 Reissued February 2016 Corrected February 2017 This report is subject to renewal February 2018. www.icc-es.orq I (800)423-6587 I (562)699-0543 A Subsidiary of the International Code Council® DIVISION:07 00 00—THERMAL AND MOISTURE 2.0 USES PROTECTION Icynene Classic, Classic Max, Classic Max Select and Section:07 21 00—Thermal Insulation Classic Plus are used to provide thermal insulation in REPORT HOLDER: buildings and to seal areas such as plumbing and conduit penetrations against air infiltration. The insulations are for ICYNENE,INC. use in wall cavities and floor assemblies; and in attic and 6747 GAMPOSELLO ROAD crawl space installations as described in Section 4.4. MISSISSAUGA,ONTARIO L5N 2L7 The Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Select CANADA insulations are for use in Type V construction under the (905)363-4040 IBC and dwellings under the IRC; fire-resistance-rated www.icvnene.com construction when installed in accordance with Section 4.5; and in Types I through IV construction when installed in EVALUATION SUBJECT: accordance with Section 4.6. ICYNENE CLASSIC, CLASSIC MAX, CLASSIC MAX The Classic Plus insulation is for use in nonfire- SELECT AND CLASSIC PLUS resistance-rated construction under the IBC and IRC and in Types I through IV construction when installed in 1.0 EVALUATION SCOPE accordance with Section 4.6. 1.1 Compliance with the following codes: The attributes of the insulations have been verified as conforming to the provisions of ICC 700-2008 Section ■ 2015,2012 and 2009 International Building Code®(IBC) 703.2.1.1.1(c) as an air impermeable insulation. Note that decisions on compliance for those areas rest with the user ■ 2015, 2012 and 2009 International Residential Code® of this report. The user is advised of the project-specific (IRC) provisions that may be contingent upon meeting specific I 2015,2012 and 2009 International Energy Conservation conditions, and the verification of those conditions is Code®(IECC) outside the scope of this report. These codes or standards often provide supplemental information as guidance. ■ 2013 Abu Dhabi International Building Code(ADIBC)t 3.0 DESCRIPTION TThe ADIBC is based on the 2009 IBC.2009 IBC code sections referenced in this report are the same sections in the ADIBC. 3.1 General: Properties evaluated: 3.1.1 Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Select: Icynene Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Select ■ Surface burning characteristics are low-density, open-cell, polyurethane foam plastic III Physical properties insulations and air barrier systems that are 100 percent water-blown with an installed nominal density of 0.5 pcf ® Thermal performance(R-values) (8 kg/m3). The insulations are two-component, spray- • Attic and crawl space installation applied products.The two components of the insulation are polymeric isocyanate (A-Component, also known as Base ■ Fire–resistance-rated construction Seal®) and proprietary resin (B-Component, Classic, • Air permeability Classic Max or Classic Max Select.Resin).When stored at temperatures between 50°F (10°C) and 100°F (38 C), the ■ Exterior walls of Types I–IV construction components have a shelf life of six months. 1.2 Evaluation to the following green standard: 3.1.2 Classic Plus: The Icynene Classic Plus foam O 2008 ICC 700 National Green BuildingStandardTM plastic insulation is two-component,low density,open cell, spray-applied, foam plastic with a nominal density of (ICC 700-2008) 0.7 pcf(11 kg/m3), The polyurethane foam is produced by Attributes verified: combining a polymeric isocyanate (A component) and proprietary resin, Classic Plus (B component). When • See Section 2.0 stored at temperatures between 50°F (10°C) and 100°F ICC-ES Evaluation Reports are nut to be construed as representing aesthetics or any other attributes nut specifically addressed,nor are they to be construed yin .- ac an endorsement of the,subjectuhjec,of the report or a recommendation for its use.There is HO warranty by ICC Evaluation Service,LLC,express or implied,as �N to any finding or other matter in this report,or as to any product covered by the report. um auiw• Copyright©2017 ICC Evaluation Service,LLC. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 7 ESR-1826 I Most Widely Accepted and Trusted Page 2 of 7 (38°C),the components have a shelf life of twelve months. be applied on the jobsite using two-component, 1-to-1 3.2 Surface Burning Characteristics: ratio,spray equipment specified by Icynene, Inc. The foam plastic must not be sprayed onto a substrate that is wet, or 3.2.1 Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Select: covered with frost or ice, loose scales, rust, oil or grease. When tested in accordance with ASTM E84/UL 723, at a The foam plastic insulation must not be used in electrical thickness of 6 inches (152 mm) and a nominal density of outlet or junction boxes or in contact with rain or water, 0.5 pcf (8 kg/m3), Icynene Classic, Classic Max and, and must be protected from the weather during and Classic Max Select have a flame spread index of 25 or less after application. Where the insulation is used as air- and a smoke-developed index of 450 or less. There is no impermeable insulation, such as in unvented attic spaces' thickness limit when installed behind a code-prescribed regulated by 2015 IBC Section 1203.3 or IRC Section 15-minute thermal barrier, except as noted in Section R806, the insulation must be installed at a minimum 4.3.1.2 and Table 2. thicknesses noted in Section 3.4. The insulation can be 3.2.2 Classic Plus: When tested in accordance with installed in one pass to the maximum thickness. Where ASTM E84/UL 723, at a thickness of 4 inches (152 mm) multiple passes are required, the cure time between and a nominal density of 0.7 pcf (11 kg/m3), lcynene passes is negligible. Classic Plus has a flame spread index of 25 or less and a 4.2.2 Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Select: smoke-developed index of 450 or less. There is no The insulation must be used in areas where the maximum thickness limit when installed behind a code-prescribed service temperature is no greater than 180°F (82°C). The 15-minute thermal barrier, except as noted in Section insulation must be applied when the temperature is at or 4.3.1.2 and Table 2. above 14°F (-10°C) and be protected from the weather 3.3 Thermal Resistance: during and after application. Icynene Classic, Classic Max, Classic Max Select and 4.2.3 Classic Plus: The insulation may be used in areas Classic Plus have thermal resistance(R-values)at a mean where the maximum service temperature is no greater than temperature of 75°F(24°C)as shown in Table 1. 180°F (82°C). The insulation must be applied when the 3.4 Air Permeability: temperature is at or above 14°F (-10°C)and be protected lcynene spray-applied foam from the weather during and after application. yplastic insulations are considered air-impermeable insulation in accordance with 4.3 Thermal Barrier: 2015 IBC Section 1203.3 and 2015 and 2012 IRC Sections 4.3.1 Classic, Classic Max, Classic Max Select and R202 and R806.5 (2009 IRC Sections R202 and R806.4), Classic Plus: at the following thicknesses: • Select 4.3.1.1 Application with a Prescriptive Thermal Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Barrier: Icynene Classic, Classic Max, Classic Max Select Minimum, 3 inches (76 mm) based on testing in and Classic Plus foam plastic insulations must be accordance with ASTM E2178. separated from the interior of the building by an approved • Classic Plus: Minimum, 2 inches (51 mm) based on thermal barrier, such as 1/2-inch (12.7 mm) gypsum testing in accordance with ASTM E2178. wallboard installed using mechanical fasteners in 3.5 Intumescent Coatings: accordance with the applicable code, or an equivalent 15-minute thermal barrier complying with the applicable 3.5.1 No Bum Plus XD: No Burn Plus XD intumescent code.When installation is within an attic or crawl space as coating is a latex-based coating supplied in 1-gallon (4L) described in Section 4.4, a thermal barrier is not required and 5-gallon (19L)pails and 55-gallon (208 L)drums. The between the foam plastic and the attic or crawl space, but coating material has a shelf life of 12 months when stored is required between the foam plastic insulation and the in factory-sealed containers at temperatures between 40°F interior of the building. There is no thickness limit when (4.4°C)and 90°F(32.2°C). installed behind a code-prescribed 15-minute thermal 3.5.2 DC 315: DC 315 intumescent coating (ESR-3702), barrier,except as noted in Section 4.3.1.2 and Table 2. manufactured by International Fireproof Technology, 4.3.1.2 Application without a Prescriptive Thermal International / Paint To Protect, is a water-based coating Barrier or Ignition Barrier: The prescriptive 15-minute supplied in 5-gallon (19L) pails and 55 gallon (208L) thermal barrier or ignition barrier may be omitted when drums. The coating material has a shelf life of 12 months installation is in accordance with the following when stored in factory-sealed containers at temperatures requirements: between 50°F(10°C)and 80°F(24°C). ® ® 4.3.1.2.1 The insulation must be covered on all surfaces 3.5.3 Fireshell® F10E: Fireshell F10E intumescent with a fire protective coating at the minimum thickness set coating, manufactured by TPR2 Corporation, is a water- forth in Table 2. based coating supplied in 5-gallon (19L) pails and 55-gallon (208L) drums. The coating material has a shelf 4.3.1.2.2 The maximum installed thickness of the life of 12 months when stored in factory-sealed containers insulation must not exceed the thicknesses set forth in at temperatures between 50°F(10°C)and 80°F(24°C). Table 2. 4.0 INSTALLATION 4.3.1.2.3 The coating must be applied over the insulation 4.1 General: in accordance with the coating manufacturer's instructions and this report. The manufacturer's published installation instructions and this report must be strictly adhered to and a copy of these 4.4 Attics and Crawl Spaces: instructions and this evaluation report must be available on 4.4.1 Classic,Classic Max and Classic Max Select: the jobsite at all times during installation. 4.4.1.1 Application with a Prescriptive Ignition Barrier: 4.2 Application: When Icynene Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max 4.2.1 General: lcynene Classic, Classic Max, Classic Select foam plastic insulations are installed within attics Max Select and Classic Plus foam plastic insulations must where entry is made only for service of utilities, an ignition • ESR-1826 1 Most Widely Accepted and Trusted Page 3 of 7 barrier must be installed in accordance with IBC Section insulation may be installed in unvented attics when the 2603.4.1.6 and IRC Sections R316.5.3 and R316.5.4, as foam plastic is applied at a minimum thickness of applicable. The ignition barrier must be consistent with the 3.5 inches (89 mm) as described in this section in requirements for the type of construction required by the accordance with 2015 IBC Section 1203.3,2015 and 2012 applicable code and must be installed in a manner so that IRC Section R806.5 or 2009 IRC Section R806.4, as the foam plastic insulation is not exposed. The Classic, applicable. Classic Max or Classic Max Select insulation may be 4.4.1.2.2 Attics-Classic Max and Classic Max Select: installed in unvented attics when the foam plastic is applied When Classic Max or Classic Max Select is applied in at a minimum thickness of 3 Inches(76 mm)in accordance unvented attics conforming to 2012 IRC Section R806.5 or with 2015 IBC Section 1203.3 or 2015 and 2012 IRC 2009 IRC Section R806.4,the insulation may be applied to Section R806.5(2009.IRC Section R806.4),as applicable. the underside of roof sheathing and/or rafters to a 4.4.1.2 Application without a Prescriptive Ignition minimum thickness of 31/2 inches (90 mm) and may be Barrier: Where Icynene Classic, Classic Max and Classic aplied to vertical wall surfaces to a minimum thickness of Max Select foam plastic insulations are installed in an attic 3/2 inches(90 mm). Maximum thickness on the underside or crawl space without a prescriptive ignition barrier, in of roof sheathing or on vertical wall surfaces is 20 inches accordance with Sections 4.4.1.2.1, 4.4.1.2.2, 4.4.1.2.3 (508 mm). The insulation may be left exposed to the attic and 4.4.1.2.4,the following conditions apply: without a prescriptive ignition barrier or an intumescent 1. Entry to the attic or crawl space is only for service of coating. utilities and no storage is permitted. The attic must have attic access complying with IRC 2. There are no interconnected attic, crawl space or Section R807, horizontally placed in the floor, and opening basement areas. outward toward the living space. Items penetrating the roof deck or walls, such as skylight wells and vents, must be 3. Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated to other covered with a minimum of 31/2 inches (90 mm) of the parts of the building. Classic Max or Classic Max Select insulation. 4. Combustion air is provided in accordance with IMC 4.4.1.2.3 Crawl Spaces: In crawl spaces, Icynene Section 701. Classic, Classic Max or Classic Max Select insulations 5. Attic ventilation is provided when required by IBC may be spray-applied to vertical walls and the underside of Section 1203.2 or IRC Section R806, except when floors, as described in this section. The thickness of the air-impermeable insulation is permitted in unvented foam plastic applied to the underside of the floors must not attics in accordance with 2015 IBC Section 1203.3 or exceed 14 inches (356 mm). The thickness of the spray 2015 and 2012 IRC Section R806.5 (2009 IRC foam plastic insulation applied to vertical wall surfaces Section R806.4),as applicable. must not exceed 31/2 inches (88.9 mm). The foam plastic does not require an ignition barrier or a coating. 6. Under-floor(crawl space)ventilation is provided when 4.4.1.2.4 Use on Attic Floors:When used on attic floors, required by 2015 IBC Section 1203.4(2012 and 2009 Icynene Classic, Classic Max or Classic Max Select foam IBC Section 1203.3) or IRC Section 8408.1, as plastic insulations be installed at a maximum applicable. p nsu ,ns ma y thickness of 111/2 inches (292 mm) between joists in attic 4.4.1.2.1 Attics-Classic, Classic Max and Classic floors.The insulation must be separated from the interior of Max Select: In attics, Icynene Classic, Classic Max and the building by an approved thermal barrier. The coating_s Classic Max Select foam plastic insulations may be spray- specified in Section 4.4.1.2.1 and the ignition barrier in applied to the underside of the roof sheathing and/or accordance with IBC Section 2603.4.1.6 and IRC Section rafters, as described in this section. The thickness of the R316.5.3, may be omitted. foam plastic applied to the underside of the roof sheathing 4.4.2 Classic Plus: must not exceed 14 inches(356 mm). The thickness of the spray foam insulation applied to vertical wall surfaces must 4.4.2.1 Application with a Prescriptive Ignition Barrier: not exceed 5.5 inches (140 mm). The insulation must be When Icynene Classic Plus is installed up to a maximum covered on all surfaces with one of the coatings described thickness of 4 inches (102 mm) within attics or crawl in Section 3.5. The coating must be applied over the spaces where entry is made only for service of utilities, an insulation in accordance with the coating manufacturer's ignition barrier must be installed in accordance with IBC instructions, ESR-3702 for the DC 315 coating and this Section 2603.4.1.6 and IRC Sections R316.5.3 and report. Surfaces to be coated must be dry, clean, and free R316.5.4, as applicable. The ignition barrier must be of dirt, loose debris and other substances that could consistent with the requirements for the type of interfere with adhesion of the coating. The coating is construction required by the applicable code and must be applied in one coat with low-pressure airless spray installed in a manner so that the foam plastic insulation is equipment. The coating must be applied to a thickness as not exposed. Icynene Classic Plus may be installed in follows: unvented attics when the foam plastic is applied at a IN No Burn Plus XD at a minimum thickness of 6 wet mils minimum thickness of 2 inches (51 mm) in accordance (0.15 mm) [4 dry mils (0.1 mm) dry film thickness], with 2015 IBC Section 1203.3,2015 and 2012 IRC Section applied at a rate of 0.4 gallon (1.5 L) per 100 square R806.5 or 2009 IRC Section R806.4,as applicable. feet(9.2 m2). 4.4.2.2 Application without a Prescriptive Ignition o DC 315 at a minimum thickness of 4 wet mils (0.1 mm) Barrier:Where Icynene Classic Plus insulation is installed [3 dry mils], applied at a rate of 0.3 gallon (1.1 L) per in accordance with Sections 4.4.3.2.1, 4.4.3.2.2, and 100 square feet(9.2 m2). 4.4.3.2.3,the following conditions apply: The coatings must be applied when ambient and 1. Entry to the attic or crawl space is to service utilities, substrate temperature is at least 60°F (16°C)and no more and no storage is permitted. than 95°F (35°C). All other surfaces(induding glass) must 2. There are no interconnected attic or crawl space be protected against damage from the coating. The areas. ESR-1826 I Most Widely Accepted and Trusted Page 4 of 7 3. Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated to other layer of 1/2-inch-thick (12.7 mm) wood fiber sound board parts of the building. installed horizontally on each face with vertical joints 4. Combustion air is provided in accordance with IMC located over the studs,attached with 6d box nails,2 inches Section 701. (51 mm) long and spaced 24 inches (610 mm) on center along the studs, and a second layer of 5/8-inch-thick 5. Attic ventilation is provided when required by IBC (15.9 mm)Type X gypsum wallboard installed vertically on Section 1203.2 or IRC Section R806, except when each face,attached with 8d box nails,21/2 inches (64 mm) air-impermeable insulation is permitted in unvented long and spaced 7 inches (178 mm) on center along the attics in accordance with 2015 IBC Section 1203.3 or studs. The stud cavity contains Icynene Classic, Classic 2015 and 2012 IRC Section R806.5 or 2009 IRC Max or Classic Max Select insulation nominally 2 inches Section R806.4,as applicable. (51 mm)thick. 6. Under-floor(crawl space)ventilation is provided when Axial loads applied to the wall assembly must be limited required by 2015 IBC Section 1203.4(2012 and 2009 to the least of the following: IBC Section 1203.3) or IRC Section R408.1, as ® 1,805 pounds(8029 N)per stud. applicable. 4.4.2.2.1 Attics: In attics, Icynene Classic Plus insulation ® Design stress of 0.78 F'c. may be spray-applied to the underside of the roof NI Design stress of 0.78 F'c at a maximum le/d of 33. sheathing and/or rafters,the underside of wood floors, and 4.5.1.2 Assembly 2 (Limited Load-bearing Wood Stud vertical surfaces, as described in this section. The Wall): Minimum nominally 2-by-4 [11/2 by 31l2 inches thickness of the foam plastic applied to the underside of (38 mil by 89 mm)] southern pine(G = 0.55), No. 2 grade the top of the space must not exceed 14 inches(356 mm). studs spaced 16 inches (406 mm) on center with two The thickness of the spray foam plastic insulation applied layers of 1/2-inch-thick (12.7 mm) Type X gypsum to vertical wall surfaces must not exceed 8 inches wallboard installed vertically with joints staggered on each (203 mm). The foam plastic insulation must be covered on face, attached with 8d box nails, 21/2 inches(64 mm)long all exposed surfaces with DC315 intumescent coating at a and spaced 7 inches (178 mm)on center along the studs minimum thickness of 4 wet mils (0.1 mm) [3 dry mils for the face layer and 6d cement coated box nails,2 inches (0.08 mm)], applied at2 a rate of 0.25 gallon (0.95 L) per (51 mm) long and spaced 24 inches (610 mm) on center 100 square feet(9.2 m2). The coating must be applied over along the studs. The stud cavity contains Icynene Classic, the Icynene Classic Plus insulation in accordance with Classic Max or Classic Max Select insulation nominally the coating manufacturer's instructions and this report. 2 inches(51 mm)thick. Surfaces to be'coated must be dry, clean, and free of dirt, loose debris and other substances that could interfere with Axial loads applied to the wall assembly must be limited adhesion of the coating.The coating is applied in one coat to the least of the following: with low-pressure airless spray equipment. ® 1,805 pounds(8029 N)per stud. The coating must be applied when ambient and ® Design stress of 0.78 Pc. substrate temperature is at least 60°F(16°C)and no more ® Desi n stress of 0.78 F'c at a maximum I�/d of 33. than 95°F (35°C).All other surfaces (including glass)must g be protected against damage from the coating. 4.5.1.3 Assembly 3 (Floor/Ceiling): Minimum nominally Icynene Classic Plus insulation may be installed in 2-by-10 [11/2 by 9 /4 inches (38 mm by 235 mm)] Douglas unvented attics when the foam plastic is applied at a fir, No.2 grade wood joists spaced 24 inches(610 mm)on minimum thickness of 2 inches (51 mm) as described in center, with minimum 1-by-3 [/4 by 2/2 inches (19.1 by this section, in accordance with 2015 IBC Section 1203.3 64 mm)] spruce bridging at mid-span. Floor decking o,2015 and 2012 IRC Section R806.5 or 2009 IRC Section must be minimum 1/2-inch-thick (12.7 mm) exterior grade R806.4,as applicable. plywood installed perpendicular to joists and fastened with 2-inch-long(51 mm)ring shank nails 6 inches(152 mm)on 4.4.2.2.2 Crawl Spaces: In crawl spaces, Icynene center at the joints and 12 inches (305 mm) on center at Classic Plus insulation may be spray-applied to vertical the intermediate joists. Plywood joints must occur over walls and the underside of floors, as described in this joists. Icynene Classic, Classic Max or Classic Max Select section. The thickness of the foam plastic applied to the insulation must be applied to the underside of the plywood underside of the floors must not exceed 14 inches deck between the joists to a depth of 5 inches (127 mm). (356 mm). The thickness of the spray foam plastic Two layers of minimum 5/8-inch-thick (15,9 mm), Type X insulation applied to vertical wall surfaces must not exceed gypsum wallboard must be attached perpendicular to the 8 inches (203 mm). The insulation must be covered with joists on the ceiling side of the assembly. The first layer DC-315 coating is described in Section 4.4.3.2.1. must be attached with 11/4-inch-long (32 mm), Type W 4.4.2.2.3 Use on Attic Floors: Icynene Classic Plus drywall screws,spaced 24 inches(610 mm)on center.The insulation may be installed at a maximum thickness of second layer must be applied perpendicular to the joists, 13 inches (330 mm) between joists in attic floors. The offset 24 inches(610 mm)from the base layer.The second insulation must be separated from the interior of the layer must be attached with 2-inch-long (51 mm), Type S drywall screws spaced 12 inches (305 mm) on center. building by an approved thermal barrier. The insulation Additional fasteners must be installed along the butt joints does not require an ignition barrier or a coating. of the second layer, securing the two layers together. 4.5 One-hour Fire-resistance-rated Assemblies: These fasteners must be 11/2-inch-long (38 mm), Type G 4.5.1 Classic,Classic Max and Classic Max Select: drywall screws placed 2 inches (51 mm) back from each end of the butt joint and spaced 12 inches (305 mm) on 4.5.1.1 Assembly 1 (Limited Load-bearing Wood Stud center. The wallboard joints on the exposed side must be Wall): Minimum nominally 2-by-4 [11/2 by 31/2 inches treated with paper tape embedded in joint compound and (38 mm by 89 mm)]southern pine(G = 0.55), No.2 grade topped with an added coat of compound, and the fastener studs spaced 16 inches (406 mm) on center with a base heads must be coated with joint compound in accordance ESR-1826 I Most Widely Accepted and Trusted Page 5 of 7 with ASTM C840 or GA-216. the code official, must be submitted at the time of 4.5.1.4 Assembly 4(Non-loadbearing Steel Stud Wall): permit application. Nominally 6-inch-deep (152.4 mm), No. 18 gage, 5.2 The insulation must be installed in accordance with galvanized steel studs spaced 16 inches (406.4 mm) on the manufacturer's published installation instructions, center, are friction-fit into No. 18 gage galvanized steel this evaluation report and the applicable code.If there floor and ceiling track with a layer of 5/8-inch-thick is a conflict between the installation instructions and (15.9 mm),Type X gypsum board applied to the interior this report,this report governs. side with the long edge parallel to steel studs and secured using No. 6, 11/4-inch-long (31.7 mm), self-drilling drywall 5.3 The insulation must be separated from the interior of screws spaced 8 inches (203 mm) on center around the the building by an approved 15-minute thermal perimeter and 12 inches (305 mm) on center in the field. barrier,except as noted in this report. The gypsum board joints must be treated with vinyl or 5.4 Since the performance of Classic Max and Classic casein, dry or premixed joint compound applied in two Max Select, when installed in unvented attics without coats to cover all exposed screw heads and gypsum board a code-prescribed ignition barrier or an intumescent butt joints, and a minimum 2-inch-wide (51 mm) paper, coating, is based on fire performance of an unvented plastic, or fiberglass tape embedded in the first layer of attic, the installation must be approved by the code compound over butt joints of the gypsum board. The stud official as conforming with the provisions of Section cavity is filled with Icynene Classic, Classic Max or Classic 4.4.1.2.2 and Conditions 1 to 5 of Section 4.4.1.2. Max Select insulation up to 6inches (152 mm) thick. 5.5 When Classic Max and Classic Max Select insulation DensGlass®Exterior Sheathing, 1/2 inch(12.7 mm)thick, is installed parallel to steel studs with vertical joints offset a is installed under Section 4.4.1.2.2 of this report, a minimum of 16 inches (406 mm)from the vertical joints of certificate must be placed in the attic stating that the the gypsum board and the horizontal joints offset a foam plastic . insulation has been installed in minimum of 24 inches (610 mm)from the horizontal joints accordance with Conditions 1 to 5 of Section 4.4.1.2 of the gypsum board. The sheathing is attached using and the terms of Section 4.4.1.2.2 of ESR-1826; any No. 6, 1 /4-inch-long (31.7 mm), self-drilling drywall screws alterations to the attic or insulation must be consistent spaced 8 inches (203 mm)on center around the perimeter with those requirements. and in the field. Hohmann & Barnard DW-10 brick ties, 5.6 The insulation must not exceed the thicknesses and 6 inches(152 mm)long by 11/2-inches (38 mm)wide, are densities noted in this report. spaced 16 inches (406.4 mm)on center vertically on each steel stud,and secured,using two 15/8-inch-long(41.3 mm) 5.7 The insulation must be protected from the weather self-drilling screws,through 4-inch (102 mm)red day brick during and after application. [31/2 inches (88.9 mm) by 21/4 inches (57.1 mm) by 5.8 The insulation must be applied by licensed dealers 73/4 inches (197 mm)] laid in a running bond pattern with and installers certified by Icynene, Inc. Type S mortar, leaving a nominally 1-inch (25.4 mm) air gap between the brick and the exterior sheathing. 5.9 Use of the insulation in areas where the probability of termite infestation is "very heavy' must be in Optional: It is permitted to add code-complying, accordance with IRC Section R318.4 or IBC Section expanded polystyrene (EPS), extruded polystyrene (XPS), 2603.8,as applicable. foil-faced, rigid polyurethane board stock or polyurethane spray foam on the exterior of the wall (between the 5.10 Jobsite certification and labeling of the insulation must DensGlass® sheathed wall and the brick), while comply with 2015 IRC Sections N1101.10.1 and maintaining the 1-inch (25.4 mm)air space. The length of N1101.10.1.1 (2012 IRC Sections N1101.12.1 and the brick ties must be increased to account for the N1101.12.1.1 or 2009 IRC Sections N1101.4 and thickness of the insulation. N1101.4.1) and 2015 and 2012 IECC Sections 4.6 Exterior Walls in Type 1,11,III and IV Construction: C303.1.1, C303.1.1.1, R303.1.1 and R303.1.1.1 (2009 IECC Sections 303.1.1 and 303.1.1.1), as 4.6.1 General:When used on exterior walls of Types I, II, applicable. III or IV construction, the assembly must comply with IBC Section 2603.5 and this section, and the Classic, Classic 5.11 A vapor retarder must be installed in accordance with Max and Classic Max Select insulations must be installed the applicable code. at a maximum thickness described in Table 3. The 5.12 Icynene Classic,Classic Max, Classic Max Select and potential heat of Icynene insulations tested in accordance Classic Plus foam plastic insulations are with NFPA 259 is as follows: manufactured in Mississauga,Ontario,Canada,under ■ Classic; Classic Max and Classic Max Select: a quality control program with inspections by ICC-ES. 494 Btu/ft2(5.6 MJ/m2)per inch of thickness 6.0 EVIDENCE SUBMITTED 4.6.2 Specific Wall Assemblies: Wall assemblies 6.1 Data in accordance with the ICC-ES Acceptance complying with Section 4.6 must be as described in Criteria for Spray-applied Foam Plastic Insulation Table 3. (AC377),dated April 2016. 5.0 CONDITIONS OF USE 6.2 Reports of tests in accordance with AC377 Appendix The Icynene Classic, Classic Max, Classic Max Select and X [Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max Select Classic Plus spray-applied polyurethane foam plastic (Section 4.4.1.2.1) and Classic Plus (Sections insulations described in this report comply with, or are 4.4.3.2.1 and 4.4.3.2.3)] and Appendix C [Classic, suitable alternatives to what is specified in, those codes Classic Max and Classic Max Select (Section listed in Section 1.0 of this report, subject to the following 4.4.1.2.3);]. conditions: 6.3 Test report on air leakage rate in accordance with 5.1 This evaluation report and the manufacturer's ASTM E2178 (Classic, Classic Max and Classic Max published installation instructions, when required by Select and Classic Plus). • ESR-1826 I Most Widely Accepted and Trusted Page 6 of 7 6.4 Reports of room corner fire testing in accordance with 7.0 IDENTIFICATION NFPA 286 (Classic, Classic Max, Classic Max Select All packages and containers of Classic, Classic Max, and Classic Plus). Classic Max Select and Classic Plus insulations must be 6.5 Test reports in accordance with ASTM E119(Classic, labeled with the Icynene, Inc., name and address; the Classic Max and Classic Max Select). product name; component designation (A or B); the flame 6.6 Test report in accordance with NFPA 285,and related spread index and the smoke-developed index; the engineering analysis (Classic, Classic Max and expiration date;the name of the inspection body(ICC-ES); Classic Max Select). and the evaluation report number(ESR-1826). 6.7 Reports of tests in accordance with NFPA 259 Intumescent coatings are identified with the (Classic,Classic Max and Classic Max Select). manufacturer's name and address,the product trade name and use instructions. 6.8 Reports of fire tests in accordance with ASTM E970 The International Fireproof Technology, Inc. / Paint To (Classic,Classic Max,Classic Max Select and Classic Protect DC 315 intumescent coating described in Section Plus). 3.5.2 is identified with the manufacturer's name, the 6.9 For Classic Max and Classic Max Select, an product trade name, use instructions and ICC-ES engineering evaluation,including full-scale fire testing, evaluation report number ESR-3702. small-scale testing and fire modeling (Section 4.4.1.2.2). TABLE 1—THERMAL RESISTANCE(R-VALUES) R-VALUE(°F•ft2.h/Btu) THICKNESS Classic,Classic Max and Classic Plus (inches) Classic Max Select 1 3.7 4.0 2 7.4 8.0 3 11 12 3.5 13 14 4 14 16 5 18 20 5.5 20 22 6 22 24 7 25 28 7.5 27 30 8 29 32 9 32 36 9.5 34 38 10 36 40 11.5 41 42 13.5 54 14 50 56 For SI: 1 inch=25.4 mm,1°F4t24h/Btu=0.176 110°K•m2M/. 1R-values are calculated based on tested K values at 1-and 3.5-inch thicknesses. 2R-values greater than 10 are rounded to the nearest whole number. ESR-1826 I Most Widely Accepted and Trusted Page 7 of 7 TABLE 2—USE OF INSULATION WITHOUT A PRESCRIPTIVE THERMAL BARRIER INSULATION TYPE MAXIMUM MAXIMUM FIRE-PROTECTIVE COATING MINIMUM APPLICATION TESTS THICKNESS(in.) THICKNESS(in.) MINIMUM THICKNESS& RATE OF FIRE- SUBMITTED (Walls&Vertical (Ceilings,Underside of Roof TYPE(Applied to all Foam PROTECTIVE COATING Surfaces) Sheathing/Rafters&Floors) Surfaces) 6 14 DC315 1.25 gal/100 ft2 NFPA 286 CLASSIC,CLASSIC 20 mils WFT/13 mils OFT MAX AND CLASSIC MAX SELECT 71/2 11'/2 Fireshell F10E 1.31 gal/100 ft2 NFPA 286 21 mils WFT/14 mils DFT 15 CLASSIC PLUS 61/2 111/2 20 mils WDFT/13 mils OFT 1.25 gal/100 ft2 NFPA 286 For SI: 1 inch=25.4 mm;1 mil=0.0254 mm;1 gallon=3.38 L;1 ft2=0.93 m2;NA=not applicable. TABLE 3—NFPA 285 COMPLYING EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLIES Wall Component Materials Base Wall System– 1–Concrete wall. Use either 1,2 or 3 2–Concrete masonry wall. 3–Minimum 35/8-inch-deep(92 mm),No.20 gage,C-shaped steel studs,spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center with lateral bracing every 4 feet(1219 mm)as required by code.Sheathing shall be a described in Exterior Sheathing below. Floorline Firestopping Minimum 4 pcf mineral wool in each stud cavity at each floorline,attached with Z-clips.Thickness must match stud cavity depth. Cavity Insulation–Use either 1,2,3,4 1–None. or 5 2–Partial cavity fill with a maximum air space of 2 inches(51 mm)or full cavity depth not exceeding 75/8 inches(194 mm)of Classic,Classic Plus,Classic Max or Classic Max Select(ESR-1826);MD-R- 210(ESR-3493);MD-C-200(ESR-3199);or Proseal(ESR-3500). 3–Any insulation qualified as noncombustible in accordance with ASTM E136. 4–Glass fiber batt insulation'. 5–Mineral fiber insulation'. Insulation must comply with the applicable requirements of 2015 or 2012 IBC Section 720.2(2009 IBC Section 719.2). Exterior Sheathing–Only for Base Wall 1-Minimum'/cinch-thick(12.7 mm),),glass mat gypsum sheathing complying with ASTM C1177. System No.3– 2–Sheathing shall be attached with No.6, 11/4-inch-long(32 mm)self-tapping screws located B Use either 1 or 2 inches(203 mm)on center along the perimeter and 12 inches 302 mm)on center in the field of wallboard.Joints must be taped and treated with joint compound in accordance with ASTM C840 or GA-216. Exterior Insulation Maximum thickness of 51/2 inches(140 mm)of Proseal Eco(MD-R-210)(ESR-3493)or Proseal (ESR-3500). Exterior Wall Covering– 1–Brick-standard nominally 4-inch-thick(102 mm)clay brick;brick veneer anchors–standard Use either 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 7 types installed a maximum of 24 inches OC vertically on each stud". 2–Stucco-minimum 3/4-inch-thick(19.1 mm),exterior cement plaster and lath with a secondary water-resistive barrier may be installed between the exterior insulation and the lath. 3–Natural stone(limestone,granite,marble,sandstone),minimum 2-inch-thick(51 mm)`. 4–Cast artificial stone,minimum 1'/2-inch-thick(38 mm),complying with AC51 and subject of a current ICC-ES evaluation report`. 5–Terracotta cladding,minimum of 1'/4–inch-thick(32 mm)'. 6–Precast concrete panels,minimum of 1'/2–inch-thick(32 mm)`. 7–Concrete masonry units(CMU),minimum of 11/2–inch-thick(38 mm)`. b.The maximum air gap between exterior insulation and cladding shall be 2 inches(51 mm). Any standard non-open-jointed installation technique such as ship-lap,etc.,may be used. c ERLEGACY REPORT Re-Issued My ,, 2 03 Business/Regional Office a 5360 Workman Mill Road,Whittier,California 90601 a(562)699-0543 !CC Evaluation Service, Inc. Regional Office a 900 Montclair Road,Suite A,Birmingham,Alabama 35213 a(205)599-9800 www.i cc-es.org Regional Office a 4051 West Flossmoor Road,Country Club Hills,Illinois 60478 a(708)799-2305 Legacy Report on the 2000 International Building Code©with 2002 Accumulative Supplement, the 2000 International Residential Code©for One-and Two-Family Dwellings with 2002 Accumulative Supplement, the BOCA®National Building Code/1999,the 1999 Standard Building Code©, the 1997 Uniform Building Coder°,and the international One and Two Family Dwelling Code©1998. ICYNENE INC. 3.2 Surface Burning Characteristics 6747 CAMPOBELLO ROAD MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO, When tested in accordance with ASTM E 84, The CANADA L5N 2L7 Icynene Insulation System©has been shown to have a 800.758.7325 flame-spread index(FSI)of less than 25 and a smoke- www.icvnene.com development index (SDI) of less than 450, when installed at a maximum thickness of 5.5 inches (140 Division 07—Thermal and Moisture Protection mm)and a nominal density of 0.5 pcf+/-10%(8 kg/m3). Section 07210—Building Insulation 1.0 SUBJECT 3.3 Thermal Resistance The Icynene Insulation System® The Icynene Insulation System® has a thermal resistance of 5.7°F.ft2.hr/Btu when tested at a thickness 2.0 PROPERTY FOR WHICH EVALUATION IS of 1.6 inches(41 mm)in accordance with ASTM C 518 SOUGHT at a mean test temperature of 75°F(24°C). 2.1 Surface Burning Characteristics 4.0 INSTALLATION 2.2 Thermal Resistance 2.3 Fire Resistance Rated Wall Assemblies, see 4.1 General Section 4.4 2.4 Attic and Crawl Space Installation,see Section The Icynene Inc. The Icynene Insulation System® 4.3 Installers Manual,Copyright©2000 and this report shall be strictly adhered to and a copy of these instructions 3.0 DESCRIPTION and this evaluation report shall be available at all times on the job site during installation. 3.1 General . The instructions within this report govern if there are any The Icynene Insulation System®is a low-density,plastic conflicts between the manufacturer's instructions and foam that has an open-cell structure. The material is a this report. two component system,spray-in-place vapor permeable product used to insulate the building envelope and air- 4.2 Application seal areas such as plumbing and wiring penetrations, rim joists areas,window frames,overhangs, porch and 4.2.1 General: The Icynene Insulation System® is garage ceilings and exterior walls. Upon completion of applied using spray equipment specified by the expansion, the open cells contain only air. The manufacturer at the construction site on chemical reaction that occurs while Icynene Insulation vertical and horizontal substrates, and the System@ is being applied takes place in seconds,with underside of horizontal surfaces to fill gaps less than five minute curing time needed. After curing, and cracks in building materials to create an the air-seal remains flexible. air seal and to provide an insulating barrier. The Icynene Insulation System®shall not be used in areas which have a maximum service 1CC-ES legacy reports are not to be construed as representing aesthetics or any other attributes not specifically addressed,nor are they to be construed as an endorsement of the subject of the report or a recommendation for its itse.There is no warranty by ICC Evaluation Service,Inc.,express or implied,as to any ASI° finding or other matter in this report,or as to any product covered by the report. S,,:" ,;v. Page 1 of 4 Copyright O 2003 Page 2 of 4 NER-420 temperature greater than 180° F(82°C).The is permitted to be installed exposed in an attic foam shall not be used in electrical outlet or or crawl space without a thermal barrier or junction boxes or in contact with rain or water. ignition barrier under the following conditions: The Icynene Insulation System® shall be protected from the weather after application. 4.3.2.1 Entry to the attic or crawl space is limited to service of utilities; 4.2.2 Maximum Thickness:The Icynene Insulation 4.3.2.2 There are no interconnected basement or attic System® shall not have a thickness areas; exceeding 5.5 inches(140 mm)and shall have 4.3.2.3 Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated a nominal density of 0.5 pcf+/-10%(8 kg/m3). to other parts of the building; A nominal thickness of 6 inches (152 mm) is 4.3.2.4 Ventilation of the attic or crawl space is permitted in attics and crawl spaces described provided in accordance with the applicable in section 4.3 below. Code. 4.3.2.5 The insulation shall be limited to a maximum 4.2.3 Licensed Dealers: The Icynene Insulation nominal thickness of 6 inches(152 mm)and is System® shall only be installed by licensed installed on the underside of the top space and dealers. Licensed Dealers have been on vertical wall surfaces and the insulation is previously certified by Icynene Inc. to install covered with FireFree 88 at an application rate the Icynene Insulation System®. The installer of 1 gallon per 100 ft2. shall provide the building official with a letter noting the installation was in accordance with 4.3.3 Assembly No. 3,Attics and Crawl Spaces: the manufacturer's instruction and this The Icynene Insulation System®is permitted evaluation report along with the date,address to be installed within attics or crawl spaces,on of installer,company's name, installer's name the underside of the top of the space and on and certification number. vertical wall surfaces with the insulation on the walls protected by an ignition barrier(see 4.3.5 4.3 Thermal Barrier below) and the insulation of the top space not covered, under the following conditions: The Icynene Insulation System® shall be separated from the interior of the building by an approved thermal 4.3.3.1 Entry to the attic or crawl space is limited to barrier of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm) gypsum wallboard or service of utilities; equivalent 15 minute thermal barrier complying with the 4.3.3.2 There are no interconnected basement or attic applicable Code, except within an attic or crawl space areas; see section 4.3.1 through 4.3.5 below: 4.3.3.3 Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated to other parts of the building; 4.3.1 Assembly No. 1, Attics and Crawl Spaces: 4.3.3.4 Ventilation of the attic or crawl space is The Icynene Insulation System® installed provided in accordance with the applicable within attics or crawl spaces on the underside Code. of the top of the space is permitted to be 4.3.3.5 The insulation shall be limited to a maximum installed exposed in an attic or crawl space nominal thickness of 6 inches(152 mm). without a thermal barrier or ignition barrier under the following conditions: 4.3.4 Assembly No. 4,Attics and Crawl Spaces: 4.3.1.1 Entry to the attic or crawl space is limited to The lcynene Insulation System®is permitted to be installed within attics or crawl spaces,on service of utilities; vertical wall surfaces with the insulation on the 4.3.1.2 There are no interconnected basement or attic walls protected by Fire Free 88,and the top of areas; the space is not insulated,under the following 4.3.1.3 Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated conditions: to other parts of the building; 4.3.1.4 Ventilation of the attic or crawl space is 4.3.4.1 Entry to the attic or crawl space is limited to provided in accordance with the applicable service of utilities; Code. 4.3.4.2 There are no interconnected basement or attic 4.3.1.5 The insulation shall be limited to a maximum areas; nominal thickness of 6 inches(152 mm)and is 4.3.4.3 Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated installed on the underside of the top of the to other parts of the building; space, roof deck and ceiling joists and floor 4.3.4.4 Ventilation of the attic or crawl space is deck and floor joists and shall not be installed provided in accordance with the applicable on vertical surfaces. Code. 4.3.4.5 The insulation shall be limited to a maximum 4.3.2 Assembly No. 2, Attics and Crawl Spaces: nominal thickness of 6 inches(152 mm)and is The Icynene Insulation System® installed covered with FireFree 88 at an application rate within attics or crawl spaces on the underside of 1 gallon per 100 ft2. of the top space and on vertical wall surfaces and the insulation is covered with FireFree 88 Page 3 of 4 NER-420 4.3.5 Assembly No. 5,Attics and Crawl Spaces: (127 mm). Two layers of minimum 5/8 inch The Icynene Insulation System® installed thick type FSW gypsum wallboard is attached within attics or crawl space where entry is perpendicular to the joists on the ceiling side made only for service of utilities an ignition of the assembly. The first layer is attached barrier consisting ofeithera 1.5-inch-thick(38 with 1-1/4 inch (31.75 mm) Type W drywall mm) mineral fiber insulation, 0.25-inch-thick screws, spaced 24 inches (609.6 mm) on (6.4 mm)wood structural panel,particle board center. The second layer is applied or hardboard, 0.375-inch-thick (9.5 mm) perpendicular to the joists, offset 24 inches gypsum wallboard, corrosion-resistant steel (609.6 mm)from the base layer. The second having a base metal thickness of 0.016-inch layer is attached with 2 inch(50.8 mm)Type S (0.4 mm) or other approved material is drywall screws spaced 12 inches(304.8 mm) installed in a manner that the foam plastic on center. Additional fasteners are installed insulation is not exposed. The protection along the butt joints of the second layer, covering shall be consistent with the securing the two layers together. The requirements for the type of construction- fasteners are 1-1/2 inch (38.1 mm) Type G required by the applicable Code. drywall screws and were placed 2 inches(50.8 mm) back from each end of the butt joint and 4.4 Fire-Resistance Rated Wall Assemblies spaced 12 inches(304.8 mm)on center. The wallboard joints on the exposed side were 4.4.1 One Hour Fire Resistance Rated Load treated with paper tape embedded in joint Bearing Wood Stud Wall Assembly: compound and topped with an added coat of Minimum 2x4 No. 2 Southern Pine(G=0.55) compound. The fastener heads were coated spaced 16 inches (406.4 mm)on center with with joint compound. a base layer of inch (12.7 mm)Wood fiber sound board on each face attached with 6d 5.0 IDENTIFICATION Box nails,2 inches(50.8 mm)long spaced 24 inches (609.6 mm) o.c. along studs, second All packages and containers of The Icynene Insulation layer of 5/8 inch (15.88 mm)Type X Gypsum System®covered by this report shall be labeled with the Wallboard on each face attached with 8d Box manufacturer's name/and or trademark, address, the nails, 2-1/2 inches (63.5 mm) long spaced 7 product name, the flames-spread index, the smoke- inches(177.8 mm)o.c.along studs. The stud development index, the shelf life expiration date, the cavity is filled with 2 inches(50.8 mm)nominal label of the quality control agency, Intertek Testing thickness of Icynene Insulation.Allowable load Services, NER-QA219 and this National Evaluation of 1,805 pounds (8122.5 N) per stud, 78% Service evaluation report number, NER-420. design. 6.0 EVIDENCE SUBMITTED 4.4.2 One Hour Fire Resistance Rated Load Bearing Wood . Stud Wall Assembly: 6.1 Manufacturer's descriptive literature, Minimum 2x4 No.2 Southern Pine(G=0.55) specifications, and installation instructions. spaced 16 inches (406.4 mm)on center with two layer of inch(12.7 mm)Type X Gypsum 6.1.1 Icynene Inc.The Icynene Insulation System® Wallboard on each face attached with 8d Box Installer Manual, Copyright©2000. nails, 2-1/2 inches (63.5 mm) long spaced 7 6.1.2 Product Specification lcynene-Pour Formula, inches (177.8 mm) o.c. along studs for face 11/2/PSB. layer and 6d Cement Coated Box Nails, 2 6.1.3 Product Specification Icynene - Spray inches 950.8 mm) long spaced 24 inches Formula, 11/2/PSA. (609.6 mm)o.c.along studs, base layer. The stud cavity is filled with 2 inches (50.8 mm) 6.2 Test reports on surface burning characteristics nominal thickness of Icynene Insulation. under ASTM E 84, Warnock Hersey Allowable load of 1,805 pounds(8122.5 N)per Professional Service Ltd., Report No. 7171, stud, 78%design. File NO.03329-50296-C7-717700,July 1988, signed by Bob Davison,C.E.T Letter report on 4.4.3 One Hour Fire Resistance Rated 5-1/2 inch thickness, February 21, 1989, Floor/Ceiling Assembly:Minimum 2x10 No.2 signed by Bob Davison, C.E.T. Douglas Fire wood joists spaced 24 inches (609.6 mm)on center, Bridging minimum 1x3 6.3 Test report on the Icynene Insulation System® Spruce. Floor decking is minimum '/a inch for SwRI Procedure 99-02, Crawl Space (12.7 mm) thick exterior grade plywood Exposure Evaluation, Omega Point installed perpendicular to joists and fastened Laboratories,Inc.,Project Nos.16600-111778, with 2 inch ring shank nails 6 inches (152.4 -111779,-111780,111781,-111861,-111862, mm)at the joints and 12 inches(304.8 mm)on August 1,2002,signed by Majid Mehrafza and center at the intermediate joists. Plywood William E. Fitch, P.E. joints shall occur over joists.Icynene Insulation is applied to the underside of the plywood deck 6.4 Engineering evaluation,Assessment of SwRI and to sides of joists to a depth of 5 inches Procedure 99-02 Test Results, Koffel ... Page 4 of 4 NER-420 Associates, Inc., KAI 02190-004, August 16, 7.3 The Icynene Insulation System® shall be 2002,signed by Eric N.Mayl,P.E.and William separated from the interior of the building by E. Koffel, P.E. an approved 15 minute thermal barrier see section 4.3 of this report. 6.5 Test report on Icynene Insulation System for determination of thermal insulating Exception: characteristics under ASTM D 518, National The Icynene Insulation System® installed in Research Council of Canada, Report No. CR attics and crawl spaces may be exposed when 5506-6, February 22, 1998. installed in accordance with Section 4.3 above. 6.6 Test reports on fire resistance rated wall 7.4 The Icynene Insulation System® shall not assemblies under ASTM E 119, Inchcape exceed the thickness and density noted in Testing Services NA, Inc., signed by R. section 4.2.2 of this report. Joseph Pearson and R. Davison: 7.5 The Icynene Insulation System®shall not be 6.6.1 One hour wall, wood studs 2x4 at 16 inches deemed to add to the structural strength of any o.c. with 1 layer of 1/2 inch sound board on wall assembly or used as a nailing base. each side and 1 layer of 5/8 inch Type X gypsum wallboard on each side, Report No. 7.6 The Icynene Insulation System®has not been 295-1358-96-01, November 11 & 12, 1996. evaluated for use as a firestopping material or through-penetration system. Fire Resistance 6.6.2 One hour wall, wood studs 2x4 at 16 inches Rated Wall and Floor/Ceiling Assemblies are o.c. with 2 layers of 1/2 inch Type X gypsum listed in Section 4.4 of this report. wallboard on each side,Report No.295-1358- 96-02, November 21 1996. 7.7 The Icynene Insulation System®is required to be protected from the weather after 6.7 Quality Assurance Program, Intertek Testing application. Services, March 05/01. 7.8 The lcynene Insulation System® shall be 6.8 Test report on fire resistance rated floor/ceiling applied by contractors certified in accordance assembly under ASTM E 119, NGC Testing with section 4.2.3 of this report. Services, Assignment K-743, Test NO. FC- 559,December 17,2001,signed by Richard A. 7.9 The lcynene Insulation System®shall not be Costolnick and Robert J. Menchetti. installed on the exterior of foundation walls or below floor slabs on ground. 7.0 CONDITIONS OF USE In jurisdictions that have adopted the Standard The ICC-ES Subcommittee for National Evaluation Building Code,the International One and Two Service finds that The Icynene Insulation System®as Family Dwelling Code and the International described in this report complies with or is a suitable Residential Code when the Icynene Insulation alternate to that specified in the 2000 International System® is installed in buildings of wood Building Code©with 2002 Accumulative Supplement, construction the insulation shall not be the 2000 International Residential Code©for One-and installed on the exterior of foundation walls or Two-Family Dwellings with 2002 Accumulative below floor slabs on ground or in contact with Supplement,the BOCA®National Building Code/1999, the ground. The Icynene Insulation System® the 1999 Standard Building Code©, the 1997 Uniform shall have a clearance above grade and Building CodeTM, and the International One and Two exposed earth of 6 inches (152 mm) or Family Dwelling Code 1998 subject to the following greater. conditions: 7.10 The Icynene Insulation System®has not been 7.1 This Evaluation Report and the installation evaluated for use with exterior walls of instructions,when required by the code official, buildings of noncombustible construction shall be submitted at the time of permit under 2603.5 International Building Code, application. 2603.6 Standard Building Code,2603.6 BOCA National Building Code and 2602.5.2.2 7.2 The Icynene Insulation System® shall be Uniform Building Code. installed in accordance with the manufacturer's published installation 7.11 This report is subject to periodic instructions, this evaluation report and the re-examination. For information on the current applicable Code. status of this report, consult the ICC-ES website. I s I y C0G.4 .5,4, BUILDING PERMIT k , ° 'r r' TO CONSTRUCT AVAI MAJOR ALT/ADD- SINGLE FAMILY � Permit Number: 20151102 'aRORATC4 Date: January 10, 2018 Permission is hereby granted to the below owner or contractor for construction in accordance to application 20150700 together with plans and specifications hereto filed and approved and in compliance with the provisions of the Codes of City of Saratoga Springs,New York. 9l7- Permit Issue Date: 10/07/2015 Permit Expiratio •ate: 08/30/2019 I3l LOCATION PERMIT CLASSIFICATION Sect/Block/Lot: 165.84-1-22 Permit Type: B BUILDING Street: 39 MURPHY LANE(SOUTH ALLEY) Work Type: B006 PERMIT EXTENSION-RESIDENTIAL Zoning District:UR-3 URBAN RESIDENTIAL-3 Prop Usage: R-3 RESIDENTIAL- 1 &2 FAMILY Occupy Class: R Const.Class: VB I I OWNER CONTRACTOR SOUTH ALLEY LLC JEFFREY L BABCOCK 38 WARREN STREET 38 WARREN ST 518-857-4006 518-708-0923 APPLICANT SOUTH ALLEY LLC 38 WARREN STREET 518-857-4006 Total Value of Work: 125000 Total Square Feet: 1888 Number of Dwelling Units: 1 Number of Bedrooms: 3 Application Date:07/31/2015 Permit Issued By: SS Scope of Work: R-3 OCCUPANCY, RENOVATION OF BARN TO HOUSE Comments/Conditions: -THIS PERMIT IS AN EXTENSION/CONTINUATION OF AN EXPIRED PERMIT AS A RESULT OF A STOP WORK ORDER. -THIS PERMIT IS A RESULT OF AN ORDER OF STIPULATION AGREED UPON BY THE OWNER AND THE CITY. -FURTHER STIPULATION DETAILS MAY BE FOUND FILED WITH THE SARATOGA COUNTY CLERK,THE SARATOGA SPRINGS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OR THE SARATOGA SPRINGS BUILDING DEPARTMENT. Zonin:,/ Building Inspector r , i • � a OG4 6.„ BUILDING PERMIT eP " TO CONSTRUCT t MAJOR ALT/ADD-1&2 FAMILY • �: ? Permit Number: 20151102 oRPO ATEO 9. Date: October 7, 2015 Permission is hereby granted to the below owner or contractor for construction in accordance to application 20150700 together with plans and specifications hereto filed and approved and in compliance with the provisions of the Codes of City of Saratoga Springs,New York. Permit Issue Date: 10/07/2015 Permit Expiration Date: 10/06/2017 LOCATION PERMIT CLASSIFICATION Sect/Block/Lot: 165.84-1-22 Permit Type: B BUILDING Street:39 MURPHY LANE(SOUTH ALLEY) Work Type: 07 MAJOR ALT/ADD-1&2 FAMILY Zoning District:UR3 UR3 Prop Usage: R-3 RESIDENTIAL- 1 &2 FAMILY Occupy Class: R Const.Class: VB OWNER CONTRACTOR SOUTH ALLEY LLC JEFFREY L BABCOCK 38 WARREN STREET 38 WARREN ST SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 518-857-4006 518-708-0923 APPLICANT SOUTH ALLEY LLC 38 WARREN STREET SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY 12866 518-857-4006 Total Value of Work: $125,000 Total Square Feet: 1888 Number of Dwelling Units: 1 Number of Bedrooms:3 Application Date: 07/31/2015 Permit Issued By:DM Permit Fee: $383.20 Scope of Work: R-3 OCCUPANCY, RENOVATION OF BARN TO HOUSE Comments/Conditions: I I ' I ! I I � I i Assistant Building Ins ector BUILDING PERMIT SUBMISSION CHECKLIST NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE❑ NEW TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE❑ NEW MULTIPLE SINGLE FAMILY(TOWNHOUSE)❑ 2 PROJECT SITE ADDRESS �! � / /IJ ZONING DISTRICT CG�2—11 CHECKLIST PREPARED BY: PREPARER'S PHONE No.: ALL ITEMS BELOW MUST BE CHECKED EITHER"YES", "NO" "or"N/A".A separate checklist, must accompany each application for a building permit. All items checked"YES"shall accompany the application form at the time of submission to the building department. Until the application is deemed complete it may be rejected by the building department and returned to the applicant. Acceptance of a permit submission as complete does not imply or guarantee that a permit will be issued. YES NO N/A 1. Building permit form completed and with required signatures from the property owner and applicant. 2. Base fee of$150.00 per unit,check made payable to Commissioner of Finance. ✓ k . 3. Water service connection fee agreement dated and signed by the property owner and by a Department of Public Works representative. 4. Window schedule(form provided by building department is required). 1/ 5. Natural light, ventilation and emergency egress calculation sheet(form provided by building department is required). V 6. Energy code compliance report, bearing the seal and signature of the N.Y.S. licensed professional engineer or registered architect. Specify compliance path: 2e56/eek, 4,01-zGy SIS 7. Energy code inspection checklist. ✓ 1 8. Property survey,with the proposed house located, in compliance with the zoning ordinance, showing all setbacks to property lines, any easements, etc(include all building projections such as decks, porches,steps, roof overhangs, chimneys, etc)The survey must show the location of all proposed silt fences and construction entrance.The silt fence and construction entrance must be installed and maintained in accordance with the NYS i ' £ Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control.The seal and signature of 1 ,, 'a the N.Y.S. licensed land surveyor is required. 9. Septic system permit application form completed and with signatures from the property owner and the contractor. 10. Septic system design certified by a N.Y.S. licensed professional engineer. Show accurate distances to all existing and proposed wells and septic systems on the subject parcel and on contiguous parcels. 11. Well completion report and well test results. 12. One complete set of building plans,each sheet bearing the seal and signature of the N.Y.S. licensed professional engineer or registered architect. The set shall include, but not be !'; limited to the following drawings: (a)foundation plan; (b)floor plans—all levels; (c)cross- / `s sections; (d)details; (e)elevations; (f)floor framing; (g)roof framing; (h)codes ✓ y specifications 13. Other: FOR STAFF USE ONLY: HISTORIC REVIEW DISTRICT YES 0 NO 0 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DISTRICT YES 0 NO Q Has the applicant been advised of the review district requirements at this time?YES NOS SUBMISSION ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW DATE TIME REVIEWED BY(SIGNATURE) REVISED 12-28-11 • APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT R„ToG/l S - A CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS g, �i' o/O o y` . is BUILDING DEPARTMENT File# Y' City Hall-474 Broadway ``6' •. g pp= • ''S '�:tSaratoga Springs,NY 12866 Application# 00/5-0700 • /,,,,, ATEO �„, Telephone (518)587-3550 Ext.2511 Fax (518)580-9480 For Office Use Only #�j9 ���/ //NE) SOL/ }{Azt Job Site � f/ Permit No. Zc i S i l0 Z Date Applied 8-3 - 15 Zoning Information Issue/deny date !0/7 /j�”55/55 Zoning District g-ea'%3 Sect-Blk-Lot ,87u -/22 Permit Type—check line that applies: Lot Width ✓d.O' Lot Area 2� 5.O sr -New No.of Bedrooms 3 lst Floor Area 7 74/SP Addition < No.of Stories Q 2°d Floor Area /�L/$g Alteration Bldg.Height 9 Basement Area Commercial—New • Yard Dimensions for Principal Building Addition Front . ,0/ Rear /5; 7' Left 5:51 Right 5 /q ' Alteration Change of Occupancy Accessory Building—Distance To Application Fee Sp,00 Principal Building 1(1/A Left lot line Fee Balance 2 33. Zeit Rear lot line Right lot line `I '� Owner gOi4Yl �L C- Applicant Shrnt el--.1 0An Address I' tv.t Address Sar` /'LA- s rk1 D-619-(19 Phone(5_1(6) 5S 9 C r �P Phone Fax Fax Email *( l Q I-I r ) 0-1Zn e . Email CID# �J 1 P P 53 CID# .._ Contractor —144W•Al i-- L 6COGV-- ' Design Professional AI y A 6 5Ei1)C/14 ,pe- Address -rVe,,_, &. Address fitief/Veele//v6A ees?1 Lam. h r x66,10 7b/r/'tsHi t�`f 4.J ST 5 7vG ,4, Ai l� /2-134 . Phone b bOQ' j`f, Phone ��� J�e 13g0 Fax Fax ,v,, Email -7 / / Email All d2/712,4 rt; eeml CID# ( ( l_lE) CID# ✓ 6`)(Vq0 poi . ,$ iso / 1 ADDRESS/LOCATION #3 g n*,i92 y mAl e Is the job site in a floodplain? /1�o Is this job site in a historic district? Ajo If so,DRC approval date Construction Costs Is this job site in a architectural district? _A/10 Basic Improvement $ If so,date of approval "— 1/ Electrical $ Does application require approval ZBA approval? APS Heating $ If so,date of approval li/21Lo/s Other $ Does application require the city planning board approval? Total Cost $ 11' j If so,date of approval (Ex: site plan,subdivision,special permit) *Please note that all applications granted approval by the Design Review Commission and/or the Zoning Board of Appeals shall expire within eighteen months unless a building permit is issued and actual construction has begun(section 240-7.12) Application is hereby made to the Building Department for the issuance of a building permit for construction as herein described,pursuant to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga Springs and in accordance with the N.Y.State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code which is applicable to new construction of buildings,and to conversions,additions and alterations to buildings.The owner and the applicant agree to comply with all applicable laws,ordinances and regulations and with all regulations and procedures as explained in this application,and will allow all inspectors to enter the premises for all required and necessary inspections. The following regulations shall apply: A. This application shall be completed and signed by the property owner and the applicant,and submitted to the Building Department. B. This application must be accompanied by: 1. Plot plan showing lot dimensions,existing and proposed buildings or structures on the lot and their distances to one another as well as to the lot lines,and all other pertinent details of the property.A copy of a legal survey is required for all new construction and may be required at the discretion of the building inspector for all projects as deemed necessary. 2. One complete set of plans and specifications for the proposed construction,each plan bearing the signature and seal of a New York State Registered architect or licensed professional engineer,(exception:projects where no structural work is necessary and expenditures are minor,in accordance with the State Education Law).For all new construction completed checklists shall be submitted(see attached). 3. Liability insurance coverage: (a) For general contractors acting in the capacity of a general contractor,$1,000,000 minimum each occurrence,with the City of Saratoga Springs named as an additional insured and as the certificate holder(see attached). (b) For homeowners,if there is no contractor participation in the project,$300,000 minimum and a maximum of$1,000.000 contingent upon the project Each application is subject to Risk and Safety review(see attached). 4. The applicant is in compliance with the mandatory coverage provisions of the Workers'Compensation Law and Disability Law (see attached). 5. Hold Harmless Agreement C. Application fee as required by the City Code and as calculated by the building department,shall be paid by check or money order (payable to"Commissioner of Finance") D. Work covered by this application shall not commence prior to permit issuance. E. Occupancy of any building or premises to which this application applies shall not occur prior to the issuance of a required Certificate of Occupancy. F. Any deviation from approved plans must be authorized by the approval of revised plans subject to the same procedure established for the examination of the original plans by the building department,including any required fees. G. Building Department shall be notified(minimum notice—24 hours in advance)according to this required schedule of inspections. (Note;before subsequent inspection requests will be scheduled,all prior inspections shall have passed). See attached card for required inspections included with building permit when issued. H. The building permit is effective for two years from the date of issuance unless a different period of time is specified. 2 SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNE' i!',�'I DATE 31 I`S � ,�► hSIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DAE f ' 2 . ADDRESS/LOCATION 3 I M(4,cpipf /'five1 SD kiey SPECIFICATIONS &MATERIALS CHART GENERAL SIZE MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS OTHER -FOOTINGS YpK e>n ziotzieerc gsv/ PsihJiN -/Wmm(z�# DRAIN going to: elilt -SLAB 3-17" egAmteere 3-00D-3 Psi -FOUNDATION WALL e" e0i/e/e_er-e. 3 000 Psi 7/1-057-w4-q, WATERPROOFING AO- VENT A1/4 -COLUMNS/PIERS /02X/au eo,obee7-6 35V0 Psi rr6)1011014) -GIRDERS/BEAMS -EXTERIOR WALL STUD 07X y/2 X& .5P #.Z/!7 iN /(a II O.C. Neld Fl •/Sf'A.) -INTERIOR WALL STUD oZXdi 5PP#2/11/if /67 ,1 O.C. -FLOOR JOIST, 1st FLOOR AM' -EY/S17st�6/ i S)SMS O.C. -FLOOR JOIST, 2"" FLOOR .2x//O �,�,ve& YPF 2 ao,4o.o. -CEILING JOIST o.c. -ROOF RAFTER - 7l°l{ SSeS ?Liu o.c. Ain? 5V,gp_ -COLLAR TIES o.c. -RIDGE BEAM �. -FLOOR SHEATHING 3/di /, A- ore/ - Ydeo v� f1 ILe® -WALL SHEATHING YZ 1' OS /,ay/, wre '_- pe/�.-.,.,.�1- whit. y gnl i`,t?, -ROOF SHEATHING 5115 t, 0..5,61/010 DV/t/Or°K- UNDERLAYMENT /J1- �D ,Aar INSULATION SIZE MATERIAL VAPOR BARRIER R-FACTOR -FOUNDATION -OUTSIDE -FOUNDATION -INSIDE c2 u ier`e'�D Tr,,977/ /L f -UNDER SLAB j -EXTERIOR WALLS r -1--& 4 Fir /A) u- ply R_/3 //2 o2/ -CEILING/ROOF /2 " F4 !�5ICL frot y t-3(3 FINISH WORK SIZE MATERIAL UNDERLAY OTHER EXTERIOR WALLS S410,i46 76 INTERIOR WALLS Vil 60)43 FLOOR Flaae- re/3 CEILING I/Z, CC gwie ��rr ROOF c25'3#7A, �J A, J1h,06L€5 MISCELLANEOUS SIZE MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS OTHER 3 61101 YR ADDRESS/LOCATION/ U tee Itt721 Azi E� HEATING SYS rEM PLUMBING-#UNITS&VENT SIZE TYPE FUEL SINKS LAVORATORIES VENT-MAl'ERIAL SIZE TOILETS TUB/SHOWER SEWER—TYPE PRIVATE DESCRIBE(DRAW ON SI ITL,PLAN) WATER SUPPLY PRIVATE CHIMNEY AND/OR FIREPLACE:MATERIAL FLUE SIZE GARAGE TYPE:ATTMEIED Vi#DETACHED A)ik UNDPNO.CARS GARAGE/DWELLING SEPARATION:DOOR TYPE 3/21 HR.FIRE RATING pec /asu re4 MATERIALS: HR.FIRE RATING PORCH:FOOTING Io k u QTe2 FOUNDATION rozramlic ltd I Tl+ 2 642-- PLEASE PROVIDE A BREIF DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE SCOPE OF WORK IS TO BE DONE: T xledrieti 'F erisii/0‘ 13g/i Velif e elif6e -41,42 -lb 5 i e FAmic yR6-1.0tA//e n/ (3)&40er IJ hA)D (OMR_ e pgr-. 4 1 ADDRESS/LOCATION 39 ga.fiiir `4iVe, Splay/fib/. **LOCATE MAIN BLDG,ACCESSORY BLDGS,AND ANY ADDIITIIONS,GIVING ALL PERTINENT YARD DIMENSIONS 14 REAR LOT LINE 50 ft. ► REAR YARD 15. i ft. (7a 7._e4e.Dv@Qim-146 of Hp use) • LEFT YARD RIGHT YARD *ACCESSO 41 ft. BU ING ft. otPc LEFT I RIGHT LOT LOT LINE v LINE 50' ft. DISTANCE SEPARATION A)//I- t(LJ 50 ft. (eøviQdi • LEFT YARD * MAINRIGHT YARD t 5,5 ft. —� BUILDING 4 5,9 ft. I FRONT YARD a Oi ft. 1 FRONT LOT 5LINE ti ft. ► RX DatelTime 05103/2016 14:29 +8855298 P.003 05/03/2016 1:33 PM FAX +8855298 LAW OFFICE GA 0003/0003 f5Y MURPHY LN r GRADE _ , 11 11=11r-111 II II. 11I'-IL, I,I,J— BACKFILL �.1 II Il 11 11 114_,-= 5 VERTICAL REBAR-12"oc(MIN) —1p.1111. 111 111. .. 11 11m1 • 'Itw-1111=-11= ilei�l--118 ASPHALT SEALER 14frail• Ili 8"POURED WALL BELOW GRADE ?11 11"''fl 111- IIg11 II h�I1.11 Ih 'I:0,=.6::.-411,- , 11 111', 1 11�11� #4 REBAR 48-72'oc II ILRMI1 I: GRAVEL --t4"CONCRETE SLAB ,,._tiMi't. MIN 2500 PSI CONCRETE 4"PVC FOOTER DRAIN VAPOR RETARDER(4-6 MIL POLY) IS REQUIRED BETWEEN CONCRETE AND SUBGRADE WITH JOINTS 16x8"FOOTER OVERLAPPED MIN 6" (2)#4 REBAR 2500 MIN PSI • Foundation Detail N.T.S. CARRIAGE HOUSE RESIDENCE #29 MURPHY LANE SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY DESIGN BY: ENGINEERING AMERICA CO SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY NOTE: THIS DETAIL DEPICTS A FOUNDATION SECTION WHICH INCLUDES THE VERTICAL REBAR SIZE&SPACING NOTED BY THE CONTRACTOR TO HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. EACO. &TONYA YASENCHAK,PE WAS NOT RETAINED OR CONTACTED TO OBSERVE THE FOUNDATION INSTALLATION. THIS FOUNDATION DETAIL MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM CODE REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE RESIDENTIAL CODE OF NYS. • • 6.A ,p N City of Saratoga Springs STEPHEN SHAW Zoning&Building Inspector BUILDING DEPARTMENT Extension 2491 CITY HALL 474 BroadwayDUANE MILLER CENTENNIAL Assistant Building Inspector Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 Extension 2512 MICHAEL CARLSON • BUILDING & PLUMBING Telephone (518)587-3550 Ext.2511 Assistant Building Inspector • CODES Fax(518)580-9480 Extension 2541 • ZONING www.saratoga-springs.org JOHN BARNEY Assistant Zoning Technician Extension 2521 NOTICE OF VIOLATION / STOP WORK ORDER January 21, 2016 Jeanne D'Agostino South Alley LLC 38 Warren Street Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 RE: 39 Murphy Lane, Parcel# 165.84-1-22 Dear Ms. D'Agostino, The scope of work you are performing at 39 Murphy is outside the scope of your permit. You are hereby ordered to CEASE AND DESIST all activities at the property. A full set of revised plans from your engineer as well as sign off from the Zoning Board of Appeals will be required to proceed. Sincerely, 4-el� / P. Ste', en R. Shaw 'ining and Building Inspector SRS/kgf (no subject) - kfarone@gmail.com- Gmail Page 1 of 1 r R i - a f Idit r p .4.* if ._ .��v , 4- + r �1' ©pen with �. .04 I e c\s, (� / J Jim' r,r .,/ ,_ " -kl ' i .: '0' ,mo—pf4. '" . a �A! Y4eeMr �` 9 !r 4 r u 4 F 1 In ,,,?- j ire 4... .17)- ..4 4,,,,,, :It . _ -_-_. T v , . , . .. , , ,_ H •' r - .. .. .!x"'.".+":. „ ' *'' .`-alk` `"` M. , � Pf vr"; ' w> v^ ,e ,,*{ TM a �. F? + 1. t ' \44t I * .1. ",, ;1- tt., , 4.. St . , N. 1fi 1.. N . tl NI M �" , .r r .'1.,.. yam.'; `'e,.� 1.::.„1,.. . :-. w� "yam '` " < c r' f x �q E Y A*t= a s Ate` „J.,,,,, " ' P' k ' \ � ' * - /* '...r a t a " i.L° ' <.. ', .it a;r # *t''' ' . _ ' iiimio',:ist: t o r . \ f � rs :lea•,,, 5 0.. ,. ' ''' i+ to i' iti . . .-� �«fir`,t5.7;43-1'.&1.,4 ;or is 31.,,� -.1" x`‘4.‘"..* a P J.'' , -4-*..,..I r",4- .-.4.._ it, .ate ,:yil 31 `. _ '�^ 're"' "n "14'1'11L \ .�- - � .,,,,,,...1.-„... . —..,,,...- .., �'� %. �. �x".Ff��y3. "`"' '•�g � 4 � {�i�� f:S'.►1.=Y1F`*.:• ��4�.} €�_ � �". aµ ' �.es"- ♦ rr��.,.,t, ~'}p,..1,-,"^x + y i' ra "r.sCk.,.J r �a.fi" 4••-_,,,'7',„ f. ♦ .3,„ 7. .—, ` s a .stir '40.1*ate. {a *.s.¢`m -O" 's, y ; _ •� s .^r...'�'r'x.« - r,4-'. ....... - °♦� ;"*C' ♦ 'I a� .�,fr•! :� "�`,,.. � ..yw '. �+ „ 3 • r - •' . Vit; - rn ,'i ...'.'''''7.-....j.:-..---;,,,,,Z; Sia . fix'J' 's-'''''., a�-1 r� �-,. i :+i K.+mak' `3 r., ��� ,."t•.:_ t 4 !"#a a � https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm 1/21/2016 (no subject) - kfarone@gmail.com- Gmail Page 1 of 1 01311611?3a Mpg Open with CQ i In r -li ®i 1 r S• D — Ci H IM N -- P R �„ Si " M , *co:''''''' r fix\si ,.: >t, • ,....'\ \v 1 \\' . ' irtNif , ,. 1 it, A A a: awl a 10170.0000.11111"-- .,, 00 1 .'Yid! a � 4. ll' .. ' K , '''''' , *00' 7 4 t ' . 0 , ' ' .0i. i___., , .. ..- R 4 �`. 1 _ ^fid .., . ' '', ,N i - ' t t :',/„. 1 ' ,4 ' , — https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm 1/21/2016 Page 1 of 1 1��I., l'I,,t4 4c41,. M taff I,' .ems .„ .,,44`, �',�`'i ,, ,,,,41.1.4,Y.,,o—fitimet,c,:.'',- ,i'..,t .> ,,,. °.i''. '.1.1V..‘,,,,,%iik,04.41.1. 16111, ie,,A i.1.; Ikk .4,, 1k84 TT it /�A i • ., '''''''')....'-'.s.' yA I �. 4., f.„,i..-#4/, ir-,041i..-,.. — — : . ,, \A ,if jokilliorzi. ..- --- 1„..,,,Vi4) '''• -- (st, fel ;' � � tai, ;.h: w 1 .r, k, .i *. .' , ./.14...vg.,,-.0.01hit). i. A.1 A ,,, i 7, y .16 ,EX; iry., i+(jy ��1 `S'la`-te + iiiz, '' i 4 �i�� A ''i ,,.: ...,.,404- Arist„,,,'.*: '._ : '* . X. ,,,,0„,....,,,,..i...... jfeu► +q , --1.14,...• di,,c, ',,,,, t'—',0!‘ft 4 ,..q. ,, „..„-,,..,„,‘,., ,. ...,,,,,.....„4-46 +74/e4 I I. l' t ' , i _, ,,,,,f,,, .„„ .. , i , , ,..,„. ..„..,,,,.,.....„ , . ,, , ,,,.._.. T.,..,,,.. , ,..... .N f't 1 i '‘ �M ..�R �� �S£ �� t 4 �R,�yx .�a}N I li � 7 � ' �` w ` - \ 4. 1 ,,... !.;of 1Y41,4...,40.'1 , ,d, =l °l° ` l ( #r5 spa" y.°1 , •# `dy n l.,,,,,4" y " i' '; :f- g21:02.4 Y r. 4 ?. a. r .r. a ., 1 w1°i,° i file:///C:/Users/u152/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20lnternet%20Files/Low/Content.IE5/PSOEGOSF/G2PY... 1/21/2016 Page 1 of 1 [--- _ ----''''‘' ____ ., .• . r,ir.• "ez .1,c,.,*""”C I / ,;it.:A z( if * `i 7- .2.:, ..... ........-- , ..... ,,,,. ...„,,,, ,,,. ,, r .. .., ...„.„„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ii-24*". -,,,,,, _ _ ', " it , _ ... I •�� ,.. "\\\NNS ° � .k." Q4." w„..,„k 5� ...a {(yf S� as�p i. 1,--. .. Lrin .'..--, /e jet \\...\\\\ ‘.... Nzr.*,,,....' } A »c. _ r -� + 4 , bbd,,},, s.r^`t a. . 4. .---4 _r x '-. _ • .. _! .7q1.1.`rte e j` T�^�,.'t_ ,,, '" i -',...',e,, N.,.\ \\ , -i, ',1 r..._ J"_+�+�.rkF.�,J�w_ !: I (d id /1„e3.-- \ ,i-- x' `1. �.�"3• s' - j_4"--, "- = , ♦ •;hill k � t rte i,,.,. 3 f� ,' \\ \ffJ r file:///C:/Users/u 152/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20lnternet%20Files/Low/Content.IE5/DOV WODK8/PD5... 1/21/2016 Page 1 of 1 • % '• Irt r'tl :, 'rte �,., _ .r �}+, _ a L,,';',' ., ,....,, c 1 4 / ....- J1 rr�d .ii i •. ..� - »..rtR..,... '! '� :.t«,,..fir .::. `-�1 ,, {'.'•.•�.J e is S 4 k );. er -ra .4 ''"^ I 7� r "'� J „ • ,�. iti „,,,,c• tt e .ff / (.. ,,,_ p 4.4 s ! , r �l P te.. ll, P....--- •-• .— '7-:,,,,6'' .' iy p� ' ” v ..._...,:.0030 . �r fir �. -�, _ �. ---., t -------. c • '� .., -- r il 1 fir? 14i4—,*' * ..? \' s F ■` .t "i1 m ,;;. arra s + 3' 'lir r" r N. 'l'.' y, "d= 17.. .&a,+ `� 4 ._ ,: , _ ...... . .., . ,,,, .f _ .,3t '' ' 'ahi a, a , ,,,. , et r x 'N, 1,t i0 ` 'a , 4 "r .4 ' 5N tz,f `/a',_ .Y ..44-': t ..* +`t =sx ,y „,„,,,f,,i,a,,..I, ,.., .,.,,,. r., tll ifie,„":,:!-- to y 1 ♦ " 1 �• r, file:///C:/Users/u 152/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20lnternet%20Files/Low/Content.IE5/X7SM2CMU/OT4... 1/21/2016 (no subject) - kfarone@gmail.com - Gmail Page 1 of 1 % . ,- , te ,, ...._ f, ;Y , ' s'• ,N,`4,. -,,,pi,,14 , P. L• • © 41i4.11-(--l'.ik: t"',°'N'ki? ;. *4i,i * • ,,,0 1. ,. ,. .. on with 4.:. At...,,‘..zstirt,;•';',*%,‘eif:it'; ..-:'''i ' -ii/irt .' 1/4*11. -' Y A•gt4i1Y? __. c ; s ..,A A i t 471111 i:Kil*-1 Arli;;;., ‘\ 4t ; t Ailho• 1111, . AP 1,;c$4111 4.-°-;)," Alb,.-el• ik •''' • ' •;j7,,4-„•`42 i iii .i.-11$94 /i0.4,0(.4 r_e-, '''.•''''c ''' ' - ' % -'" •.. 110, • i.1 Ay \it ye, • .%0 44' • _ '••••• 41 ../p •'...'t ''" .41 i 1,4 e, pt. - -, . . . IC ' ' ,, 1:-.1_ ,),.,.. s 4 /A -Iti, ) • IT, „ ;t $ . $1 1. t I' '''. i t)' if •,.1#0 4_4 ,A3rie ' - - -4t-tke0 1 I f 49thlb I 4 afb ,....,,e- /,' , ,,„„,, I 4414 ; ....' t, t y170frib , — .vr,:tritN„.. . ,,.44, ._, .4 i 1•— • „lio CI et 1/4•12+M k-41.44, "-• .4( - firejt,e,,f" MIi H 4P4 .. irt:114:1. ,4 41C1I7 ii. " ' ' ,44,711 il' 1 - mil)41,:t.,..ali 21.41:S.17. ,101%Vrff ir 4.3". *:$1)/e :41607 . - - ' "''..,,, li N etk 1 it ,,z1. ki t / IIIIIIIIIII"Pil P .... '-‘1 1 :4, ,c ; ,,,, -(' T V %..4'.. * , ' F - ., 'I,..:riedlIP.4416N" . 1 • if 0 .• - ° *« 4'7' '0' e-2. ,,,7 :14,*?:"14) • 1 t , ...- , •,,,, li , VI /'ll l . . . , . )• • '- • • A i , 1 - ,,,ret ' ; h,f, ...,1,2, vi • . ..; ------ 'ii e$ .."iv-.':•„. 1/40 • '-.":7"---- CS—f. ,.. ' \ \\*No----,7"--------„ , •,,,,.&,?,- r, - 1/21/2016 https://mail.google.comimail/u/0/?tab=wm (no subject) - kfarone@gmail.com - Gmail Page 1 of 1 �,� L M?_"r`f 6� "20a�•: �y Open with ' 0121I , ,. Q ''''1, 1'44*. ' P.rt ' ?"W. , ,,k' 7..1 r------ittp, - .... ",,,,/, . i , ,. .r.0,,,e,11 .. , i 1 1, „,,,,, , I pi,1"..? ,,,,!! - 1 4. - f ,t' '*'..---- , ',,,14” "kt,,A4"t. e f , ,),,, . i. '' '1'.4.1i, 1 t'IF i ..t.,. **1" '4.."toqk , SE ttiri w,4r/i `,+ r ' * • ks 4, e. ,ee. .4%. �� IP aiJ y pp, Cir M i4.t.,:;,,,,, " � . ,r r it% ,� l' , , 1 a n ♦ p{ , ,,pflAiei ,r7r.;4;,:,,c,„:t21.p ,. 1;4..4'4' V:."..;,,t. 1 ; . „, e* . , .4' ;47;1- or ::„.# ".:".* \\ g' . - .--",, • 4 1".* , ; - _ ,, .' 0,,,,,vi' '"itk::\::. .,:.-".1,1.-4'lif 7 A „..4 I 1:111174:- " 41, j�*t tai a. ate ,aFP x YI it .=f a, • , .! I \ \ r • 7. s y�i t 0 "","'` k,, r# '1-.}� '' +..� •'', \ \ 4. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm 1/21/2016 Page 1 of 1 k,{wp� a°Lw. S yf•.E'.. N ,wA' +�� " ; 4.f +'�- � ply � t-1,0 t . pY . , : {„r1 .c4s, ,... t-1,0 Sr ,,,,fro",---, t A y.1,t .m '+,. + . e r___—_:.------..,L ,,,d••4• , Int y sr' , /i.s'r"7„'yk{.-. 0: e tAi ''.- i-^-"' -^-- �. m. duet/ �^;o - .,.x ,, . ,„It,r -ltrirl ' : - -,-----------_- ----- A irt:11 ' ,,' r J4.. , c.;,..i ';'5, 1,,,. I %,k oe",';`,t ,- iy)if 14066:' -4"4 LA-4*", — —` 17---------- — - - t, !..k' t. . ' 't.X.K.' I ' :1:*'.',„.. jililekt ! ,,,,, ,,, ,,,,/- ..,.:,,,,,* Al?" � ' ,,,,,:,,,,,4;t -- — `' .,', r � „..1..j. k_ asI oil ,_, :,..:,,•-i:2-',„-.4-4:,,,,, ,...,„_,,,_ , _ ,-, -,„0.. ...,,......,...:! - __... i H,,.....„,:iiz.1 iicii,,,,;:;::4:,,,:.::::,,k.ri:„,;.,,u,,,trit4;4.;.".„..4000.14_1.z...,;:i17, 0.,...../,::1 . ofi Iti 4' ._.,..... VII_ ,...f., 0, ---, 7 a I < t' _ . a. a file:///C:/Users/u152/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20lnternet%20Files/Low/Content.IE5/X7SM2CMU/BQ... 1/21/2016 Page 1 of 1 \P --. ..... 0 ,,... 1,-.;- , .• ''•1$',.fr. ',•."' Iti ''j 1 01 1 I,• 7,47'44 • ', . ' -11,4 , tk ,. ,rr'' „..., I I, , t ?F' „A 1 7s4„,,,,,....,- ..r . , ,.. • , , u.,-,1, NI ,-,,,. ._, 1 •-..,"",.: .,-A .` . . , 4, 1 '' ' it ..---- •.., ' -` 1.. - 1\--1. ,, - ,....."‹....."'"'dm' ,,,,,.,_........--*-""" , . ' .....0--- --- - - .- - ' . _____ _ __. - —- .. I , _, _ ,1 --- • . II 1 1 , I 10 A 1 i - , ._.,-- '..,7-......-;-.4«'.,-i ..:7: -,;-- „--; *,,,i-.2,r...,' •„;,;.;14..,:.,- --- - I., ..,-, *...."''- •-. - ......1- ......r „„:4--y. ....-..... ...,:.,..".. .....:,...:- ., . , v.-_... rf r, .. ...r . . o 1 • f. I '''--114*-- ' ''''-':--k-4*71/41:7r* -f:..,-' 1',"'-----..':.0.d: .1i... '., 1, - :,-i417,74- i.,..4,,41',.;:t.:, .4,,.. , milt 6,ivie- .„,,,lit-,, , -..,.- ,,,.,.. , . _ f , , .. . ' .01-4 • , ...4 -,.; ..... ..., ,,.. 11,,,,,,',-,,,Nt_4r..471 .., 'f...' ''' " , • 4 • i` .:..' .1, '''Poi •:..)**.* '. ''.14'," ' .0*- ' ' 1 j,.._,-,_t-..-:r:. i.r.,.., . . ...,..,_ , • --4,.. . -,„„,-).,,,,,....,. ,, ,...,.„ _ „.... .. , _. ..1 , . , ..,. . ,t,, .,-,,,,A; :0 -. ,..- , . - , .-7-...-.., ,, . , • . - , ''.. .,L . ::..• - , ,; :,, „, ,._ -7 . . ' v,.._$:. _.. , r t,, ,., . , ,...: ,,, . ,. ... . , , g- f I- _ _ e i. -- , '''',,,'N',,,,ii . - '-I' •zs'''' u . : - --.71=-:,... ' '4;;-'1;i4CA4,- .7Vt':- ''''V ..-4•4.,•i*.:4,:., --e'-.i.''''.:i ' . .: '' ....6,,,,,,...,........,_ _ file:///C:/Users/u152/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Low/Content.IE5/MMJFZIS2/1-11CI... 1/21/2016 Page 1 of 1 (no subject) - kfarone@gmail.com - Gmail • c*r , $..,• f ,,, f i Atl With , y - - 41 ,,4 »d r ",t4i E :-4 -• �,,'' i j », i!..-„,..N., t,,,' �cr '" `-:air >.d t a.t«s r '« �, .,t •% , , - - A r r�er ''. � ' r.° it �� * 1 \ . ,..,i..0" e ,.. ;,.., ,„*.`"4,,,, ':,ii- A .. •_ , ..tt,i LI ct t•_., it et i, . f, ' 4i4 .. 14. I , 1 • a7 H ...._ t,- 4 e. " t ,. N.N _ P-.�. *.ate -r""'!` :,ice - _ — — -• : r t M <_ e , „ L, � '-mss �� }F. ,. -•g. tom ."" «0:0-9 1 , „� , ,.Y • Is. .i.„,..,,, , • , ` „mt � ,r., -„xz � . "l�i.TtY ri, J f'gr",ypYl� '*� i • x ,„s _ 9y o-$kms r - ire P* 9 ;•' ,S° i httP g gs://mail. oo le.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm 1/21/2016 i (no subject) - kfarone@gmail.com - Gmail Page 1 of 2 01�1161123jpq •. « , ' s > Dom, -itt X' .,„„e,-.,''',„.,,- , ,),1/ 44 , .11 V 'IT 1 I/4 V A,1�f� w. /4*i".%'�T .�� B�.,�, i rf •SE Di - . ` 1 �, } "' rt P?} ,' k +4.•*`x' { f r T ��yy �y y�r[[. , ,`3iit $ tide ;f 1 . ''fi t:" a. - - +'�fr' •g Fr i •_ ",,# -+k� '. Ci 1 . _ YFz_rS.i �` G ,,,� . - 'c' .1-?'''t .?t ,a,. fa> t . • y4 M, Q NI , ? _ 14r2; _ -- `'� sem . �. _.. �r „' fi�ty,. ; r \ ri s( .\ -, I ' ' S kr, *411 I ,'It* i.,- ..,,,,1---- •-••3*7.if.--TH 4. •' '., _. ,1 ,...%,„:,,:-:7'' ' ,, .t �q»*': .tea► `.r^j a 9,t �� ar s6�',e •,�, �'s .l t , � � � 3_v._.4,-rly , ' tit r. �4r r{ ] 4 my.' � y • 1r- a ; .. ,� f 1 '../,',,, l rj j �' [} a,:, , ., # mss`=' - j` • j :. y *�. *`Fly, ` � ` 541, J,�++,+r- • f k ri. /44! .1.A... t. ' -- -p..,_...24,,,i'lif // ` ' AL3 �� 1 * # f https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm 1/21/2016 THE LAW OFFICE OF AMY MELE 1.03 VAN HOUTEN FIELDS • WEST NYACK, NEW YORK 10994 (845) 596-8260 FAX: (212) 269-0515 EMAIL: AMY@AMYMEI.ELAW.COM. March 21, 2016 • (Via Email and Hand Delivery) City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals City Hall 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Re: #2807.1 — 38 Murphy Lane—Area Variance Modification; Applicant: Jean D'Agostino Dear Members of the Board: I represent Brian and Susan Rodems along with several neighboring landowners in connection with the above-referenced application. Mr. and Mrs. Rodems' property is • across the alley from the applicants lot. I write to respectfully urge the. Board to deny the requested modification. I was just retained on Friday, and unfortunately I was unable to rearrange my schedule to be there in person this evening. I therefore request that this letter be incorporated' into the record. The instant application is a classic example of "act first, ask forgiveness later." The current building under construction' bears no resemblance to the historic barn. The clapboards, barn doors and shiplap are gone. The original slab-on-grade concrete floor The Building Inspector issued a Notice of Violation and Stop Work Order dated January 21, 2016 on the basis that,the work was outside the scope of the building permit, which of course was tied to the original variance. 1 • has been completely regraded and replaced with a full height basement, which raises the height of the first floor by four feet (46 inches as measured fromthe original at-grade elevation of the barn) and, the second.floor.by an additional four feet. Thus, the entire structure has been raisedby approximately eight (8) feet. All of the exterior walls have been reframed, and the entire second story has been removed. The Applicant's explanation, that it was "just as easy" to install a full-height basement and that she "decided" to reframe all of the exterior walls does nothing to justify the instant application and instead simply demonstrates that her current "hardship" is entirely self. createdz' As you are aware, this Board previously granted an area variance to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single family house. The entire basis of the original variance application, upon which this Board and the neighboring residents relied, was the renovation of a 100-year old barn to its original glory. Indeed, the Board specifically considered whether to require the applicant to demolish the barn and build a "conforming"`residence: "1. Principal building coverage: the lot size, at 2500 square feet, is such that the footprint of a house conforming to the 30% coverage requirement would be small (750 square feet including overhangs). This can be done if the barn is removed, which may be an undesirable effect as noted by the applicant on page 66 of the application "Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the neighborhood and • 2 Applicant has submitted a letter in support of her current application in which she characterizes the neighbors as harassing and complains that they would not agree to provide easements or allow her to store fill on their property. Of course, the neighbors were under no obligation to comply with such requests (she does,concede that one of the neighbors gave her consent to place a portable toilet on his property during construction.) Nowhere in the letter, however, does she take responsibility for her own actions i.e., the unilateral redesign without going back to the ZBA and the Building Department. The Applicant continues to refer to the structure as "the..barn;" when there is no semblance of a barn on the property. Perhaps the most telling admission is that she does not intend to live in the residence: "I just want to finish what;l started sell the,property to a new family,and get out of the neighborhood for good.' 3 Arguably, the original variance could have been characterized as a use variance. The barn was. always classified as an"accessory building.' Prior tothe sale to the applicant, the lot was always owned by a neighboring property owner. In retrospect, it should have been merged with a lot with a primary residence on it. Had it been, I suspect that the Planning Board would have never granted a subdivision. 2 community character." The applicant does not seek to do this in the proposal as submitted..." 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the barn has been in existence since.1900 and that the position of the building relative to the neighbors would result in it being: less noticeable as a residence than: otherwise, and that the barn and surrounding yard are visible now. The board also notes that the renovation work would improve the outward appearance of the structure, currently in disrepair." (Emphasis supplied). After being granted very substantial relief4 from the zoning regulations based upon these representations, the applicant tore down thebarn, started anew, and built a structure that is far more noticeable, bears no resemblance to the 1900's barn, and towers over the neighbors' residences. She now asks the Board to condone her gross deviation from the original variance. The Applicant is asking this Board to reconsider and modify its prior decision. The City's zoning code, Section 8.5(G) provides: G. In order to rehear an appeal previously determined by the ZBA, the following must occur: 1. A ZBA member must move to formally rehear the appeal; 2. A unanimous vote of all ZBA members present must approve the motion to rehear; 3. The appeal shall be subject to the same notice provisions as an original hearing; 4 The original variance granted a 62.1% minimum lot size variance (2,500 vs. 6,600); a 16.7% minimum lot width variance, a 69% minimum front lot setback variance, a 37.2% minimum rear yard variance, and relative relief from principal building coverage of 55%and 50%variance from parking requirements. 3 4. The ZBA may reverse, modify"or annul its original decision provided the ZBA finds that the rights vested in persons acting in good faith reliance upon the reheard order, decision or determination will not be prejudiced thereby; and 5. A unanimous vote of all ZBA members present is required to • reverse, modify or annul its original decision. Clearly, if the original variance is modified to accommodate the current proposed structure, the rights of.. those who justifiably relied upon the original variance ie.., the neighbors who did not object to the original variance - would be prejudiced. The modification would result in the following negative impacts to neighboring residents, which cannotbe mitigated if the applicant is permitted to build what she now proposes:. 1) The new construction raises the total height of the structureby eight (8) feet. While the applicant denies this, her interpretation is based upon measuring the height from grade — but she raised the grade and now the first floor is +1- 4 feet above the original barn floor elevation" after the original variance was granted. In addition, the applicant poured a full height foundation as opposed to restoring the original slab. At the last meeting, the applicant was asked to provide further clarification for her claim that the height increase is less than 8' —she has yet to provide this board with such clarification. • 2) Theincreased grade also has a deleterious effect on drainage. The site is now graded and pitched so that water will flow off the: subject property into the alley and onto the neighbors' property with no corresponding drainage installed. 3) Because the front, rear and side-yard setbacks were so drastically reduced, the increased height cannot be meaningfully camouflaged by landscaping or other buffers. 4 4). The new height and steep roof line will make the building among the tallest in the neighborhood, and will severely impact the privacy of the neighbors. Indeed, seven (7) directly abutting homes will have their privacy impacted es the structure looms over their backyards. 5) The new construction at the height proposed is completely out of character with the existing homes, and their property values will be negatively affected. There is ample precedent to support the denial of the instant application. The case of Merlotto v. Town Qf Patterson Zoning Board of Appeals, 841 N.Y.S.2d 650 (2d Dept. 2007) is particularly instructive. There, the applicant purchased two (2) lots'in an RPL-5 zoning district which required five (5) lots to build a single family residence. The applicant was granted an area variance to build, a new dwelling on the lot despite its non-conforming size, with the condition that "[t]he new structure as restored shall be build the exact size, shape and current location of the existing foundation." Id. at 651. The applicant subsequently altered the plans and commenced framing a second story. After the building inspector denied authorization to change the plans, the applicant returned to the ZBA:to seek permission for the second floor. Id. at 652. At the public hearing, the neighbors objected to the request to modify the variance-, and pointed out that the new structure was more than double the size of the original dwelling, and that the "high pitched" roof line did not match the roof line of the neighboring houses. Id. at 6.52. • The zoning board denied that portion of .the application which sought to add a second floor and for an increased roof line. The applicant appealed. The Supreme Court reversed,and the Board.appealed. The Appellate Division reinstated the decision of the zoning board, finding: that the zoning board had properly found that the "illegal second story would produce 'an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood, since the majority of the neighboring homes are one story structures with lower roof lines_." The Court also agreed with the zoning board's reasoning that "the difficulty was self-created,, since the Petitioner chose to ignore the previous variances granted." Id. at 653. Finally, Court 5 . pointed out that the zoning board justifiably found that "the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved...by the construction of a smaller house:in accordance with the area variance previously granted." Id. (emphasis in original). The court went on to conclude "[i]t must be stressed that the petitioner completedthe framing of his 1,546 square foot house and sought approval of the ZBA after the framing of the structure was completed. In so doing, he may be regarded as the quintessential example of self- created difficulties." /d. The analogy to the instant application is obvious. The Applicant only sought. relief after a Notice of Violation and Stop Work Qrder were issued. The unilateral decision to not restore the barn and construct a new single family home is a self-created hardship, and results in a structure which is completelyy incongruous with the character of the neighborhood. Indeed, this Board recognized that this very action _ tearing down the barn and building a new structure would have a negative impact on community character. See, original variance, findings #1 and #2. The new structure towers above the neighbors, has no"frontage" on any street and is massive in relation to the surrounding structures. If this modification is granted, future occupants of the home will have elevated, unobstructed views into what should be private back yards. The historic barn is gone and the,structure currently proposed is 240% larger than what would be permitted on a parcel this size. Put simply, the neighbors werewilling to accept the barn, which has always been an accessory use, as a residence if it were restored to resemble the historic barn and maintained the same height and proportions. Before you now is a proposal to build a larger, higher, new structure in a location where for 100 years stood a barn as a peaceful accessory use with no occupants and where only non-intrusive activities occurred. The barn was a testament to the history of the neighborhood and the City of • Saratoga Springs. Now., gone forever, the applicant proposes a house which is not only taller than the adjacent properties but has no relationship to the context of the neighborhood, with a front porch literally located on the street. and a structure that crowds the tiny parcel upon which it sits. 6 The fact that the applicant may lose money or incur additional expense does not change the analysis. See, e.g„ Fendelman v. ZOning Board of Appeals of the Village of Scarsdale, 577 N.Y.S.2d 138 (2d Dept. 1991) (that homeowners might suffer some economic loss as a result of altering garage which failed to comply With side-yard requirement did not require granting of variance); Carlucci v. Board of Zoning Appeals for the. Town of Philipstown, 613 N.Y.S,2d 665 (2d. Dept. 1994) (after finding that. hardship was self-treated, board of zoning appeals has no obligation to weigh expense of compliance in petitioner's favor on request for area variance); Slakoff v. Hitchcock, 599 N.Y,S2d 63 (2d Dept. 19,93) (fact that owners would suffer economic loss was irrelevant to determination of whether owners were entitled to area variance for pool and deck constructed in violation of zoning requirements). Mr. and Mrs. Rodems along, with ,other neighbors have submitted photographs depicting the original structure and the state of the current construction under separate cover. The Rodems and their neighbors have also submitted photographs of the neighboring residences with reference to their height. We ask that these be included in the record on this matter. Of course, we invite and welcome the Board to visit the site. Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request that the instant application be denied in its entirety. Very truly yours, Ceiricedi Amy Mele, Esq. pc: Mr. & Mrs. Brian Rodems Dan and Loretta Martin Blaine and Rachel Dunn Evan Williamson Susan Bru'ndige Paul Tucker and Maggie Moss Tucker 7 Zimbra� �,S https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13920&tzAmeric... Zim bra stephen.shaw@saratoga-springs.org 39 Murphy Lane construction From : Susan Rodems <srodems@nycap.rr.com> Sun, Jan 31, 2016 12:16 PM Subject : 39 Murphy Lane construction &1 attachment To : Stephen Shaw <Stephen.Shaw@saratoga- springs.org> Hi Mr. Shaw, Attached is a letter that we would like you to read and if you could forward it on to all the assistant building inspectors as well that would be appreciated. We feel you should all be informed as to the situation on Murphy Lane. Our back yard and driveway border Murphy Lane. Thanks, Sue and Brian Rodems The 39 Murphy Lane construction project.docx 112 KB 1 of 1 2/1/2016 9:48 AM `� The 39 Murphy Lane construction project February 1. 2016 To the Zoning Board, Susan Barden and the Saratoga Springs Building Inspector We are writing today to make you aware of some problems at the 39 Murphy Y Lane construction site. Since this is no longer a barn renovation/restoration but new construction there are issues that need to be dealt with. A neighbor of ours requested and was granted a stop work order because of what's going on. This is a nonconforming lot which now has a structure on it that will be way too tall (as per building code) if it is allowed to proceed. They have dug a full basement with 4 very large windows at ground level (when I was in city hall reviewing the plans several weeks ago the drawing still only showed a crawl space). The foundation is very tall as well and they have built a first floor. There is absolutely nothing left of the original barn, so if they put a second floor on, it will make this house very tall. This has and will change the character of the neighborhood. The applicant and the engineering/design firm have not been truthful in their actions and should be made to come up with a new design to comply with the original structure. This should only be allowed to be a single story house. Otherwise we will have a structure with a nonconforming height on an already nonconforming lot. They also have a front stoop that protrudes from the front of the house. Once they have the second step built they will be stepping right into the alley. This should be redesigned and recessed into the house instead. The front stoop poses a danger on the alley,between vehicular traffic, snowplows and service vehicles. Please take a look at this project and pay very close attention,the zoning board and the building department need to take action and hold them accountable. The applicant is trying to pull a fast one and should not be allowed to continue until they comply with the height and design constrictions of new construction on a nonconforming lot. We feel the applicant should be only allowed to build the house as tall as the original barn structure. Thank you, Susan and Brian Rodems 84 White Street To: Steve Shaw, Building Inspector From: Concerned Property Owners (adjacent to 39 Murphy Lane) C/O Brian Rodems Date: 04/13/2016 RE: Response to the Request to Lift the Stop Work Order(39 Murphy Lane) ************************************************************************ Mr. Shaw, Please find attached a document in which we, as concerned and impacted property owners, outline a series of findings related to the recent proceedings with respect to the 39 Murphy Lane project. Would you please consider these findings when rendering an opinion in response to the request from the Applicant's attorney to the lift the stop work order on this project? Thankou for your time and consideration, Y Brian Rodems 84 White Street Saratoga Springs, NY brodems@pobox.com Cell #: 518-588-1878 CC: Anthony J. lzzo, Assistant City Attorney IN THE MATTER OF the stop work order of the Building Inspector involving 39 Murphy Lane between Clark Street and Stratton Street, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.84-1-22, in the Inside District, on the Assessment Map of said City. City of Saratoga Springs. Findings in relation to violation of conditions of variance issued by board of appeals. 1. From ZBA decision(emphasis added): "The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single family house." From this request, it is unfathomable that now the applicant is not clear or has any question about the scope and limitations of the approval—especially since the applicant's entire presentation and proposal and request was solely for the renovation of the barn. The zoning board of appeals granted relief based solely upon the applicant's commitment to renovate the existing barn. 2. The applicant claimed in the original variance application(page 66)that"Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the neighborhood and community character." This claim and commitment to renovate the historic barn was part and parcel of the determination by the zoning board of appeals to issue the seven substantial variances requested. The condition to renovate and convert the existing barn was self-imposed by the applicant,was accepted by the zoning board of appeals as foundational to its decision,and is clearly and unequivocably binding upon the applicant. There is nothing unclear or nebulous about this condition—in particular because it was self-imposed by the applicant. 3. The applicant clearly understood the self-imposed and binding condition for renovation of the barn, and had proceeded to initially take appropriate measures to lift the barn and do foundation work. Unfortunately,at some point in the process, the applicant decided,without requesting in writing an interpretation or modification or application for a new variance,to abandon the renovation of the barn. Unfortunately,the variance was granted solely for which was exactly what the original variance was for—and nothing else. 4. The applicant did not renovate existing barn rather demolished the existing barn including slab floor, studs, siding, second floor, studs, siding and roof. This demolition was done without a demolition permit and was in noncompliance with the zoning variance issued by the board of appeals. 5. The applicant abandoned the renovation and conversion project and commenced constructing a new dwelling including installing a full basement with a new finished floor elevation approximately 4 feet above the original first floor elevation as part of a larger structure and was in the process of constructing a new residence including new walls and pre-manufactured roof trusses. These changes to the original proposal are substantial,are totally inconsistent with renovation of an historic barn and would increase the nonconformity of the structure and potentially cause additional adverse impact to surrounding properties. 6. The applicant was not proceeding under the terms of the original approvals and had proceeded to demolish the existing barn and continue with construction of a new residence which was completely inconsistent with the original variance application and in violation of the prior approval to renovate an existing barn structure. 7. In the prior decision the board had concluded that"the applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant."This prior decision was based on the fording that such other means required the removal of the barn as noted in the decision that,if the barn is removed, which may be an undesirable effect as noted by the applicant on page 66 of the application"Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the neighborhood and community character."The applicant does not seek to do this in the original proposal as submitted and the new construction carried out by the applicant demonstrates that the benefits of constructing a residence could have been achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue. 8. The appellant has shown flagrant disregard with the prior decision of the zoning board and with the applicant's own statements and commitment by tearing down the barn,the applicant removed the basic reason for granting the variance—that it was an existing building that could not and should not be changed. 9. By demolishing the old barn and commencing new construction,the applicant has abandoned the prior project and has demonstrated that there were, in fact other means feasible to the applicant to carry out the project,which was one of the key findings made in the previous variance decision by the board. By those actions of the applicant,the appellant has abandoned the premise upon which the original variances were considered and granted and thereby has vacated any of the variances that had previously been extended for the project. 10. The applicant was granted significant relief comprising 7 variances including approval of a lot that that was two and one-half sizes smaller than the minimum lot size. (6,600 square feet required; 2,500 square feet provided)and it is now clear that the applicant could have reduced these requests. 11. The construction of a new residence and demolition of the historic barn was not the proposed action nor was it an alternative considered in the state environmental quality review(SEQR 6 NYCRR Part 617)documents submitted by the applicant and hence the prior determination required under SEQR must not be considered applicable and an environmental assessment form must be submitted by the applicant for a new determination of significance made by the lead agency. 12. The applicant violated her own self-imposed conditions and thus the proper course of action would have been for the applicant to request modification of that prior variance or submit a new application or request a written interpretation prior to unilaterally deciding to tear down the barn. If there is any hardship or damage in this case it clearly has been self-created by the applicant due to the applicant's disregard of the conditions of the variance issued. Further,the applicant must seek and propose a remedy to these substantive issues and the disposition of the nonconforming structure that has been erected on the parcel. nn vaLci nmr U/I U Ib 11:4u +5855295 P.001 07/22/2016 10:53AM FAX +8855298 LAW OFFICE 0001/0001 JAMES A. FAuCI ATTORNEY AT LAW,PLLC 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa,NY 12020 (518)885-5011 Fax(518)885-5298 ballstonlaw.com iinnftellstonlnw.enm Graydine Sanders.Paralegal gr4y_dinvig 11steplaw.mn July 22, 2016 Zoning Board of Appeals City of Saratoga Springs . 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 Via Fax 580-9480 and Susan.barden@saratoRa jprings.erg RE: Murphy Lane-Parcel 165.84-1-22—Interpretation Application - South Alley,LLC Dear Chairman Moore and Zoning Board of Appeals Members: On behalf of the applicant,please allow this to supplement,confirm and clarify issues that were raised at the'July 18, ZBA meeting. The applicant has filed an interpretation application/appeal with the ZBA seeking a determination that the lot in question is a"legal non-conforming lot,"i.e., it is a buildable lot (per local code 5.5) since it has retained its current dimensions since 1927 (see title company letter and deeds starting at page 12 of application). The July 18,2016,ZBA meeting discussions were largely devoted to the July 8,2016, "stop work order"which "clarified"the January 21, 2016, stop work order. I submitted a letter to the Board dated July 11, in response to the July 8, stop work order. The ZBA agreed that my July 11, letter would supplement the interpretation application and act as an appeal to the July 8, stop work order. The ZBA has Ieft open the public comment period on the application and this matter is back on the ZBA agenda for July 25. Bc advised that the applicant continues to NOT seek any additional area variance relief. The applicant does not seek to increase the front step construction any more that what the specific variance granted for the"front yard." As a matter of fact,the applicant will he constructing less into the setback then what the variance granted: the variance grants a 3.1' foot front yard setback(or 6.9 feet of relief from the 10 foot setback requirement). As per the submitted survey(s) which the Building Department has(additional copy enclosed herein),the new construction will be 0.1 foot less into the setback than what was granted (the front steps will be 3.2 feet from the road) or will be only using 6.8 feet of relief. Sincerely, James A. Fauei Encl. o . JAmEs A. FAUCI ATTORNEY AT LAW, PLLC 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa,NY 12020 (518) 885-5011 fax(518)885-5298 ballstonlaw.com jim@ballstonlaw.com Graydine Sanders-Paralegal graydine@ballstonlaw.com April 11, 2016 Mayor Joanne Yepsen City Hall, City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 HAND DELIVERED William Moore Chair, Zoning Board of Appeals City Hall, City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 HAND DELIVERED RE: 39 Murphy Lane: Tax Map Parcel 165.84-1-22 (Inside District)Variances Granted 04/02/2015 Dear Mayor Yepsen and Mr. Moore: Please be advised that this firm has been retained by Jean D'Agostino with regard to the above. My investigation of this matter includes a review of the papers that have been filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department, a review of the written minutes and video replays of ZBA meetings,the variances that were granted in March, 2015, a site visit of the premises, and a review of the City's Zoning Ordinance. From a review thereof, it appears that Mrs. D'Agostino is no longer asking the ZBA for any kind of relief whatsoever. To make this point absolutely clear,be advised that Mrs. D'Agostino is not asking for any additional relief from the ZBA. She is satisfied with the variances already granted to her in 2015. That being the case,there is no further action required or allowed by the ZBA, i.e,there is no application before the ZBA for any variance, interpretation or rehearing. Notwithstanding this, Mrs. D'Agostino continues to be willing to work with the City in the final design of the structure. Exactly how and in what capacity this cooperation will take place is to be determined since it cannot occur before the ZBA. With regard to any perceived violations that have lead to the Stop Work Order that continues to impede the construction on the site, I respectfully call your attention to the written resolution that granted the variances on April 2, 2015. Other than limiting the applicant to the percentages indicated in the relief granted,the resolution contains no limitations or conditions whatsoever with respect to what the applicant may construct on that site, i.e., it is unconditional. 1 ' Therefore, for example,there is no legal impediment for a structure to be elevated to the maximum height of sixty feet per what the UR-3 district allows. Note that the language in the resolution granting the variances"to permit the renovation and conversion" and"as per the submitted application materials,"with nothing more, in a resolution granting a variance does not limit an applicant to constructing a structure exactly per the plans submitted. Such language is far too vague and imprecise for anyone, including an applicant,building code inspectors, or neighbors to rely on. Case law makes this clear: "[tjhe zoning board,however,must clearly enumerate the conditions in the board's decision so that the applicant, neighbors and municipal officials are fully aware of the nature and extent of any conditions imposed. Hoffmann v.Gunther, 245 AD2d 511 (2"d Dept, 1997) Conditions must be certain and unambiguous. Suburban Club of Larkfield v Town of Huntington, 57 Misc 2d 1051, affd 31 AD2d 718. The reason that the Courts have ruled this way is to avoid the very situation that we find ourselves at in these present proceedings. The construction taking place at the subject premises is not in violation of the variances granted in 2015. Mrs. D'Agotino,the contractor, AND THE BUILDING INSPECTOR have relied on and have been guided by the general language of the resolution granting the variances. Mrs. D'Agostino's repeated willingness to submit to the ZBA's review at the ZBA's February 22, 2016, and March 21, 2016,meetings, and the Design Review Commission meeting on April 6, 2016 (which,by the way,has no authority over this project as the subject premises does not fall within DRC jurisdiction),further points to her good faith and willingness to work with the City. In Hoffman,supra,the ZBA of the Town of Mamaroneck granted an area variance "to allow the construction" of an addition "in strict conformance with plans filed with this application provided that the applicant complies in all other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck." In annulling the ZBA's decision with regard to the"strict compliance"language,the Appellate Division stated: The ZBA had the authority to attach conditions to the granting of the area variance (see, Matter of Kumpel v Wilson, 241 AD2d 882). However, it also had the obligation to clearly state any conditions imposed, so that the petitioners,their neighbors, and Town officials, would be fully aware of the nature and extent of any conditions imposed (see, Matter of Sabatino v Denison, 203 AD2d 781, 783; Matter of Proskin v Donovan, 150 AD2d 937, 939;South Woodbury Taxpayers Assn. v American Inst. of Physics, 104 Misc 2d 254, 259), without reference to the minutes of the proceeding leading up to the granting of the variance (see, South Woodbury Taxpayers Assn. v American Inst. of Physics, supra, at 259). Here, it is not apparent from the language of the 1979 resolution granting the side-yard variance,that the variance was granted on condition that the petitioners leave the addition constructed in accordance with the plans on file unchanged in perpetuity. Nor did the 1979 variance impose any height conditions other than those imposed by the zoning ordinance. Since the project in issue here was within the height limitations of the zoning ordinance, did not deviate from or increase the building's footprint, and did not encroach upon the required side yards established by the 1979 variance, once the ZBA granted the necessary front-yard variance, it should have authorized issuance of a building permit and a certificate of occupancy. Other relevant case law sheds more light on the issue: of the common law and must be strictly Zoning regulations are in derogationy construed against the municipality. Thus, any ambiguity in the language used in zoning regulations must be resolved in favor of the property owner (see,Matter of Allen v Adami, 39 NY2d 275, 277, 383 N.Y.S.2d 565, 347 N.E.2d 890; Matter of Hess Realty Corp. v Planning Commn. of Town of Rotterdam, 198 AD2d 588., 603 N.Y.S.2d 95 [3rd Dept.,Nov. 4, 1993]; Matter of Chrysler Realty Corp. v Orneck, 196 AD2d 631, 632-633, 601 N.Y.S.2d 194, supra; Matter of Barkus v Kern, 160 AD2d 694, 695-696, 553 N.Y.S.2d 466). Contrary to the contention of the intervenor-respondent Fifth Avenue of Long Island Realty Associates, we find that no inference can logically be drawn from the language of the variances granted that they were conditioned upon strict adherence to all aspects of the site plan submitted at that time and could not be modified unless approval was first obtained from the Board. If the Board intended to condition either variance on the maintenance of a certain number of spaces in a certain location, it could have done so in its determinations. Zoning regulations may not be extended by implication(see, Matter of Chrysler Realty Corp. v Orneck, supra, at 633; Matter of Exxon Corp. v Board of Stds. & Appeals of City of N.Y., 128 AD2d 289, 296-297, 515 N.Y.S.2d 768, supra; cf., Matter of Town of Sullivan v Strauss, 171 AD2d 980, 981, 567 N.Y.S.2d 921). KMO-361 Realty Ass. v. Davies, 204 AD2d 547 (2d Dept, 1994), See also, Fuentes v Village of Woodbury 82 AD3d 883 (2"d Dept,2011): "The zoning board of appeals has the authority to attach conditions to the granting of the area variance. However, it also has the obligation to clearly state any conditions imposed, so that petitioners, their neighbors, and town officials are fully aware of the nature and extent of any conditions imposed without reference to the minutes of the proceeding leading up to the granting of the variance." (citing Hoffman, supra). Sabatino v. Denison,203 AD2d 781 (31d Dept, 1994): "We disapprove of respondents' (ZBA) assumption that every item discussed at the public hearings on the application became an express condition of the approval. To the contrary, it was the Zoning Board's obligation to clearly state the conditions it required petitioners to adhere to in connection with the approval (see,Holmes v Planning Bd. of Town of New Castle, 78 AD2d 1, 32, 433 N.Y.S.2d 587;South Woodbury Taxpayers Assn. v American Inst. of Physics, 104 Misc 2d 254,259, 428 N.Y.S.2d 158)." I also point out that the resolution granting the 2015 variances took into consideration the effect on the neighborhood: "These variances will not have significant adverse physical and environmental effect on the neighborhood/district." Also,the Building Inspector was at the site several times prior to eventually issuing the stop work order. Those prior site visits included the inspection and approval of the now existing foundation, second floor, and roof. Given the above,the current Stop Work Order has been wrongfully issued. Mrs. D'Agostino has adhered to such wrongful Order to her detriment and her damages continue to accumulate on a daily basis. Demand is hereby made to immediately lift the stop work order and • to re-instate the building permit. Failure to do so will result in Mrs. D'Agosinto pursuing all legal remedies. Thank you. Sincerely, James A. Fauci cc: Jean D'Agostino Anthony Izzo,Esq. —HAND DELIVERED hf I am here as a resident and property owner. What I have to say is solely my own personal opinion and does not reflect the role or viewpoint of our company, Behan Planning and Design as consultant to the city in our efforts to create a Unified Development Ordinance. The points I am about to make reflect the unique aspects of the subject project only and the specific impact this particular project has to me and my life and property as an immediate neighbor. I have the following questions for the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the application of the owner of 39 Murphy Lane, Saratoga Springs: • 1 l ww What does the word renovation mean? Dictionary.com: To restore to good condition What is the definition of demolition? Dictionary.com: To destroy or ruin(a building or other structure), especially on purpose; tear down; raze. Here is a photo of the historic barn which was located on the alley for over 100 years: `�\�..� Y. 1 4 ,,. JL4 4 1 T* 4 Y r• Lti xtr\4-s u� 4 t ." y}" �—. t " @ ft' ; `".rig l 'vT 3;X.r., t caw * ;. `3 CI F f. P er And here is a photo of the historic barn undergoing `renovation' by the applicant: The workers in this photo are removing the entire second floor of the historic barn. 31:::4 ' _ :e fi( tet1r ' * . ,' { ekx y * '''N ;' s F .,{ for fti,t '4 '''..1 1‹.,...'W i'•;.; '' .-?,— s , ,""'''''.1*4 . .1. r le AVVIkk ' t4,' 4,, I ° f , ., uktai, �v\ P! a : • i- �° .< 'v- CO Yid' }! �a .. 7'1� � 1 iia � p l� 'y1j3$r' e� IEEE @.,'W f Y T R '14.,-.'1/4-•:-.4's f ., � � }Sys : ,,,-/ ' .'I M `� M sr I . #i '1 .dam. / * vii ,,A,.....r.,:'.., I 17 i ' r„,. ... t ,. ,.', od, .,..,,,,„,,,, ., f, ,,,,, , r4r...... , , , I 4 .4114.1z.--,..„--;,,,,-- , , ,,, ,,,i, ,..., ,,,Ire$ 2 1 • • 'a Here is a close up view of the new structure, showing nothing left of the historic barn: 0 g$� j r' % `�•a,' !�1 5i SPI E d I II% a �`� I q I� " s . m a r. xrt 4 �r'ra ri✓rhrri- r � r �/% /,///j r✓r s %r/ %j%//fir r/%/ir r %/ r�r/i, ; What statements were made du ing the applicant's presentations to the board and the public that convinced the.board to allow her to renovate the historic barn? From the findngs of the ZBA in decision of March 23, 2015: 1. .....As noted by the applicant on page 66 of the application "Tearing down the barn and starting new would cause a detriment to the neighborhood and community character." What has brought about the demolition of the historic barn? From the applicant's new application: During construction it became apparent that there were more decaying studs and rafters to be repaired than existing framing members to be saved Shouldn't the applicant have been aware of the structural condition of the barn before making representations to the board and the public that she was going to renovate the barn? Yes, the applicant should have been aware of the structural condition of the barn. What structural members were not visible or otherwise unable to be evaluated prior to the ZBA decision i_....,.year? 3 V V None–all structural members of the historic barn were visible from the interior of the barn. Does the building inspector have any additional information to offer as to what evidence was provided by the applicant to justify removal of the barn she had intended to renovate? From the applicant's new application: The owner decided to reframe exterior walls... If no information has been provided, other than the applicant's say so, how are we to know that the applicant did not intend to remove the barn rather than renovate from the very beginning? ?7?777?77777 Is it not one of the purposes of having a ZBA to protect the health safety and welfare and character of the neighborhood? From the city's zoning code: In making its determination whether to grant an area variance, the ZBA shall take into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant. In making such determination, the ZBA shall also consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance; So it seems that the ZBA must weigh the benefit to the applicant against whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood, isn't that what this portion of the city code states? This project only seems to benefit the applicant to the detriment of the neighborhood character. The applicant has the demolished barn and listed the property on Zillow (the real estate web site) as a single-family home worth more than $400,000—quite a bump from a property sold one year ago for$80,000. The neighborhood and nearby properties are adversely impacted by the presence of an oversized residence on a mini-sized lot—a residence with windows and occupants looking out all around compromising the privacy of our back yards. This project does negatively impact the character of the neighborhood, and does diminish our privacy and our property values. Our open spaces and open yards provide the openness and light and air that this property does not offer. Applicant wins, neighborhood loses. From the information provided by the applicant can the building inspector discern how much higher the new building is proposed to be than the historic barn was? (Ridgeline to ridgeline, not from grade, the applicant uses the new grade to her advantage in the drawings provided) Neighbors estimate the barn was 22.5 feet above existing grade whereas the new building has a dimension of 30+' above the grade of the alley, for a total of approximately 8' higher. Isn't the new request to raise the barn 8' higher contrary to the findings of the board when they granted the variances last year? 4 From the findings of the ZBA in decision of March 23, 2015: 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the barn has been in existence since 1900 and that the position of the building relative to the neighbors would result in it being less noticeable as a residence than otherwise, and that the barn and surrounding yard are visible now. The board also notes that the renovation work would improve the outward appearance of the structure, currently in disrepair. Won't the new structure being up to 8' higher change its position relative to the neighbors and impose upon their private backyards from an 8' higher vantage point? Neighborhood answer: Yes, the neighbors believe this will be a much greater imposition and will greatly change the character of the neighborhood. Was the granting of last year's variances exclusive to the renovation of an existing barn, as was described in the applicant's original application? From last year's ZBA decision (emphasis added): The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the renovation and conversion of an existing barn structure to a single family house. Was it even appropriate to approve last year's variances on this lot, that is, was it a legal non- conforming lot? From Section 5. City zoning code. Nonconforming uses, structures and lots. The owner of any lot in a residential district which does not conform to the district's minimum lot size and minimum average lot width requirements may erect a single family residence or accessory building if the lot legally existed on or before January 19, 1970 and is not under the same ownership as any adjoining land. (Note, the subject parcel was owned by an adjacent parcel and was therefore not a legally existing nonconforming lot.) Has the city ever allowed a single family residence to be constructed on a lot size of 2,500 square feet? Is there any lot this size in this neighborhood? From Zillow: Next smallest lot with a SFH in this neighborhood is still 1000 square feet larger than the lot the barn was on. It was built in 1897 and fronts on a real street, Clark Street. Was the applicant required to file her new plans with the building inspector and be subject to a review before construction of new plans began? From the building permit the applicant signed: F. Any deviation from approved plans must be authorized by the approval of revised plans subject to the same procedure established for the examination of the original plans by the building department, including any required fees. 5 Isn't the applicant asking you for additional relief, this time for a self-created increase in non- conformity. From the applicant's current application: Once the barn was lifted/cribbed it was just as easy to install a full foundation than a slab/ frost wall foundation. New foundation wall was installed higher than the original perimeter slab foundation that was replaced. Is additional relief warranted in a situation that was created by the actions of the applicant, with disregard with for the regulations of the building permit that was signed and the zoning variance that was granted on the property? Neighbors say no relief is warranted. Should you consider that this is just a matter of adding a couple of steps in the front or back setbacks? Neighbors say no. Shouldn't this raising of a brand new building by 8' or more be considered a new and significant impact on surrounding properties? Neighbors say yes. Would the board would have granted any variances last year if the applicant had told the board that the project involved demolishing the historic barn and building a brand new single family structure on a lot that is two and a half times too small? (2500 square feet provided vs 6600 required) Your answers needed here... Why would the board consider this merely as a modification to the prior granted variances when the applicant has disregarded the conditions of approval for those variances, that is, that they were granted for the renovation and conversion of an existing barn to a SFH? Is it not more pertinent at this time to decide if the variances granted last year for the renovation of the historic barn have any continuing validity since the historic barn has been destroyed? Shouldn't the board consider it to be more appropriate that those variances be declared null and void? What is the board's concern for people who have lived and invested in this neighborhood for decades? There are at least seven directly impacted properties, who will now have someone looking over their private backyard spaces from an 8' higher vantage point? Would you want this in your backyard? Imagine trying to relax, put your feet up, and enjoy the property you have invested in for decades while a new building looms over you and new neighbors may be coming and going or just peering out from their new property only a few feet away? Would you want this or would you expect to be protected from this possible reality by the laws of the city? Why are neighbors expected to spend time and financial resources defending our properties from capricious actions of applicants? 6 Is there any reason the board shouldn't deny the new variance requests and also find the prior variances granted on this property to be null and void since the applicant disregarded the condition upon which the variances were approved and destroyed the historic barn? Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Behan, February 22, 2016 7 Collins & Co. Li.None , 7 INTERSTATE AVE,SUITE B Albany,NY 12205-5308 ° w Tel: 518-456-1297,Fax: 518-456-0897 WORK AGREEMENT TO: SOUTH ALLEY LLC RE: 39 Murphy Lane/Insulation Address: 38 WARREN STREET,SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY,12866 Address: 39 MURPHY LANE SARATOGA SPRINGS,SARATOGA,NY, 12866 Attn: Date: 08/16/2018 Expiration Date: 11/14/2018 Tel: (518)857-4066 Estimator: Ryan,Jessica Joy Fax: Quote#: 73895323 Version 1 of 1 • Division#: 493-ALBANY COLLINS&CO-INTERSTA Subject to the terms and conditions stated in this agreement,Contractor is willing to furnish to you all material and labor required for the Scope of Work described below: Scope of Work(the"Work")to be performed: • Draft stop,fire block,fire stop(UBC 708.2.1 et seq.,formerly 216(1),or locally adopted equivalent),and fire rated caulking are not included within Contractor's Work unless specifically listed below. Plan#: NA I NA Trade: INSULATION Work Area Product Notes CEILING UNDER PLYWOOD AS IS(FOAM)._ NOM.5.5"CLOSED CELL FOAM R-38 PROSEAL LE 365 CARPORT CEILING(OVERHANG) NOM. 1.5"CLOSED CELL FOAM R-1 1 PROSEAL LE 365 NOM.6"OPEN CELL FOAM R-24 CLASSIC PLUS Base Price: $2,281.32 Additional Information: NOTE:This agreement consists of multiple pages.If you do not receive the number of pages noted below,please contact Contractor directly at the telephone number stated above. TERMS OF PAYMENT:Payment in full due as stated on invoice regardless of any payment arrangements you have with third parties. ACCEPTANCE:Contractor may change and/or withdraw this agreement if Contractor does not receive your signed acceptance within 10 business days after the Date stated above. PRICING:The prices stated in the Scope of Work above will remain firm for 90 days after the Date stated above.If performance of this agreement extends beyond this 90 day period,you agree to pay Contractor's then current pricing("Price")for any Work performed after that 90 day period.The Prices arc based only on the terms e and conditions expressly stated in this agreement.The Prices exclude any and all terms and conditions not expressly stated herein,including,without limitation,any obligation by Contractor to name you or any third-party as an additional insured on its insurance policy;to provide per project aggregate insurance coverage for the Work;to participate in any owner controlled,wrap,or similar insurance program;to indemnify or defend you or any third-party from any claims,actions and/or lawsuits of any kind or nature whatsoever except to the limited extent state in Section 18 of this agreement.Any terms or conditions required by you by contract or otherwise in addition to or inconsistent with those expressly stated in this agreement will result in additional charges and/or higher Prices.Any additional work performed is subject to Contractor's then current pricing(unless Contractor otherwise agrees in writing)and to this agreement. CUSTO ': CONTRACTOR: BY By: SI NA�`.` IT SIGNATURE TITLE Company Name • Date: THE INFORMATION CONTAI 1 D IN THIS AGREEMENT IS CONFIDENTIAL.NEITHER THIS AGREEMENT NOR ITS TERMS MAY BE DISCLOSED TO THIRD PARTIES. � I (u471 v9 PzIgc i of 3 1 FILE# • ::,` - City of Saratoga Springs r A, BUILDING DEPARTMENT e23 CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY. SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 PHONE 518-587-3550 EXT. 2511 FAx 518-580-9480 CERTIFICATION OF PLACEMENT OF ICE AND WATER PROTECTION (BARRIER) JOB SITE ADDRESS v I 'v11' La--ine- Sa '- Sr'r1nS BUILDING PERMIT# 20i b ib DATE ISSUED 1/ ((-I//f o I, .JLC( 1 "1 )/0 , being duly sworn, depose and state: OWNER OR CONTRACTOR INT NAME I hereby certify to the City of Saratoga Springs, that as required by the Residential Code of New York State (section R905.1.2) or the Building Code of New York State (section B1507.2.8.2), an approved underlayment (typically at least two layers cemented together or of a self-adhering polymer modified bitumne sheet) has been placed extending from the eave's edge to a point at least 24 inches (610 mm) inside the exterior wall line of this subject building, in accordance with applicable code(s) and/or as specified by the licensed professional responsible for the building plans. Note that typically 2 rows @ 3ft are the minimum requirement. Roofing materials installed per manufacturer's instructions. v SIEMIli INTRE OF OW ' •' CONTRACTOR l 7'�I l � DATE OF SIGNATURE Sworn to before me this 40-- Day of ./t 6.,.1_,/,. !If . , 201 / �'ii ‘ 4 / JO-ANN!M 0 REILLY /L� ���I/�.f • JO ANN CountyCIe��7•r NotaryPublic NOTARY PUBLIC State of New Y k .� Qualified in Saratoga 5,, My Commission Expires August 5, /� Reg#010R4984929 Revised 2/2018 6/21/2019 Zimbra Zimbra patrick.cogan@saratoga-springs.org Re: Murphy Lane barn / summary of issues From : Patrick Cogan <patrick.cogan@saratoga-springs.org> Fri, Jun 21, 2019 04:31 PM Subject : Re: Murphy Lane barn / summary of issues To :Aaron Dyer <aadyer@ssfdny.org> Cc : Lisa Shields <lisa.shields@saratoga-springs.org>, Meg Kelly <meg.kelly@saratoga-springs.org>, Peter martin <peter.martin@saratoga-springs.org>, Lisa Watkins <lisa.watkins@saratoga-springs.org>, Vincent DeLeonardis <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga-springs.org> I can confirm that there is not yet a Certificate of Occupancy for this project. The Building Permit is valid until 8/30/2019. In addition to all normal requirements that must be met before we issue a CO, we will also verify that the owner has complied with the settlement agreement dated 12/18/17 and the Zoning Variances granted 4/2/15. I would recommend that any questions or issues related to the height of the building be directed to the City Attorney's office for any response if warranted. The building height is directly related to the central issues of the Stop Work Order, ZBA case, and the settlement agreement. Thank you, Patrick Cogan Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs (518) 587-3550 x2491 From: "Aaron Dyer" <aadyer@ssfdny.org> To: "Lisa Shields" <lisa.shields@saratoga-springs.org> Cc: "Meg Kelly" <meg.kelly@saratoga-springs.org>, "Peter martin" <peter.martin@saratoga- springs.org>, "Lisa Watkins" <lisa.watkins@saratoga-springs.org>, "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga-springs.org>, "patrick cogan" <patrick.cogan@saratoga- springs.org> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 9:11:46 AM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn / summary of issues Lisa, I have spoken with Jack and we will be reviewing this issue today and I will respond back with our recommendations. Thank you https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 1/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra Aaron Dyer Battalion Chief Saratoga Springs Fire Dept. 60 Lake Ave Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Office: (518) 587-3599 x3023 Cell: (518) 925-0609 aadyer@ssfdny.org From: "Lisa Shields" <lisa.shields@saratoga-springs.org> To: "Aaron Dyer" <aadyer@ssfdny.org> Cc: "Meg Kelly" <meg.kelly@saratoga-springs.org>, "Peter martin" <peter.martin@saratoga- springs.org>, "Lisa Watkins" <lisa.watkins@saratoga-springs.org>, "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga-springs.org>, "patrick cogan" <patrick.cogan@saratoga- springs.org> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 8:22:04 AM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn / summary of issues You all received this email this morning, as well as his email from 6/19 (below)...as you know there's quite a bit of history on this property. Aaron, I believe this to be a code enforcement matter for follow up with Blaine's complaint now, so we will take your lead and are available for a technical review meeting if necessary. Vince and Patrick can provide history beyond what's in our files/systems. • Thank you, Lisa From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Lisa Shields" <Lisa.Shields@saratoga-springs.org> Cc: "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpilk@gmail.com>, "Matt Sperazzo" <mjsperazzo@yahoo.com>, "Meg Kelly" <meg.kelly@saratoga-springs.org>, "Peter Martin" <peter.martin@saratoga- springs.org>, "Aaron Dyer" <aadyer@ssfdny.org>, "Lisa Watkins" <lisa.watkins@saratoga- springs.org> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 8:01:43 AM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn / summary of issues Lisa,thank you very much for your response! And thank you to everyone included on this message; I know your time is valuable so I will be brief. I wanted to give you a few bullet points to help get you up to speed, and guide you to what we as a neighborhood are concerned about as it relates to the Murphy Lane barn/house. You may be slightly familiar with this building as it was the subject of a contentious zoning board of appeals debate. To be clear, I'm not here to re-debate those issues. I do, however, want to ensure that what was built is in compliance to what was agreed to with the city after a long battle that involved attorneys, the time of the neighbors, and the time of several city officials. And I want to ensure the parking is done in a compliant and safe manner. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 2/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra • • I want to ensure the parking is being adhered to correctly. The developer/seller sought- and won - a relief variance to go from two parking spaces to one. I would like to be certain her one parking space is in compliance with the design specifications she submitted to the city and the city code • I want to be certain that the home only has one space, and is not able to claim parking spots along the alley. As you can see in the photos provided in my previous email, cars are oftenparked there and often times have tires on pavement! The dimensions for a parking space are very clear in the city ordinance section 6.2.7 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS Section A— While I am sure you are familiar with the code, I have included these at the bottom of this email for your convenience. • We've been encouraged to call the police anytime the car is parked along the alley, which we have done several occasions. The police always come and tell us that we are doing the right thing but that there's nothing to enforce and that we should ask the city to put up a sign, which will give the police something to enforce. According to the officers, the way it currently is set up, it's a code enforcement issue—not a parking issue. When it becomes a parking issue, they can take more action. Therefore we got together as a neighborhood and all sent in submissions to the proper channels. That was done last August. So far we have heard nothing and repeated outreach to that group have yielded us no responses. We are seeking a "No Parking/Fire Lane" sign. There is precedence for this as there is one the other segment of Murphy Lane.This seems very reasonable. Several neighbors, including us, are willing to give permission for a sign to be placed on their/our land. • • I want to know whether it is legal for the seller to indicate there are more than one parking spaces during her marketing. Is she permitted to do this? It's certainly unethical. As the home is currently advertised on her own website, its listed with more than one parking space. The unfortunate result that awaits a potential buyer is looming. She is putting her personal needs to sell a home above what is right/ethical and possible legal • Does this home have a CO yet? I've asked that question a few times and have not received an answer. • I want us to ensure the height of the building is correct. And if it's not, what can be even be done? This is a concern that goes beyond Murphy Lane, but has been an issue around the city—as Skip Carlson said, people are doing what they want and asking for forgiveness later. Note: the house was not to exceed the height of the original building— I have renderings from an architect that indicate the height of the former building, and will share with you upon request. • I believe the city right away is 3 feet, can someone confirm that?And what is the penalty for punishment if someone is parked their car then the city right away? • Safety.: I worry about emergency service vehicles getting down the alley. I have heard the owner say "we would just move the cars if a fire truck needed to get past"— I do not think this is safe, at all! Also, when the cars are parked parallel to the house, I am unable to get out of my driveway. If one of my children is sick and I need to rush to the hospital in the middle of the night, this could be a major issue with consequences I do not wish to think about As it relates to any of the issues above, please let me know any actions that you take. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 3/19 0 6/21/2019 Zimbra Thank you for your time. If any of you would like to speak to me directly, I can be reached on 917-251- 7209. I also welcome all of you to come to the neighborhood anytime and I will speak with you in person, so that you can see the issue in living color. 6.2.7 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS A. Parking Space Dimensions 1. Each off-street parking space shall have the following minimum dimensions: 1. Parallel parking Width= 9 feet; length=22 feet; height= 7 feet 2. Perpendicular parking Width= 9 feet; length=18 feet; height= 7 feet 3. Parking on angle Containing an unobstructed rectangle measuring at least: Width= 9 feet; length=18 feet; height = 7 feet On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 1:07 PM Lisa Shields <lisa.shields@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Hi Blaine, Thank you for your email. I have submitted your complaint with your attached photos to the Code Enforcement Office in the Department of Public Safety for their follow-up. Copied here are Battalion Chief Dyer, who has direct supervision of the code enforcement team, and Lisa Watkins who manages their office. Mayor Kelly and Public Safety Commissioner Martin are also copied here. Please let me know if I can help in any other way. Lisa Shields Deputy Mayor City Hall, Suite 9 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 (518) 587-3550 x2514 PLEASE NOTE OUR TEMPORARY LOCATION AT THE RECREATION CENTER, 15 VANDERBILT AVENUE From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Lisa Shields" <Lisa.Shields@saratoga=sprinngs.org> Cc: "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpilk@gmail.com>, "Matt Sperazzo" <mjsperazzo@yahoo.com> https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 4/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra Sent: Wednesday; June 19, 2019 10:36:30 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Hi Lisa, I need to talk to someone in code enforcement on this home. As you know, It's been a back and forth on this home but ultimately the project went forward provided they stuck with the stipulations that were put down by the city. The home is now being marketed for sale, which is absolutely fine. What is not fine is that the seller/developer/real estate agent is telling people there are two to three parking spots at this home. There are factually not that many. There is one. That is how it got through the ZBA in the first place as they sought a relief variance to go from two spots to one. Which they got. I'm attached a photo of the listing which was recently updated today where the real estate agent has stated there are two spots. There are not two spots - there is one spot. She is saying there are more spots than there are in order to make it more markable. And once it's sold, the buyer will be left lied to, bringing more frustration to the neighborhood. I encourage you to drive by the home. You will see where she's telling people to park in front of the home as she put down gravel, but it's in the city right-of-way and is preventing me from getting into and out of my driveway. I have repeatedly brought this up with several people in the city including the parking enforcement and the building inspector, but I feel like no one is getting back to me because this is a hot button issue with the city attorney. I'm very upset because no I feel like no one is advocating for us, The citizens. I know your time is very valuable and I did not want to bring this to your attention but I felt I had no other choice. Who can I speak to about the issues what we're having with the parking? I've been told by the parking people that it's in process, but they will not tell us where in the process it is, but it's been 10 months! When I call to check in they tell meto call the police anytime there's an issue. We've called the police several times (7-10), but I don't want to keep calling them because they have more valuable business to attend to in the city. I'm at a loss I don't know who to turn to. I know we're right but I no one seems to want to help us. She's violating her relief variance and the city right of way, but it's advertising it falsely. The potential buyer needs to be protected, and so does the citizenry. I'd be happy to speak to you anytime in person or on the phone I can be reached at 917- 251-7209 or anytime via email. Thank you for your time, Blaine On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 2:37 PM Lisa Shields <lisa.shields@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Hello Blaine, I'm writing to you on behalf of the building department and in response to your emails. At this time, there are no building code violations at this property. Compliance https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 5/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra with the stipulation and the city's building code for the revised plans will be confirmed during the required inspections. There is a meeting with the mayor which was requested by others in your neighborhood on Monday April 16 at 2pm in the City Council room. Feel free to join us then or contact me with any further questions. Thank you, Lisa Shields Deputy Mayor City of Saratoga Springs Sent from my iPhone On Apr 11, 2018, at 10:08 AM, Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Duane, Refreshing this. On Fri, Apr 6, 2018, 10:08 PM Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@.gmail.com> wrote: Hi Duane, Directing this at you now, since I got a bounce back from Steves email as no longer valid. If it's easier to catch you up by phone, in happy to do that. Just let me know, but I would like an answer from the department. Best, Blaine On Thu, Apr 5, 2018, 11:11 PM Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Refreshing this. • On Mon, Apr 2, 2018, 5:54 PM Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you for the suggestion, but I am unavailable for the neighborhood meeting. I'm more than happy to get answers from you and Ms Barden, as you are the subject matter experts and the Mayor is not. I'd like to draw your attention to the Zoning ordinance Section 6.2.6 Off Street Parking Schedule https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 6/19 ' 6/21/2019 Zimbra Use: RESIDENCES Minimum Space: 2 per unit; 1.5 per unit in a UR-4, UR-5, T-4 or T-5 district. The applicant got a variance permitting parking for one vehicle. How will the building department qualify what constitutes one space? Blaine On Mon, Apr 2, 2018, 12:50 PM Stephen Shaw <stephen.shaw@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Mr. Dunn I am unaware of any civil definition of one space. No one has authorized any change from one to zero. My understanding is that there is a neighborhood meeting coming up with the Mayor and the City Attorney. It might be beneficial for you to either send your questions or attend. Steve From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Stephen Shaw" <stephen.shaw@saratoga=springs.org> Cc: "duane miller" <duane.miller@saratoga=springs.org>, "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpilk@gmail.com>, "Lisa Shields" <Lisa.Shields@saratoga=sprngs.org>, "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga=springs.org>, "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga=springs.org> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 4:36:25 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Refreshing this. On Sat, Mar 24, 2018, 7:44 PM Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you for getting back to me. I truly appreciate it. I'm very concerned that the applicant received a variance to allow for one parking spot on the property, and now she effectively has none. While there may be a "car port" I suspect once the stairs to the front door go in, there will not be room for a vehicle. It certainly will not meet the definition of the commercial space you outlined below. The original relief granted was for going from the standard two spaces to one space. So what is our civil definition of one space? https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 7/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra If there truly is no space for one car than who authorized the new variance to go from two spaces to 0 spaces? Best, Blaine On Mar 20, 2018 10:11 AM, "Stephen Shaw" <stephen.shaw@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Mr. Dunn, Thank you for your patience. I am told by Susan Barden that there are no dimensions for a legal parking space inside a residence that the ZBA requires. Parking space requirements for commercial projects, usually at exterior areas, are 9 x 18. Revised plans have been submitted based on the court stipulation. The City will be reviewing those plans today for compliance with the stipulation and Building Code. Confirmation of compliance with those plans comes at the next inspection. I hope this answers your questions for now. Feel free to contact us with questions in the future. Stephen Shaw Zoning & Building Inspector From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Stephen Shaw" <stephen.shaw@saratoga=springs.org> Cc: "duane miller" <duane.miller@saratoga=springs.org>, "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpilk@gmail.com>, "Lisa Shields" <Lisa.Shields@saratoga=springs.org> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 8:31:59 AM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Wonderful, thank you for taking the time the get back to me, Steve. In the meantime, can you tell me what the legal size for a parking space is per the code? This is in general to all of the city, not just the project on Murphy Lane. Excelsior, Blaine Dunn On Mar 15, 2018 8:20 AM, "Stephen Shaw" <stephen.shaw@saratoga=springs.org> wrote: https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 8/19 ' 6/21/2019 Zimbra Baine, I spoke with the City Attorney's office yesterday about how to handle the continued inquiries about this project. I will be following up with the Mayor's office today on the same topic. Thank you for your interest into this project. Steve From: Blaine Dunn" blame.dunn@gmail.com> To: "duane miller" <duane.miller@saratoga=ssprings.org>, "stephen show" <stephen.shaw@saratoga=springs.org> Cc: "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpilk@gmail.com>, "Lisa Shields" <Lisa.Shields@saratoga=springs.org> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 7:47:23 AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Murphy Lane barn Refreshing this. On Mar 14, 2018 10:41 AM, "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Refreshing this. On Mar 12, 2018 10:28 PM, "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Duane and Steve, I have been conversing with Susan Barden, and she suggested that i reach out to you. Concerning the construction project on Murphy Lane, it is my understanding that the city does not have the new plans on file while the construction is taking place. Is it normal to allow work to take place while the city is not in possession of plans? How is the city to know if it is being built correctly and to spec? Second question, the applicant was granted a variance for one parking spot, rather than the normal two. The settlement agreement she made with the city did not eliminate that requirement. What is the legal size definition for one parking spot? Best, Blaine Forwarded message From: Susan Barden <susan.barden@saratoga- springs.org> Date: Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 12:55 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 9/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra • To: Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> Hi Blaine, I would suggest that you contact the Building Dept. Either Steve Shaw or Duane Miller can assist with that question. Have a nice weekend, Susan Susan B. Barden, AICP Senior Planner SaratogaCity of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway. Saratoga Springs, NY 518-587-3550 ext. 2493 From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga- springs.org> Cc: "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpiik@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 9:00:29 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn So construction is allowed to take place while the city awaits new plans? One last question, the applicant was granted a variance for one parking spot. What is the legal size definition for one parking spot? On Mar 8, 2018 12:02 PM, "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Blaine, We do have plans, but my understanding is that revised plans have been requested. Have a good day, Susan Susan B. Barden, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 10/19 • 6/21/2019 Zimbra Saratoga Springs, NY • 518-587-3550 ext. 2493 From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga- springs.org> Cc: "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpilk@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 9:59:26 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Circling back on this. Is it normal not to have plans on file as construction is under way? On Mar 2, 2018 6:00 PM, "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Susan, Is it normal for the building department not to have the plans on file for a project of this size? How can they check if things are being built to spec if they don't have the plans? Blaine On Mar 2, 2018 3:38 PM, "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Hi Blaine, The Building Dept. has requested submission of revised building plans including elevation drawings. These have not been received yet. Have a great weekend. Susan Susan B. Barden, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway. Saratoga Springs,NY 518-587-3550 ext. 2493 From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga- https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 11/19 • 6/21/2019 Zimbra springs.org> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 2:50:50 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Of course, I forgot about that. I'd like to get on this sooner rather than later. The building is now at it's full height, so if there is a difference, it would be best to discover that now before it gets too far along. Have a nice weekend. Blaine On Feb 23, 2018 2:44 PM, "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Hi Blaine, Those elevation drawings were submitted with the proposed area variance modification that was later withdrawn by the applicant. I'll have to review the building plans and get back to you. Have a nice weekend, Susan Susan B. Barden, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway- Saratoga Springs, NY 518-587-3550 ext. 2493 From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga- springs.org> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:19:29 PM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Is this it? Page 4 . https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 12/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra http://www.saratoga- springs.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/337? fileID=1460 On Feb 22, 2018 2:04 PM, "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: That would be great. I appreciate you getting back to me. • On Feb 22, 2018 2:03 PM, "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga=ssprings.org> wrote: Hi Blaine, I don't believe that there is anything specified in the agreement as to height of the structure. It should be noted in the building plans. I can take a look at those and let you know. Best, Susan Susan B. Barden, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga_Springs 474 Broadway. • Saratoga Springs, NY 518-587-3550 ext. 2493 From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga=springs.org> Cc: "loretta martin" <loretta.martin@me.com>, "Judy" <jchase2@nycap.rr.com>, "Cynthia Behan" <cbehan@nycap.rr.com>, "Rachel Pilkington" <rachpiik@gmail.com>, "Susan Rodems" <srodems@nycap.rr.com>, "Ilorrill" <Ilorrill@aol.com>, "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent.deleonardis@saratoga- springs.org>, "Tony Izzo" <tony.izzo@saratoga=springs.org>, "Trish Bush" <trish.bush@saratoga- springs.org>, "Matt Sperazzo" <rnjsperazzo@yahoo.com>, "Evan https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 13/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra " Williamson" <thumpero02@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 7:36:20 AM Subject: Re: Murphy Lane barn Refreshing this. On Feb 19, 2018 4:41 PM, "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> wrote: Susan, Tony, Vincent, In this agreement, was there any stipulation made on height? I recall something was said during the conference call, but im not certain exactly what. They put the second floor on today. Once they add 11 feet for the roof, it may become the tallest building on the block. FYI the original barn was 23 feet high. Best, Blaine On Jan 6, 2018 10:39 AM, "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga- springs.org> wrote: Hello all, The City legal staff and I would like to set up a meeting to discuss the status of the pending litigation on the 39 Murphy Lane barn area variance application with all neighbors that may be interested in an update. Please let me know if you are interested in meeting with us and your general availability for the coming week and/or following week. Please provide any contact information (email or phone number) that you may have for the new owners at 22 Clark St., Matthew Sperazzo, and 15 Stratton St., William Crager, or forward this message. In addition, please provide https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 14/19 ' 6/21/2019 Zimbra any contact information for Susan Brundige, 18 Clark St., or forward this email. I have not included any neighbors that were personally noticed of the public hearings and didn't provide comments to the ZBA when the applications were considered, but feel free to pass along this invitation to anyone that I may have missed. We will follow up with a meeting date and look forward to meeting with you. Best regards, Susan Barden Susan B. Barden, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway. Saratoga Springs, NY 518-587-3550 ext. 2493 Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the i sender by return e-mail. Thank you https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 15/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e- mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 16/19 • 6/21/2019 Zimbra delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e- mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication. and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 17/19 6/21/2019 Zimbra • Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are. intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 18/19 " 6/21/2019 Zimbra Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. • https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=32667&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 19/19 8/16/2018 Zimbra Zimbra duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org Re: Documentl.pdf From : Duane Miller <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Thu, Aug 16, 2018 11:33 AM Subject : Re: Documentl.pdf To :Jean D'Agostino <jeandagostino@howardhanna.com> Cc : patrick cogan <patrick.cogan@saratoga-springs.org> Jean, I have received your attached letter from the Truss manufacturer. In addition, the Building Department requires that an Engineers' approval letter be provided for the completed truss installation. Original Message From: "Jean D'Agostino" <jeandagostino@howardhanna.com> To: "duane miller" <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 10:02:26 AM Subject: Documentl.pdf Hi Duane, please let me know if this is what you need. Thank you, Jeanne [Howard Hanna. Find out what YOUR HOME is really worth.] Howard Hanna. Find out what YOUR HOME is really worth. The information contained in this transmission including any attached documentation is privileged and confidential. It is intended only for use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copy of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Howard Hanna by replying to this email. Please delete all copies of this message and all attachments. All properties herein are subject to change in sales terms, prior sale, or withdrawal without prior notice; Howard Hanna is not responsible for changes in sale, availability or for any errors in information presented. Howard Hanna Real Estate Services<https://www.howardhanna.com> (412) 967-9000. Duane Miller Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs 518-587-3550 ext.2512 https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=264768az=America/New York 1/1 7"al kilt Gol gri+1 UFP New York, LLC 1.0,44E A Universal Forest Products Company Jean, Back in the spring,I made a site visit to the job on Murphy Lane in Saratoga Springs,NY to do a visual truss inspection for trusses that had been stored for future construction. I went to ensure that the metal connector plates and lumber were still in compliance with our TPI standards. Upon review of the trusses,I determined the plates were still embedded properly,even though they sat for extended period. The lumber was also still in good condition since the trusses were stored in an upright position and covered to protect them from the weather. There was one truss that had minor damage and we obtained an engineered repair to fix that truss which was repaired by the framer. Lucas Ahl (Ivo ._ a 507 UFP New York,LLC 11 Fails.Industrial Park Rd Hudson,NY 12534 rOCEN 52®118 sli • 11 Falls Industrial Park Road Hudson,NY 12534 518.828.2888 phone 518.828.2891 fax www.ufpi.com REScheck Software Version 4.6.4 .x It / Compliance Certificate Project Carriage House Residence Renovation Energy Code: 2009 IECC Location: Saratoga Springs, New York • Construction Type: Single-family Project Type: New Construction Conditioned Floor Area: 1,718 ft2 Glazing Area 9% Climate Zone: 5 (6998 HDD) Permit Date: Permit Number: . Construction Site: Owner/Agent: Designer/Contractor: 39 Murphy Lane South Alley, LLC Engineering by:Tonya Yasenchak, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 38 Warren St PE Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Engineering America Co. 76 Washington St. Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 518/587-1340 Compliance: Passes using UA trade-off Compliance: 0.7%Better Than Code Maximum UA: 300 Your UA: 298 The%Better or Worse Than Code Index reflects how close to compliance the house is based on code trade-off rules. It DOES NOT provide an estimate of energy use or cost relative to a minimum-code home. Envelope Assemblies Gross Area Cavity Cont. Assembly or R-Value R-Value U-Factor UA Perimeter Ceiling 1: Flat Ceiling or Scissor Truss 945 38.0 0.0 0.030 28 Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,276 21.0 0.0 0.057 66 Window 1:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 62 0.310 19 Door 1: Glass 40 0.310 12 Door 2: Solid 20 0.150 3 Wall 2:Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,145 21.0 0.0 0.057 60 Window 2:Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 101 0.310 31 Floor 1: All-Wood joist/Truss:Over Outside Air 171 30.0 0.0 0.033 6 Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry 946 11.0 0.0 0.072 66 Wall height: 7.7' Depth below grade: 5.5' Insulation depth: 7.7' Window 3:Vinyl/Fiberglass Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 24 0.310 7 Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln'- Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 1 of 8 Compliance Statement: The proposed poyilAing.design described here is consistent with the building plans, specifications, and other calculations submitted with the app.lietkelipp,The proposed building,q„as been designed to meet the 2009 IECC requirements in REScheck Version 4.6.4 and`tc�k3o lESIV m rf,� tory requireme listed in �,ae REScheck Inspection Checklist. En.ineerin. b : �``Q4. • • 6. `�ASF�i '• %fi ^` 'y S E f 2 tD 2018 Name Title 4.47 • 4. i • mature Date l- j s s P~ • t r O • N�i�i�su�rt • Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 2 of 8 CTv REScheck Software Version 4.6.4 Inspection Checklist Energy Code: 2009 IECC Requirements: 0.0% were addressed directly in the REScheck software Text in the "Comments/Assumptions" column is provided by the user in the REScheck Requirements screen. For each requirement, the user certifies that a code requirement will be met and how that is documented, or that an exception is being claimed. Where compliance is itemized in a separate table, a reference to that table is provided. Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Pre-Inspection/Plan Review Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 103.2 Construction drawings and ❑Complies [PR1]1 documentation demonstrate } " 3❑Does Not U energy code compliance for the Z ❑Not Observable building envelope. I , ❑Not Applicable 103.2, Construction drawings and I ❑Complies 403.7 documentation demonstrate i❑Does Not [PR3]' energy code compliance for , ['Not Observable lel lighting and mechanical systems. Systems serving multiple #❑Not Applicable idwelling units must demonstrate compliance with the commercial code. 403.6 Heating and cooling equipment is; Heating: Heating: ;❑Complies [PR2]2 sized per ACCA Manual S based i Btu/hr Btu/hr :❑Does Not per ACCA Manual or V ion loads ] Cooling: Cooling: ;❑Not Observable ;other approved methods. Btu/hr Btu/hr l ❑Not Applicable 1 Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact (Tier 2) 3 Low Impact (Tier 3) Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 3 of 8 Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Foundation Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions Si Req.ID 402.1.1 Conditioned basement wall ; R- ; R- .❑Complies ;See the Envelope Assemblies [F04]' insulation R-value.Where interior i ❑Does Not ,table for values. insulation is used, verification Not Observable may need to occur during ❑ j Insulation Inspection. Not ❑Not Applicable required in warm-humid locations in Climate Zone 3. I 303.2 Conditioned basement wall 1 ; '❑Complies [F05]1 insulation installed per t ❑Does Not manufacturer's instructions. 10Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.2.7 Conditioned basement wall j ft ft ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies [F06]1 insulation depth of burial or ❑Does Not table for values. U distance from top of wall. ❑Not Observable I ;❑Not Applicable 303.2.1 'A protective covering is installed 1 I❑Complies [F011]2 !to protect exposed exterior [ ?❑Does Not insulation and extends a t minimum of 6 in. below grade. • Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.8 ;Snow-and ice-melting system 10Complies [F012]2 controls installed. 10Does Not ) 7 ❑Not Observable (❑Not Applicable • Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 4 of 8 Section • Plans Verified Field Verified # Framing/ Rough-In Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.1, ;Door U-factor. U- U- ;❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.3.4 ❑Does Not table for values. [FRU1 F i❑Not Observable • ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, ;Glazing U-factor(area weighted U- U- •;❑Complies ;See the Envelope Assemblies 402.3.1, average). ❑Does Not 'table for values. 402.3.3, 402.5 ;❑Not Observable [FR2]1 ❑Not Applicable 303.1.3 U-factors of fenestration products F 1❑Complies [FR4]1 Tare determined in accordance I I 1❑Does Not v with the NFRC test procedure or I ❑Not Observable taken from the default table. • 1 i❑Not Applicable 402.4.4 Fenestration that is not site built ! j (❑Complies [FR2O]1 is listed and labeled as meeting 1 I {❑Does Not AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/I.S.2/A440 ❑Not Observable or has infiltration rates per NFRC , 400 that do not exceed code IDINot Applicable ; limits. 1 ' 402.4.5 IC-rated recessed lighting fixtures ;❑Complies [FR16]2 'sealed at housing/interior finish ❑Does Not • U ;and labeled to indicate <_2.0 cfm l❑Not Observable leakage at 75 Pa. ; ( 1111Not Applicable ; 403.2.1 Supply ducts in attics areR 1 R- ;❑Complies [FR12]1 insulated to>_R-8.All other ducts i R_ • R- :❑Does Not I ,in unconditioned spaces or outside the building envelope are? ;❑Not Observable insulated to>_R-6. :❑Not Applicable 403.2.2 All joints and seams of air ducts, (❑Complies [FR13]1 lair handlers,filter boxes, and '❑Does Not -, ;building cavities used as return :ducts are sealed. ❑Not Observable '❑Not Applicable 403.2.3 ,,Building cavities are not used for i❑Complies [FR1513 supply ducts. I❑Does Not 4 iENot Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.3 HVAC piping conveying fluids R- R- '❑Complies [FR17]2 ;above 105 °F or chilled fluids '❑Does Not V ;below 55°F are insulated to >_R- ;❑Not Observable 3 ;❑Not Applicable 403.4 Circulating service hot water R- R- '❑Complies [FR18]2 (pipes are insulated to R-2. ❑Does Not lqJ ENot Observable DNot Applicable 403.5 'Automatic or gravity dampers are !❑Complies [FR19]2 installed on all outdoor air 1 I❑Does Not intakes and exhausts. Observable 1 ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: • 1 High Impact (Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact (Tier 3) Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 5 of 8 0\ • Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Insulation Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 303.1 ;All installed insulation is labeled e I {❑Complies • [IN13]2 or the installed R-values R❑Does Not ' U provided. i❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, ;Floor insulation R-value. R- ; R- ;❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.5, i ❑ Wood ❑ Wood ❑Does Not table for values. 402.2.6 [IN1]1 ❑ Steel ❑ Steel ❑Not Observable 4 ❑Not Applicable 303.2, ;Floor insulation installed per , ❑Complies 402.2.6 manufacturer's instructions, and i❑Does Not [IN2]1 in substantial contact with the p) underside of the subfloor. l ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, :Wall insulation R-value. If this is a; R- R- '❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.4, mass wall with at least 1/2 of the ;❑ Wood ❑ Wood ❑Does Not table for values. 402.2.5 ;wall insulation on the wall ❑ Mass ❑ Mass :Not Observable [IN3]1 ;exterior,the exterior insulation ❑ Steel ID Steel ❑Not Applicable V I requirement applies. pp 303.2 ;Wall insulation is installed per 1 . l❑Complies [IN4]1 !manufacturer's instructions. ❑Does Not J i❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: • • • • • 1 'High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino- 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 6 of 8 I , Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.1, ;Ceiling insulation R-value.Where R- ' R- ;❑Complies ;See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.1, l> R-30 is required, R-30 can be ❑ Wood ❑ Wood lODoes Not 'table for values. 402.2.2 :used if insulation is not [FI1]1 ;compressed at eaves. R-30 may ❑ Steel ❑ Steel ;❑Not Observable tg be used for 500 ft2 or 20% I❑Not Applicable (whichever is less) where I sufficient space is not available. ' 303.1.1.1,;Ceiling insulation installed per i❑Complies 303.2 ;manufacturer's instructions. ;❑Does Not [F12]1 Blown insulation marked every v 300 ft2. I❑Not Observable 1❑Not Applicable 402.2.3 Attic access hatch and door R- ; R- l❑Complies [F13]' l insulation >_R-value of the IODoes Not ;adjacent assembly. 11_39j ad1 ;11Not Observable I ;❑Not Applicable 402.4.2, :Building envelope tightness ACH 50 = ACH 50 = ❑Complies 402.4.2.1 ;verified by blower door test result ❑Does Not [F117]' ;of<7 ACH at 50 Pa.This 4 ;requirement may instead be met .❑Not Observable :via visual inspection, in which ;❑Not Applicable 'case verification may need to occur during Insulation Inspection. 403.2.2 Post construction duct tightness cfm cfm ;❑Complies [F14]1 test result of<_8 cfm to outdoors, ❑Does Not 4 or<_12 cfm across systems. Or, rough-in test result of. 6 cfm ['Not Observable across systems or<4 cfm ;❑Not Applicable without air handler. Rough-in test ;verification may need to occur I • !during Framing Inspection. I ' 403.1.1 1 Programmable thermostats ❑Complies [FI9]' I installed on forced air furnaces. ❑Does Not • V 1❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.1.2 Heat pump thermostat installed f❑Complies [FI10]2 Ion heat pumps. +❑Does Not t i p❑Not Observable j❑Not Applicable 403.4 ICirculating service hot water ❑Complies f [Fill]2 +systems have automatic or ❑Does Not U `accessible manual controls. Observable ] t i❑Not Applicable 404.1 ;50%of lamps in permanent ❑Complies [F16]' lfixtures are high efficacy lamps. i❑Does Not 11=INot Observable ❑Not Applicable 401.3 Compliance certificate posted. lEComplies [Fl7]2 I ,❑Does Not V ❑Not Observable I❑Not Applicable 303.3 {Manufacturer manuals for 10Complies [Fl18]3 9 mechanical and water heating ,❑Does Not `Q, i equipment have been provided. ,❑Not Observable I s ;❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 7 of 8 • • • 1 High Impact (Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact (Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) • Project Title: Carriage House Residence Renovation Report date: 09/26/18 Data filename: C:\Users\Tonya\Documents\REScheck\D'Agostino - 39 Murphy Ln - Rev 9-25-18.rck Page 8 of 8 'At60i No 64106 Preett 'j':5-SF 3$ fil/6 441j5T-RZ) 4113) ab Cs. /7 If- 20:P-- EY 2& 12.) 12E.5F -0,1) sj FA,e) ..1t1 OIA (ifix_. 3') 12.osf (s- (S-- (2' ry = 20.0 (2) c J C-"2-) ( 3 ) ) _ 3o. o Ji) � f 2joo R, ! s 47.50/° AAai 06- D= (,) / s 10.025F 31) I • = Z5 O Zb 61-AS5 C r� ( 3`)'(, S 240.015F (3e,, 3fo ` + ?) u s j42Pfild ; (z4)%eae) 621 : �2` x z,) _- Zg. F (1C : (- :) ( ' ?) 3o.) { (z) F ; (2) (LI'q 4t'6 qZ.7� /00.76-=5~ /0)51 (it = , 3 i 1oOf' 601 / /7/, 365-F- (z- 3e) (7'71e (icri - Wi 4 't `z, 310`1 4- 2(e `Z (-717)62R. 54) = qq(4,- z 5F wlioPOLJ *3 (q ) (41)(3 ` Y `) = 25-1 sF j I. Q JAMES A. FAucI ATTORNEY AT LAW,PLLC 30 Remsen Street Ballston Spa,NY 12020 (518)885-5011 Fax(518)885-5298 ballstonlaw.com iim(a ballstonlaw.com Graydine Sanders,Paralegal grayd ine(a,ballstonlaw.com April 29,2016 Hon. Joanne Yepsen Mayor, City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 HAND DELIVERED RE: 39 Murphy Lane: Tax Map Parcel 165.84-1-22 (Inside District)Variances Granted 04/02/2015 —Jean D'Agostino Dear Mayor Yepson With regard to the above, although the stop work order itself is silent upon"the conditions under which the [unauthorized] activity may resume" (despite as such is required per City of Saratoga Springs Ordinance 9.2.1.2(A)), it appears that through meetings and discussions we have had with Mr. Izzo and Mr. Shaw,that the stop work order was issued pursuant to a perceived violation of City Ordinance Article 5 —Nonconforming Uses, Structures and Lots. From a review of that Article, and of the history of the lot in question,there is no question that that there is no violation whatsoever occurring with the present construction on the lot. A title search has revealed that the lot was created with its present dimensions in 1927. Enclosed please find copies of the deeds in the chain of title together with relevant maps. The only issue with Article 5 of the City Ordinance that could apply to the present facts is 5.5 Nonconforming Lots, which provides: A. A lot which lawfully existed and was in compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance applicable on the date that such lot was recorded in the Saratoga County Clerk's office but which does not conform to the current dimensional requirements of this Chapter shall be considered a legal non-conforming lot of records as follows in "B" and"C". B. Minimum lot size and minimum average lot width requirements shall not apply to any lawfully recorded lot which was under different ownership from any adjoining land on or before July 6, 1961. 1 Ali C. The owner of any lot in a residential district which does not conform to the district's minimum lot size and minimum average lot width requirements may erect a single family residence or accessory building if the lot legally existed on or before January 19, 1970 and is not under the same ownership as any adjoining land. Since the lot as issue was created in 1927, it is a legal pre-existing non-conforming lot and the minimum lot size and minimum average lot width requirements do NOT apply and any current owner of the lot is expressly allowed to construct a single family residence upon the lot. Note also that section 5.4 Nonconforming Structures of the ordinance is also inapplicable since the structure that is on the lot was never nonconforming. Mrs. D'Agostino has been extremely patient in dealing with the City on this issue. Her damages as a result of the wrongfully issued stop work order continue to accrue. Demand is hereby made once again to immediately lift the stop work order and to re-instate the building permit. Failure to do so will result in Mrs. D'Agosinto filing a lawsuit against the City asking for all legal remedies including monetary damages. Sincerely, James A. Fauci ENCL. cc: Jean D'Agostino Anthony Izzo, Esq. - with encl. Steve Shaw, -with enclo. 1 F.' OGA 'h City of Saratoga Springs STEPHEN SHAW Zoning&Building Inspector BUILDING DEPARTMENT Extension 2491 7. $ CITY HALL • .. DUANE MILLER 474 Broadway Assistant Building Inspector Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 Extension 2512 MICHAEL CARLSON Telephone (518)587-3550 Ext.2511 Assistant Building Inspector • BUILDING & PLUMBING Fax(518)580-9480 Extension 2541 • CODES • ZONING www.saratoga-springs.org JOHN BARNEY Zoning and Building Technik.ian Extension 2521 NOTICE OF VIOLATION/STOP WORK ORDER July 8, 2016 Jeanne D'Agostino South Alley LLC 38 Warren Street Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 RE: 39 Murphy Lane, Parcel# 165.84-1-22 Dear Ms.D'Agostino, This order is in furtherance of and clarifies the reasons for the stop work order of Jan. 22,2016 which ordered • you to cease and desist all work associated with Building Permit#20151102 on your property located at 39 Murphy Lane, parcel#165.84-1-22, in the City of Saratoga Springs. The reason for this STOP WORK ORDER was the fact that you had progressed both beyond your approved variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)as well as outside the scope of your approved Building Permit plans. The building plans as submitted on 8/3/15 with the building permit application show a crawlspace under the first floor. Although this differs from simply replacing the slab, as was indicated to the ZBA,this type of change is deemed minor. Similarly, when you deviated from those approved plans and increased your foundation size to create a basement,that change was also considered minor in nature as it was not anticipated to effect the variances as approved. As is our typical protocol,you were allowed to proceed with the concrete foundation pour on 12/22/15 under the condition that revised plans be submitted to show that the change was acceptable to your engineer. We were not in receipt of those revised plans until 5/3/16, approximately 4 1/2 months after you received the request and 3 1/2 months after the issuance of the initial STOP WORK ORDER on 1/22/16. In the intervening month between the foundation pour inspection and the issuance of the STOP WORK ORDER it was clear that the project had become significantly different than the approvals that it had received both by the ZBA'and the Building Department. Fill has been brought in and a once level site is now much higher than the alley and adjoining properties. This fill was a result of the foundation change and a requirement of the NYS Residential Code Section 401.3 to have adequate drainage away from the foundation walls. An assessment should be done to ensure that this requirement is not being exceeded and thus creating a run off problem in the alley and adjoining properties. You may even qualify for that section's exception. Another result of the foundation change is that the first floor is now significantly higher than it was originally as well as being higher than depicted in the plans submitted for the building permit.This has led to the need for additional steps at the front landing and thus further principal building coverage than the existing variance allows.This change in elevation also means that there is new construction in areas of the required setback not previously considered by the ZBA. Both of these items will require you to seek an amendment to your variance from the ZBA. Furthermore,although your plans indicate "repair, replace& sister as required" in multiple areas,the ZBA's 3/23/15 decision clearly does not authorize either"tearing down the barn and starting new" or "a removal of the existing barn" (decision paragraphs la and lb). There have been massive changes in the exterior coverings from siding to roofing as well as all the roof framing and most of the wall framing. Given the fact that the renovation aspect of this project was so critical in the application, neighbor support and granting of the variance,I believe that it is incumbent upon me to refer this back to the ZBA for their interpretation as to whether the work done is consistent with the work that they anticipated and authorized. Sincerely, Ste,ren R. Shaw Zoning and Building Inspector SRS/kgf 2 Zimbra 11 ., https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=15179&tz=Americ... Zimbra kathleen.farone@saratoga-springs.org Re: Stop Work Order From :Stephen Shaw <stephen.shaw@saratoga- Fri, Jan 22, 2016 04:25 PM springs.org> Subject : Re: Stop Work Order To :Jean D'Agostino <jdagostino@realtyusa.com> Cc Susan Barden <susan.barden@saratoga springs.org>, Kathleen Farone c<,..,) <kathleen.farone@saratoga-springs.org>, Vincent ; c/ DeLeonardis <vincent deleonardis@saratoga springs.org>, Tony Izzo <tony.izzo@saratoga springs.org>,.Joseph Ogden <joseph.ogden@saratoga-springs.org> Jeanne, It has been determined that the changes to your Building Department plans which increased the height of the structure also increased the non-conformance. That is a situation that, along with the additional steps in the setback, will need to be addressed by the ZBA at the next possible date . No further construction is to continue until that time . Stephen Shaw Zoning & Building Inspector Original Message From: "Jean D'Agostino" <jdagostino@realtyusa . com> To: "Stephen Shaw" <stephen. shaw@saratoga-springs . org> Cc: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga-springs . org>, "Kathleen Farone" <kathleen. farone@saratoga-springs . org>, "Vincent DeLeonardis" <vincent .deleonardis@saratoga-springs . org>, "Tony Izzo" <tony. izzo@saratoga-springs . org>, "Joseph Ogden" <joseph.ogden@saratoga-springs . org> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 6: 04 : 28 PM Subject : Re : Stop Work Order Hi Steve, I don' t understand why you gave me a stop work order? Please advise. Jeanne 1 of 2 1/25/2016 9:48 AM Zimbra ' https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=15179&tz=Americ... Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 21, 2016, at 3 : 49 PM, Stephen Shaw <stephen. shaw@saratoga-springs . org> wrote: > NOTICE OF VIOLATION/STOP WORK ORDER > Ms . D'Agostino, > The scope of work you are performing at 39 Murphy is outside the scope of your permit . You are hereby ordered to CEASE AND DESIST all activities at the property. A full set of revised plans from your engineer as well as sign off from the Zoning Board of Appeals will be required to proceed. > Stephen Shaw > Zoning & Building Inspector > Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual (s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail . Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice : This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual (s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. 2 of 2 1/25/2016 9:48 AM —Ilt bra Page 1 of 2 Zimbra duane.miller©saratoga-springs.org RE: #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley From :Tonya Yasenchak <tonyay@nycap.rr.com> Wed, Sep 16, 2015 08:08 PM Subject : RE: #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley To : 'Duane Miller' <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Cc :jdagostino@realtyusa.com Hi Duane - Jeanne D'Agostino will be dropping off revised plans to you tomorrow morning. The revisions include: - Crawl space foundation instead of the slab. The vapor barrier will then be on the warm side of the crawl space wall foundation. - Revised RES Check Energy Analysis with the crawl space modification - Revised cross section which details the crawl space as well as scissor trusses over the Master Bedroom. - Plot Plan which depicts the location of silt fence around the perimeter of the lot and a construction entrance at the carport location. Due to the small size of the lot, any excavated materials will be placed directly in a truck for removal. Therefore there is no plan for excavated material storage on site. Building materials will be stored in the back yard as well as within the building. Engineering America Co. does not design or suggest the means/methods for the Contractor. Should you have questions about cribbing or any other construction method, the Owner and/or their contractors should be able to answer your questions. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Thank you for your time & cooperation. Sincerely, - Tonya Y. ENGINEERING AMERICA CO. "Quality Design with Integrity" 1 Tonya Yasenchak, PE 76 Washington St. , Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 I 518 / 587 - 1340 tonyay@nycap.rr.com Original Message From: Duane Miller [mailto:duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org] Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 3:29 PM To: Tonya Yasenchak <tonyay@nycap.rr.com> Cc: jdagostino@realtyusa.com Subject: #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley I have reviewed the plans and permit application for this project and have the following questions/comment: 1. )How is the vapor barrier requirement for the slabs being met? https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=5335&tz=America/New York 9/17/2015 , ‘, ' ' `fibra Page 2 of 2 2. )Construction entrance and silt fence locations are not shown on the plot. Please provide. 3. ) I am curious as to how the foundation will be poured with the structure in place. Is the plan to jack and crib the existing structure? If so, please submit plan for excavation removal and material staging area. Please provide the information requested, the permit cannot be issued until received by the Building Department. Duane Miller Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs 518-587-3550 ext.2512 Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual (s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=5335&tz=America/New York 9/17/2015 Zichna Page 1 of 2 i Zimbra duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org _ . - . - --- -, Re: #39 Murphy Lane,South Alley From : Duane Miller <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Cf-Thu, Sep 17, 2015 03:35 PM Subject : Re: #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley To :Tonya Yasenchak <tonyay@nycap.rr.com> Cc :jdagostino <jdagostino@realtyusa.com> Tonya, Thank you, I have reviewed the revisions (Dwg. A-4) , but do not have a revised drawing A-5 to reflect the change to a crawl space in lieu of over- pouring existing slabs. As far as the Means and Methods of the project, I just want to make sure we are all on the same page. The Building Department requires an Engineered plan as to any jacking methods. Per Section 1202.7 of the Existing Building Code, Structural inspections will be required by a qualified professional to verify that components of the existing structure have sustained no damage. Please contact me if you should have any questions. Original Message From: "Tonya Yasenchak" <tonyay@nycap.rr.com> To: "Duane Miller" <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Cc: "jdagostino" <jdagostino@realtyusa.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 8:08:45 PM Subject: RE: #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley Hi Duane - Jeanne D'Agostino will be dropping off revised plans to you tomorrow morning. The revisions include: - Crawl space foundation instead of the slab. The vapor barrier will then be on the warm side of the crawl space wall foundation. - Revised RES Check Energy Analysis with the crawl space modification - Revised cross section which details the crawl space as well as scissor trusses over the Master Bedroom. - Plot Plan which depicts the location of silt fence around the perimeter of the lot and a construction entrance at the carport location. Due to the small size of the lot, any excavated materials will be placed directly in a truck for removal. Therefore there is no plan for excavated material storage on site. Building materials will be stored in the back yard as well as within the building. Engineering America Co. does not design or suggest the means/methods for the Contractor. Should you have questions about cribbing or any other construction method, the Owner and/or their contractors should be able to answer your questions. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. ' Thank you for your time & cooperation. Sincerely, https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=5399&tz=America/New York 9/17/2015 Zimbra • Page 2 of 2 t Tonya Y. ENGINEERING AMERICA CO. "Quality Design with Integrity" Tonya Yasenchak, PE 76 Washington St. , Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 518 / 587 - 1340 tonyay@nycap.rr.com Original Message From: Duane Miller [mailto:duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org] Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 3:29 PM To: Tonya Yasenchak <tonyay@nycap.rr.com> Cc: jdagostino@realtyusa.com Subject: #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley I have reviewed the plans and permit application for this project and have the following questions/comment: l. )How is the vapor barrier requirement for the slabs being met? 2. )Construction entrance and silt fence locations are not shown on the plot. Please provide. 3. ) I am curious as to how the foundation will be poured with the structure in place. Is the plan to jack and crib the existing structure? If so, please submit plan for excavation removal and material staging area. Please provide the information requested, the permit cannot be issued until received by the Building Department. Duane Miller Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs 518-587-3550 ext.2512 Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual (s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Duane Miller Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs 518-587-3550 ext.2512 https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=5399&tz=America/New York 9/17/2015 '7W AC" As'0�► CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Bill Moore, Chair y Keith B.Kaplan, We Chair ti::; t' ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CiC a ;:�,- 4 m Adam McNeill,Secretary {pi;- 191:5.2 OiiS, •, O Gary Hasbrouck Cm(HALL-474 BROADWAY George"Skip"Caisson SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 pH)SI8-587-3550 Ex)518-S80-9480 James Helicke CENTENNIAL W.%W.SMATOGA-SPRI,,S,ORG Susan Steer ZBA MEETING—MONDAY,MARCH 23,2015 RECORD OF DECISION ALL SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT 1. #2820 WOJDYLA RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 119 George Street, area variance for bedroom and bathroom additions to an existing two-family residence; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage, minimum side yard and total side yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential—3 District. Action: Public hearing opened and remains open;application adjourned to Apr. 13. 2. #2821 TROJANSKI BUILDERS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, 10 Doten Avenue, area variance for proposed construction of a single-family residence,seeking relief from the minimum average lot width, minimum side yard setback(each side)and minimum total side yard setbacks in the Urban Residential—4 District. Action: Public hearing opened and remains open; application adjourned to Apr. 13. 3. #1634.1 BRUNSWICK B&B FRONT PORCH AND SIGN, 143 Union Avenue,area variance for proposed construction of a front porch expansion and a new freestanding sign; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback and maximum size for a freestanding sign in a residential district in the Urban Residential—4 District. No Action: Application adjourned to April 13, 2015. 4. #2823 CELESTE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, 32 Fifth Avenue, area variance to raise roof of an existing garage and use as living space; seeking relief from the minimum rear and side yard setbacks and to permit finished/habitable space in an accessory structure. Action: Public hearing opened and remains open; application adjourned to Apr. 13. 5. #2822 YITZHAK SHAHAR AND GKY REALTY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE,498 Crescent Ave., area variance for new single-family residence;seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback requirement in the Suburban Residential—2 District. No Action: Application adjourned to April 13, 2015. 6. #2818 HIGGINS PORCH EXPANSION, 100 Union Avenue, area variance for construction of a 88 sq. ft.front porch addition to an existing single-family residence;seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback, minimum side yard setback and total side yard setbacks in the Urban Residential—4 District. Action: Public hearing closed; motion to approve—passed 7-0. 7. #2777.1 CITY CENTER PARKING GARAGE,surface parking lot bound by York Street, High Rock, Lake and Maple Avenues, area variance for construction of a parking structure, seeking relief to impede solar access to a neighboring property in the Transect—6 District. Action: Public hearing closed Mar. 9; motion to approve—failed to pass; motion to deny—passed 4-3. 8. #2807 MURPHY LANE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE,Murphy Lane/South Alley, area variance to convert existing barn structure to a single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum lot size, minimum average lot width, maximum principal building coverage, minimum front yard, rear yard, total side yard and minimum parking requirement in the Urban Residential—3 District. Action: Public hearing closed; motion to approve—passed 4-3. 9. #1976.1 SARATOGA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL,459-539 Lake Avenue, use and area variance modifications to construct a second-story addition and recreational facility;seeking to modify a condition of prior approvals limiting student enrollment at the school in the Rural Residential District. Action: Public hearing closed; motion to approve—passed 4-3. 10.#2774 COMPLEXIONS SIGN,268 Broadway, area variance to install wall signs/banners; seeking relief from the maximum number of wall signs, maximum extension from the building and to permit banner signs in the Transect—6 District. No Action: Public hearing opened Jan.26 and remains open; application adjourned to Apr. 13, 2015. 11.#2792 STONE BUILDINGS, 68 Weibel Avenue, area variance to maintain existing buildings; seeking relief from the build-to, minimum frontage build-out and minimum two-story requirements in the Transect—4 District. No Action: Public hearing opened Nov. 17 and remains open; application adjourned to Apr..13, 2015. 12.#2747 CONGREGATION&YESHIVA PARDES DORMITORY, 1 Veterans Way, area variance for expansion of the existing school including construction of an approximate 10,000 sq.ft. residential building; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage requirement in the UR-1 district. No Action: Public hearing opened February 10, 2014 and remains open; application adjourned to Apr. 13, 2015. Motion to approve February 2 raft meeting minutes—passed 5-0-2 SIGNATURE: • 3/2 s<`.5 CHAIR DATE DATE FILED WITH CITY CLERK: RECEIVED MAR 25c515 ACCOUNis D Zimbra Page 1 of 1 Zimbra duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org #39 Murphy Lane, South Alley From : Duane Miller <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> I Fri, Aug 28, 2015 03:28 PM fi Subject#39 Murphy Lane, South Alley_7 To :Tonya Yasenchak <tonyay@nycap.rr.com> Cc :jdagostino@realtyusa.com I have reviewed the plans and permit application for this project and have the following questions/comment: 1. )How is the vapor barrier requirement for the slabs being met? 2. )Construction entrance and silt fence locations are not shown on the plot. Please provide. 3. ) I am curious as to how the foundation will be poured with the structure in place. Is the plan to jack and crib the existing structure? If so, please submit plan for excavation removal and material staging area. Please provide the information requested, the permit cannot be issued until received by the Building Department. Duane Miller Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs 518-587-3550 ext.2512 https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=5206&tz=America/New_York 8/28/2015 N" Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13504&tz=Americ... •i Zimbra stephen.shaw@saratoga-springs.org Murphy Lane Barn, dangerous site From : Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> Mon, Jan 25, 2016 09:01 AM Subject : Murphy Lane Barn, dangerous site 03 attachments To : Stephen Shaw <stephen.shaw@saratoga- springs.org> Cc : Susan Barden <susan.barden@saratoga- springs.org>, Timothy Wales <timothy.wales@saratoga-springs.org>, Rachel Pilkington <rachpilk@gmail.com> Hi all, hope everyone is having a happyyear. new The Murphy Lane barn continues to be a concern for me an my family. 1) the entire roof of the structure has been removed. How tall is this thing going to go? 2) with my safe distance inspection it looks like over 90% of the structure is new building materials. We were told this was a barn renovation project, and that the character of the barn would not be changed. It looks to me that the entire structure is being replaced, but they are doing it in a way attempting that attem tin to fool the community. I fear the developer has really misrepresented this project and I needed to voice this opinion. 3) one of the beams supporting the structure is not anchored to the ground! (Photo attached) I think a plow truck moving snow could potentially dislodge this causing some level of damage. This is a safety concern only. I'm worried. 4) building materials are stacked in a very unsafe manner against the front of the house. Photo attached. If we get a stiff wind (like we had last Sunday evening) these boards will most certainly go down and will block the street, but could potentially do damage to other nearby structures, and could even cause personal injury if someone was walking by. This is an urgent safety concern. Please let me know your thoughts. This barn project is a lie. The developer is a) deceiving the city b) infringing on neighbor properties (putting equipment and material on neighbor properties without permissions) and C) currently creating a dangerous environment on Murphy Lane. Something needs to be done about part C before someone gets seriously injured. 1 of4 1/29/2016 10:58 AM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13504&tz—Americ... r v On Dec 7, 2015 3:33 PM, "Stephen Shaw" <stephen.shaw@saratoga-springs.orq> wrote: Blaine, I visited the site and was not entirely happy with what I saw. I did call the owner and tell her that she was required to have a portable toilet. They are getting on that immediately. I am not sure what was said about an apartment in the basement but that is not happening. They are at the proper depth and there will be no full basement. If their trucks are on your property at any time you have the right to tell them to get off and you have the right to call the police. Unfortunately the Building Departmenthas no other jurisdiction. The dirt issue is similar in that the Building Department has no real authority. However, if soil is being stored anyplace improperly should be reported to the Engineering Department as there are storm water pollution laws. Please feel free to address any further issues with this project with me. In turn I will address them with the owner and get back to you. Thanks Stephen Shaw Zoning & Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs Forwarded Message From: "Blaine Dunn" <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> To: "Susan Barden" <susan.barden@saratoga-sgrings.orq> Sent: Monday, December 7, 2015 12:56:36 PM Subject: City of Saratoga Springs: Murphy Lane Barn This is an inquiry e-mail via http://www.saratoga-springs.org/ from: Blaine Dunn <blaine.dunn@gmail.com> Hi Susan. I left a voicemail for you earlier. I wanted to share with you some observations about the Murphy Lane barn project. My property is the most impacted by the project, as its being built essentially in my back yard. 2 of 1/29/2016 10:58 AM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13504&tz—Americ... Q 1) I have been observing the workers urinating on the property. They have no facility to urinate in. this is disgusting and i hope members of my family do not see this. 2) workers there told me they were told last week to dig the foundation down an additional 5 feet. Initially, they were digging a 3-4 foot crawlspace. Now, they were told do dig to 8 feet, because they are putting an apartment in the basement. This, if true, is a pretty sizable violation, and raises additional concerns about the intentions of the developer. 3) workers have been parking heavy trucks and personal vehicles on our property. The site is simply too difficult for them to work on without encroaching our property. They say "we will take care of it". But what rights do i have here? 4) they have been using my property as a repository for dirt during excavation. It started out with a small pile of dirt. about 2 feet x 2 feet. I told the workers that i didn't mind as long as they spread the dirt out. They have taken advantage of my kindness, and there is now a pile of dirt 7 feet high, going across 75% of my lot. When i called the "developer" Jeane Dagostino (realty USA) she was irreverent. I have pictures for you if you need them. I raised my hand to express concern, but i talking to an irrational person in Mrs Dagostino. The ridiculous project she has undertaken has only just begun, as they are only in the excavation portion. I fear her crews will continue to violate our space, without any remorse for the next 12 months. Additional, it was only on days where i have taken off work, where i have observed these negative behaviors - what is happening on the average day (such as today) when no one is there to watch them? Are they urinating on my property and parking directly on my lawn? I appreciate you taking the time to read this. Im just a concerned homeowner, who wants to be fair, but i feel they are abusing things and we are only in the early stages here. Best, Blaine 917-251-7209 Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other 3 of 4 1/29/2016 10:58 AM I Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13504&tz=Americ... action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This email communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictlyprohibited. If you 9 have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. IMG_20160125_070344.jpg H .• 3 MB ..... ate._.. .._ _. IMG_20160125_070334.jpg 3 MB vA S d� .s fi*Y9 ,, , IMG_20160125_070328.jpg 4 of4 1/29/2016 10:58 AM I; Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13935&tz=Americ... ` la Zimbra stephen.shaw@saratoga-springs.org Fwd: 39 Murphy Lane From : Loretta Martin <loretta.martin@me.com> Mon, Feb 01, 2016 02:25 PM Subject : Fwd: 39 Murphy Lane To : Stephen Shaw <Stephen.Shaw@saratoga- springs.org> Begin forwarded message: From: Loretta Martin <loretta.martin@me.com> Subject: 39 Murphy Lane Date: February 1, 2016 at 2:16:13 PM EST To: susan.barden@saratoga-springs.orq I live on the corner of Murphy Lane and Stratton Street. My address is 17 Stratton and my phone number is 518 306 5063. I am writing today because of the construction site next door to us. I appreciate your attention to this matter. 39 Murphy Lane Construction To the Zoning Board, Susan Barden and the Saratoga Springs Building Inspector As next door neighbors, on 17 Stratton Street, we did not object to the initial building permit that was submitted last year for this proposed renovation. What is happening now on that site is NOT what was submitted. They have dug an 8 foot basement, taken off all of the siding and torn down the roof. That, to me, does not look like the renovation they proposed, but an all out new house. They have a front stoop that protrudes from the front of the house that will make it impossible not to step into the alley when they use it. 1 of2 2/1/2016 2:33 PM Zimbra, https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=13935&tzAmeric... V I am requesting that you take a good long hard look at what they are doing and take action to make sure this "house" does not exceed height regulations on a non conforming lot, and stay within the original barn structure height and size. Thank you for your consideration in this matter Concerned neighbors Loretta Martin 17 Stratton Street 2 of 2 2/1/2016 2:33 PM Co.rn-r,eJ4,cc3 0/6/111,717:The____ City of Saratoga Springs Pre-Construction Meeting Agenda l ( " I Acknowledgements: i I Owner- ect ! .)k)ocC)'IC Contractor- C (cCCSkrci Engineer- C'^S(ACG', , Cc - Attendees: NAME COMPANY PHONE CELL EMAIL S q / 4 Qr VGA } i IC'J Ocy .(-(\5'I�zC!' )( 26 2+ 1' szIb Y� crctge, 4-C7-3 I 3-° 2.Q QCK jm,fit ate LAirem,.--t- I x96.3 y3G s BYO '>ti 0„.,/i ' '5am 115 ' 3.Gle 4,vt Sita�.J �o1 S S TP,,de o. 5'16° �SQ ioa-S,�i','1yS. 0 P064Jee,2J & 5713LtDdfh' e. l 4 NYS /tsedocut rc_ Aniefaoc Ca `t 23'99 0� -Innyp,rr.�ow1. s.Y2q c *I( 5517 5. 5-6q o ,- e glIti4A /' 5143 SQ,--•3SSo 2554 TL 6. ListalkSi ' t�iejN4 014AcZ•go,HALtS/P4GCcAt 7. SGrAdDC-60 I0Si IGiAcam0 $5PD SIF-58Vs /100(3Yo3) �cpre�t'cy'`,cos1 e. .ir;ruf q at(36C-ZCi cri_ 8. C I'Y't c CPS iq 1633 i`CP\G 959 . 2 o61 ThTc,�';c•G��w��,,,0�� ,�, co 9. —41�1 t1M(JThLLj )gr1'.3564,068U �� k 4\errim lect-fr‘ itralvy- far 1 • b/Anosk-v,o of� o sfi� r J 5 Rec q <60- Rev. 3/21/12 r Not,„ rfvle/3-Alcy) P Page 5 of 5 S 5 0 C -1Th �A S. Return Completed Requests to: Records Access Officer o '} � `s City Attorney's Office Requests are also accepted by: Hand-delivery1j, - City of Saratoga Springs Fax:(518)587-1688 '44400,1,,n, 474 Broadway Or Email: FOIL@saratoga-springs.org Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 Office Phone: 518-587-3550 x 2516 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW REQUEST There is a 25 cent per page copying fee for records. Additional fees apply for photos and large maps. ° / /P/lr.9 to oh . �f- Today's Date let �/' ' n Mailing Address Name City Stat Zip 7c, Firm . Organiza;on , Telephone Number .Aii. / `� L� L4w1fe/1_ f�. l"r. c ?rj Signat e Email (/ Dear Records Access Officer: Under the provisions of the New York State Freedom of Information Law,Article 6 of the Public Officers Law, I herby request records or portions thereof pertaining to(Describe Record(s) in Detail) If this request is for a list,what is the purpose for the records: The Freedom of Information Law requires that an agency acknowledge a request within five business days of receipt. The agency has up to 20 business days to respond to a request and will respond as soon as possible. If for any reason any portion of the request is denied,you will be informed of the reasons for denial. If approved,records will be made available upon receipt of payment. All checks are to be made payable to the Commissioner of Finance. FOR AGENCY USE ONLY o Approved Number of Pages Responsive: Total Charge: o Partially Approved o Denied(or denied in part)for the reasons checked below: _Release would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.[POL§87(2)] _Records requested cannot reasonably be located based on description.[POL§89(3)(a)] _Release of information would endanger the life or safety of a person. [POL§87(f)] _Evidentiary records withheld as criminal action still pending. [POL§87(e)] _Juvenile records cannot be released without a court order. [Family Court Act§784] _Release of Medical Information constitutes violation of HIPPA. [Men Hyg§33.I3(c)] _Interagency or intra-agency materials do not apply to FOIL. [POL§87(g)] _Exempted by a law other than FOIL Specify: _Record not maintained by this agency _No record exists which responds to this request/record cannot be found Other Approved By: Date: tk- -4 y. Return Completed Requests to: i. Records Access Officer ' f Requests are also accepted by: z# .ti City Attorney's Office Hand-delivery • .-9.4� City of Saratoga Springs Fax:(518)587-1688 eoRATED`"' 474 Broadway Or Email: FOIL@saratoga-springs.org Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 Office Phone: 518-587-3550 x 2516 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW REQUEST . There is a 25 cent per pageco ng fee for rec1�dditional fees apply for photos and large maps. Today's Date -3- `/�� ) -._Mailing Address / t 1....A_I‘-/ Name City State Zip Firm • Organi ation Telephone Number Signature Email Dear R,c',rds Access Officer: der the provisions of the New York State Freedom of Information Law,Article 6 of the Public Officers Law, I herb -, - . . '- -s rertainin' to !escribe Record(s) in Detail) �t���� A .401111.1.1111=110MINfimmiiirgrimw,----Aca.r.o.zownwiliir ,„ 17:if Si1/Alwe- iAasw-7,immir- If this request is for a list,what is the purpose for the records: The Freedom of Information Law requires that an agency acknowledge a request within five business days of receipt. The agency has up to 20 business days to respond to a request and will respond as soon as possible. If for any reason any portion of the request is denied,you will be informed of the reasons for denial. If approved, records will be made available upon receipt of payment. All checks are to be made payable to the Commissioner of Finance. 1 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 o Approved Number of Pages Responsive: Total Charge: o Partially Approved o Denied(or denied in part)for the reasons checked below: —Release would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.[POL§87(2)] —Records requested cannot reasonably be located based on description.[POL§89(3)(a)] —Release of information would endanger the life or safety of a person. [POL§87(0] —Evidentiary records withheld as criminal action still pending. [POL§87(e)] —Juvenile records cannot be released without a court order. [Family Court Act§784] —Release of Medical Information constitutes violation of HIPPA. [Men Hyg§33.13(c)] _Interagency or intra-agency materials do not apply to FOIL. [POL§87(g)] _Exempted by a law other than FOIL Specify: _Record not maintained by this agency _No record exists which responds to this request/record cannot be found Other Approved By: Date: (39 murphy City of Saratoga Springs Pre-Construction Meeting Agenda Acknowledgements: Owner- e�,/) P ' `$os 0 Contractor- ` rV\V\�u��G.� Engineer- F nsi k eQ-I ) A'.-4A C - Attendees: NAME COMPANY PHONE CELL EMAIL 1. 5-'7 ,6)4 Vco,) g/C1 Pr 77. - rs-c) 2. (L UO?nQ ktkc41(</( (Caere .,S 'cO`/O 3. /1J/ 26nG "'earl elq 35o-O Lcj° x wedio6 03 la Hee-) loco , lel?g &. 5-252-43 i,rr-r.t 914 5. 1-496to ' ,e, -176) 6. get/4iZe F(cw'6e 0E—?/77 7. 9.A.10/9-aha4—. )171\1 5)f1-300X2 pZ3 e/k9-Fer. 07:M Jara.,/ore- 5pri . 0 8. LoktAturz. LI-544(4.4am DiKOPto ce4 . -_ ✓ ,� Ss�a 9. '''S ) � � 7-icre Rev. 3/21/12 Page 5 of 5 r 21 0 Zimbra Zimbra duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org Re: 39 Murphy Lane From : Duane Miller <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Wed, Feb 28, 2018 08:26 AM Subject : Re: 39 Murphy Lane To :Jean D'Agostino <jeandagostino@howardhanna.com> Cc : Susan Barden <susan.barden@saratoga-springs.org>, Tonya Yasenchak <tonyay@nycap.rr.com>, Patrick Cogan <patrick.cogan@saratoga- springs.org> Hi Jeanne, That's fine, I just wanted to make sure we address any issues in advance. I do see a faxed foundation detail dated 5/3/16 in the file, it will of course need to be incorporated into the revised drawing set with an engineers' stamp. I also want to point out that elevations will need to be detailed with all dimensions noted. It is my understanding that the height of the finished structure has entered into the conversation. As always, feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Original Message From: "Jean D'Agostino" <jeandagostino@howardhanna.com> To: "Duane Miller" <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 7:44:29 PM Subject: Re: 39 Murphy Lane Hello Duane, Tonya can not come out to the site until Friday and she will do all the necessary measurements. We did give a drawing to Steve Shaw in May of 2016. So it should be in the file, when we were going back to the zoning board. As for the sub pump I was not going to put one in. Please let me know if you need Anything else Jeanne D'Agostino License Associate Broker Howard Hanna Real Estate Services ' Cell: 518-857-4006 > On Feb 27, 2018, at 9:30 AM, Duane Miller <duane.miller@saratoga-springs.org> wrote: > > Tonya, > > I understand that work has commenced for this project. I had requested a revised Foundation drawing back on 12/22/15 to show a full height basement as opposed to a crawlspace and the location of the sump pump discharge location. Please update the drawings to reflect these changes. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. > > -- , > Duane Miller > Assistant Building Inspector > City of Saratoga Springs > 518-587-3550 ext.2512 > > Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=21462&tz=America/New York 1/2 2/ 0171 Zimbra tsender by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. [Howard Hanna. Our Signs Are Popping Up Everywhere.] <hlip //www.howardhanna.com> Howard Hanna. Our Signs Are Popping Up Everywhere. The information contained in this transmission including any attached documentation is privileged and confidential. It is intended only for use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copy of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Howard Hanna by replying to this email. Please delete all copies of this message and all attachments. All properties herein are subject to change in sales terms, prior sale, or withdrawal without prior notice; Howard Hanna is not responsible for changes in sale, availability or for any errors in information presented. Howard Hanna Real Estate Services<https;//www.howardhanna.com> (412) 967-9000. Duane Miller Assistant Building Inspector City of Saratoga Springs 518-587-3550 ext.2512 https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=21462&tz=America/New_York 2/2 " Building Department ti REVIEW CHECKLIST-Residential Property Address: 3 M1R?{4� t ikge Date: 8/27 App# 2oI So7oo ZONING WINDOWS .SETBACKS -II- NATURAL LN(R303.1) glf SLOT: SIZE/WDT/% OCC EMG.EGRESS (R310) -Er-FLOOD FLOOD PLAIN .. SAFETY GLAZING (R308) ,E7'31,ETLANDS STATE/FEDERAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS 'C O41 .0" 1 ATED DOOR W/SC (R309.1) DESIGN CRITERIA(R301) ,B- S.E--PAf AT-IGN=(R309:2) iff-GSL-50 PSF ❑ SLAB/POLY(R309.3/R506.2.3) WINDSPEED-90 MPH MISC. INTERIOR FEATURES ENERGY BATHS VENTED (R303.3) LEr-'' ENERGY CODE CERT(E401.3) SMOKE DETECTORS (R313) )2-r-INSULATION E� CO DETECTORS (R313) 'e THERMAL BARRIER/FOAM PLASTIC (R314) FOOTERS r SIZE STAIRWAYS Er DEPTH STAIRS-T,R,N (R311) REINFORCEMENT HANDRAILS (R311.5.6) 1 LANDINGS (R311.4.3) FOUNDATION J GUARDS (R312) SOIL TYPE (R401.4) Er"WALL HEIGHT/WIDTH ROOF ,,REINFORCEMENT p� COVERING to' ANCHOR BOLTS (R403.1.6) ICE PROTECTION (R905.2.7.1) 2-- SHEATHING BASEMENT/CRAWLSPACE VENTILATION PARS& POSTS .< ATTIC ACCESS q;,_S AB & PO YL --EGRESS PORCHES/DECKS ACCESS (R408.3) FRAMING ❑ VENT (R408.1) i r ATTACHMENTS& FLASHING FRAMING .FLOORS C�¢S1LT FENCING�"�--` .er WALLS INTERIOR/EXTERIOR ❑ CONSTRUCTION ENTRANC HEADERS/BEAMS r' ROOF TRUSSES/RAFTERS OTHER CEILING HEIGHT(R305) ❑ JROOMS ❑ TAI RS ❑ ASEMENT ❑ UNDER BEAM/DUCTWORK ❑ Reviewed by: D, M I I`L R Date: *14 I ;�i 4♦p;♦ �i;♦.�;�;♦;•� a ���;♦•• �a�;♦;.;sAeJp i♦♦♦ , 0•i;;•;•;•;•; �0 0i♦;4, .♦•-•... �i ..�i♦�'I.` °i•+♦♦♦����►.vi4.4♦A•00.♦+3J`♦♦!i.�i♦i`P♦;♦'♦;♦�r. �•♦�•O(1 •�A� .♦zo.2 .''+ ••�;•;•;�'5 ♦.♦♦�1Q♦• ®a�•" zz ♦A♦A6 ( r2? 1a 2s3p oo 40.4 . 4��J141 1po3;�•A•♦•�At. 24 •♦ •rtet 17 � v) 2s �, A.(128) ••(120) ♦ 4•i7 (r29 -` ;♦�O®•i- rs .A♦AOp,,6 ;,;•.aO2a ••�aA•;. ,,,a 30A��•0J♦�A�® ••♦♦IV♦t, A1�P so 38 ♦•♦• �a 4/♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ �.# 1AA♦♦ O.AAA AA ♦ A ♦♦ ..♦♦'4 A♦O ♦:....;x49,,,AAA . _`-�o " 77.1 m .. n••i iA♦A`0 ,,t+.4A♦♦.♦� A♦AAj♦•.:i 4, m : ♦ OAA♦t► ♦AAAA ♦A.7AA0 �' 12 mm 32 s.sa 122 BO ► 4 •♦♦A.♦ ♦AOAAA♦ ♦AA♦.♦4. �� •��s0•♦•O♦a�► O••O•♦• O�o►•DOiO•i m ,.25.00 83 ♦�►�� •4®♦�•.4,►A••Aa•♦•A�4 ♦.*•J♦ wm ses5 ,.ez --------.1/0 o m •♦JO♦4 ♦♦♦♦40.0 A.4.. - A♦AA��A �AA.�♦♦♦� A♦�AAA�4l•A♦, i ses`� ,` 8 7 so N ,25.so �AAt .♦♦♦♦ AA.A,►♦ � .♦A *ses 4 41 is n 2502 20.00 w so ♦A, 43P44:1A❖A• �•J♦•J4•0�®0•♦`►• z�ae 13rs> ' 23 77 50 �♦• �► ►A♦ a�IIP • ♦♦ A® O 5p m 82 '"�g5 a A0000 ♦•i00• •• '' O• • ! 42 ee ❖♦A.A� A♦A♦�A♦��♦••�'►A.i►A•♦A� ?za 80 = 35 ��•;.♦.4 t+4%0 ,j♦•♦A®.i••♦®�!•.;' �® o �---- -- 40 S 36 A•••A`♦et v+. ;•♦AJ4•Ak. •;A;�V - ;♦ 7'300 V ►• Jie,`�•J' +41a�W4�••+- 4- 4X �, ,°a,�_ 1• iii♦♦��•y�'i�A•♦ J .���i!•�!�aP sus 44 ____s_____- 50u ••AA♦A•a ♦♦.�� �t4. a ,4. ♦fir . 7547 •'�♦'�4' '4.4 i�-4- • •.♦®0 .♦ A 165.84 „5 __ ® 44 ---- ► �OOiO•Ope�,�:•o:'' ♦t .. ---- • su ♦♦ J �A•�A 7•AA:a• ____- - 50 ♦♦♦♦O�►®� AAS J ♦ ♦A♦ ,...-.� 4, +.47-ti 0: . ♦ ♦A♦ J (♦ #40 ao- au` m I I Z ►•JJA�•A4 aa•OO . ••r♦•! A♦Ji� •1 0 a 1 84 • •♦a7•iii• %i♦4Aii'i•00� • 48 m 1 i p• a0Ji�00.OQbi00PJ•i •a••i 0N0 I i J I Cr) 50 4.►♦O�•.A.♦Ae y 4', 44 A•i♦O N a7 a Z _ „° 1 I r�♦ ',•4►J!A.,.A+ v4: ; (a) ,°° 1 1 ,°° to*'O�OOOO4. d•JOaaJODi,DA ,00.oa 69 (31 1 (4)1(5) ,zs.00 ❖♦♦1•.♦♦AA♦�1•.♦A♦♦•4••• j ,5. 00.00JOJOO•Ji�O• �; as g _ ,5 I 77 0♦;•��•• •♦6p tr®OiJJJi•,O (1) 0(5) _-- 125.00 AA♦ ...AA♦. ♦. nu(2) 40 ,aoS.67 ,z� ';♦•Aaa�:��•;:;;�; ���� o O ♦..A♦ •A .i♦t♦ NA ♦tJ yivJ♦••OJ0� CI) -4 60 ►•• ��A;♦�JJ•i•004d (2) 11 a (g1----- ,au 66 65 -- m --ii-- 8s ,••°XS�4. • 4„ 90 o -----iii- -(e) (11) -1 5 ;•.4�®� A��A♦A;AO� la- ♦♦♦♦� r ♦♦ 1 ` 1„ '4♦♦ B 00 15 0 ►;A1. �1 AA♦AA♦♦4► ♦♦O 0000 001 ♦♦♦ . 53 52 ,x�- �' �����•••Aaj.A 4„,„..., � ' 125 i'" 7•A ♦�J ♦♦A♦�AA.:' Z ♦iw .♦' E j V♦ JA♦.♦♦ ♦•�J♦JD�♦AJA•�♦♦ ♦•♦i 1 0 `gTRE .:44 ♦ a� N 1,7 �-^"- ►•♦ ♦♦♦ ♦�•�.♦4►. ♦'I♦•h• 4;„1„V43•44•iiii•a♦�A _1_._ ----5 ♦•;i%i�0••j►•%S..;i;i;��►J•� �%Oii.4•Te too 00Ark -1-------j ���0♦♦AAA♦ __rco ,--,----'-'25.-------1 ,25 ►C�''•�i•••••.�ii•O�•�•ii`S*�04►00000•J•J•♦;•OO;p. RX Date!Time 0510312016 14:29 +8855298 P.002 05/03/2016 1:33 PM FAX +8855298 LAW OFFICE N 0002/0003 MURPHY LN io GRADE 1,-r-�IlFillr'�-,11. 11 u � b 'll=llll�li II �II�II IIy=11ICrl-��-_I 1111# • VERTICAL REBAR-41"oc(MIN) BACKFILL 111-11111=1 "POI 711=111411: 7 -IIIrI` ASPHALT SEALERib 1I-II 8"POURED WALL BELOW GRADEIrll�II 11 =I1.=11=11 1 l r=11`--1! 11ISII I =11Vilr= Ii M*III1IIIInI #4 REBAR 48-72°oc 1JGRAVEL =. Q•-l 4"CONCRETE SLAB ��•r+`• MIN 2500 PSI ANCRETE OMVAPOR RETARDER(4-6 MIL POLY) 4"PVC FOOTER DRAIN IS REQUIRED BETWEEN CONCRETE AND SUBGRADE WITH JOINTS 16x8"FOOTER OVERLAPPED MIN 5" (2)84 REBAR ;11I�o� 2500 MIN PSI a•• OFESSIQN 1/A Foundation Detail ��� <O e••� YAS,c'•� N.r.s ,G- �0 ' •fir r''.. X•40, 4 ¢,,; CARRIAGE HOUSE RESIDE 01, . #29 MURPHY LANE `- J'.•• fl85Q` ` �.' •• A SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY /�/���F OF NIES�O���` DESIGN BY: 19: 11111110 ENGINEERING AMERICA CO MAY — 3 2015 SARATOGA SPRINGS,NY NOTE: THIS DETAIL DEPICTS A TYPICAL FOUNDATION, COMPLIANT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CODE OF NYS, FOR INSTALLATION&SUPPORT OF THE DESIGNED RESII)FNCF_AT 0109 MURPHY LANE. SARATOGA SPRINGS.NY City Council Meeting 11/06/17 Supervisor Veitch reported the 2018 budget was announced on November 1, 2017 and projected to be $319 million. There is an increase in spending of $16 million due to the public safety facility they plan to build in 2018. The tax rate for residents is $2.29 / 1,000 and not exceeding the tax cap this year. A public hearing has been set for December 6, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. at the County and a vote at the December 13, 2017 meeting. Peter Martin Proposed County Budget Supervisor Martin reported unfunded mandates equal $61 million dollars with the largest item being Medicaid. Some of the other unfunded mandates include pensions; tuition sharing for community college; and early intervention and pre-school. There is $60 million dollars projected in sales tax revenue and the County has been doing well over the past several years. There is new property coming on to the tax rolls. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Mathiesen seconded to go into executive session for collective bargaining — CSEA, Local 1000 AFSCME, AFL-CIO City of Saratoga Springs DPW Unit of the Saratoga County Local 846 and pending litigation: Index No.: 2016-2282 South Alley, LLC vs. Stephen R. Shaw et al. at 9:38 p.m. Ayes—All **Council returned at 10:03 p.m. Mayor Yepsen advised nothing was finalized to report. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Yepsen adjourned the meeting at 10:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Ribis Clerk Approved: 11/21/17 Vote: 5 - 0 • Page 14 of 14 tLUukpHf_L A�a.� FuaL FvNDA71DM 3)eThiL 4112-o1ito MURPHY LN GRADE 1i911P llc 11. 1 r=11011,41f0.11*110i1 '=11=11-11 -11=IIF -5 VERTICAL REBAR-12"oc BACKFILL • r 11#4110I 1=11-11F=1I` R IN#11.1 11=11 i 1i=[I=II01E=---1 =11-11=11^1l° 8"POURED WALL ASPHALT SEALER r"�1'l1f,=11=111#1 BELOW GRADE 111PI1=.11=11: 1I1=a-111 u:�sir.=.nil 1t r r-1111=:! 111=If 1. #4 REBAR 48-72"oc 111111.110111=11 11 ��� 4"CONCRETE SLAB GRAVEL '�:I�...I or- ,.:.. MIN 2500 PS/CONCRETE 571 VAPOR RETARDER(4-6 MIL POLY) 4"PVC FOOTER DRAIN IS REQUIRED BETWEEN CONCRETE AND SUBGRADE WITH JOINTS 16x8"FOOTER OVERLAPPED MIN 6" (2)#4 REBAR 2500 MIN PSI ct, Foundation Detail N.T.S. Engineering America Co. Quality Design with integrity 76 Washington St.,Saratoga Springs,NY 12866 518/587 4340 RX DatelTime 05103/2016 14:29 +8855298 P.001 05/03/2016 1:33 PM FAX +8855298 LAW OFFICE Il 0001/0003 k. ENGINEERING AMERICA O . 76 WASHINGTON ST . S'ARATO'GA SPRINGS , NY 12866 518 / 587 - 1340 518 / 580 - 9783 ( FAX ) TRANSMI'T'TAL SHEET TO; FROM: Steve Shaw,Building Inspector Tonya Yascnchak COMPANY; DATE City of Saratoga Springs May 3,2016 FAX Nt Mt TR: TOTAL NO.OF PACES TNCT.tIT)TN(:COVER: 3 PI I(7NE NUM$bK: STNT)P,T$RIVIlRP.NCE NUMBS/4.: RE: YOUR REFERENCE NUMTmR: #29 Murphy I n.Foundation Saratoga Springs,NY .••°. . . • ❑ URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW 0 M.RASK COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY 0 AS REQUESTED • Mr. Shaw-- A modified foundation detail sketch for the structure under construction at#29 Murphy Ln.is attached. This full foundation detail is a revision to the crawl space foundation detail proposed& discussed with thc building dept.September 16,2015. The attached typical foundation detail which is stamped depicts a foundation compliant with the Residential Code of NYS for the structure designed at#29 Murphy Ln. The attached typical foundation detail which is not stamped depicts the f undation rebar as noted to EACo.by the contractor who installed the foundation. The additional rebar,at closet spacing, exceeds the minimum requirement of thc Residential Code of NYS for the e foundation wall. EACo.is not able to stamp the"as-built"as we were not retained or contacted to observe the foundation as it was being installed. It is the understanding of 13.ACo.that the foundation was inspected by the City during construction. n .,Illi � ,6S101�;till./ Please feel free to contact „i:E°4gy tvestl? c have. Thank you for your tirnezn(vwe nao1n.•v °°',° ;�y. Sincerely, -- _-' r. s , '1. � .0 ' 'd .r Tonya Yase n(h•�PE�= ' '=,,,....,'.:?/'' 'R' t i ° • .P' `� Enc. •• ::0 t ON •.• �, • Cc: D'A •tin(> ie ..... °° °re OF N�' A o� ��A17r� OS,�O®®,® BGCY ® � s ~ 1 J .;`► Recewed Bt2311g I [I] 333 Kingsley Road, Burnt Hills, NY 12027 • Office(518)280-3190 • Fax(518) 280-5379 • Rich@nolan-engineering.com • www.nolan-engineering.com August 20, 2018 Jean D'Agastino, 39 Murphy Lane Saratoga, NY 12866 SUBJECT: Structural Inspection of Installed Trusses SITE LOCATION: 39 Murphy Lane, Saratoga, NY 12866 Dear Mrs. D'Agastino, This letter transmits the results of a structural inspection that was performed at the address cited above. The inspection was performed at your request in order to determine the structural acceptability of the installed trusses. The inspection was performed on August 20, 2018. The structure was a 2-story, single-family, home that was unfinished at the time of inspection. The overall dimensions of the home/roof were approximately 36' x 26'. The installed trusses were common trusses with one area that had a vaulted ceiling, as shown in Figure 1. The trusses were specifically designed for the home and we have the stamped truss plans. However, the trusses were stored onsite for a prolonged period of time. We inspected the trusses, their connectors, and bracing. We noted that one truss connection had an OSB (Oriented Strand Board) plate installed on both sides (Figure 2). No structural issues were observed with the trusses, their connectors, and the lateral bracing was found to be installed. I certify the structural acceptability of the installed trusses. { , s . \. lik'--,,,... ..,,, •,,, ,., . ' \ w`_ w .s. l If RJ ��f.'e.i" "�. �_ .„, ii...._,., ':4.- '-`-'‘ tit...... ..........v....... ,. , �£ .d" r • t 17 ,..;,,, :, 1y v ..._sem ^- • ...a• t (jam y ;�tw1 Figure 1 —Common Truss Layout N t4,44.\ I \ • ..„ . ,., ,%:7,!_i__L._ illik, i �% •n•,.,„:„.,,..,. J 6 t. k na } f -s 4 4 yA„,@� ,.," C ,,fir^ - * - Z:4 m , �L Nc i- / 'k' . . ",' n Figure 2—OSB Plate Installed on Both Sides of Truss Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, ��of NEtyr ��G��,�D E. N OA, ri- cs,`6,0 083929 e" 0FFss\oNPL Richard E. Nolan, PE Lic. #083929 9'A 6'a57-j�0 c; a 4te, 6,07-. //.9//g •. ncnLrcn -� ' W CCESS O _,.....„05I O 20 \. \ le uo U - •ANEL co 2-0 /� i A N (2)2x4 2-4 SLING DR_ 2-4 SLIDING DR 2 5�2 j 2 /- HEADER\ \ \ O K 2-6 - v),...,_ f--- 5'-2" --//---- 5'-712" D 2-6 W :::@ v)....... U WALK IN - c CLOSET 0 N ,.2-6 ,_ 0/- 2'-4" �� OFFICE/DEN .- (119 SQ.FT.) 0 0 \ ti - U Q. V 4:1 ^ (2)2x10 Y O o `o HEADER `" ! 3'-0" , ./ 10'-0" / L o 1 A Q \ \ I►: 1I \ (2)2x4 HFADFR 2x6 WALLS GLASS IN WINDOW SHALL NOT EXISTING&NEW _ 16"oc(TYP) A BE LESS THAN 60"ABOVE B ROOF OVERHANG '5A FINISED FLOOR OR '5A TEMP.GLASS REQ 5'-0" / 13'-012" / � i"`T' f, BUILDING PERMIT • TO CONSTRUCT PLUMBING - PERMANENT A. rt Permit Number: 20180648 °"'pGRAT€:n Date: June 7, 2018 Permission is hereby granted to the below owner or contractor for construction in accordance to application 20150700 together with plans and specifications hereto filed and approved and in compliance with the provisions of the Codes of City of Saratoga Springs,New York. Permit Issue Date: 06/07/2018 Permit Expiration Date: 06/06/2020 LOCATION PERMIT CLASSIFICATION Sect/Block/Lot: 165.84-1-22 Permit Type: B BUILDING Street:39 MURPHY LANE(SOUTH ALLEY) Work Type: 1701 PLUMBING-PERMANENT Zoning District:UR-3 URBAN RESIDENTIAL-3 Prop Usage: R-3 RESIDENTIAL- 1 &2 FAMILY Occupy Class: R Const.Class: VB OWNER CONTRACTOR SOUTH ALLEY LLC MONAHAN&EVERY PLUMBING&HEATING LLC 38 WARREN STREET 24 STONEHURST DRIVE 518-857-4006 518-745-7586 APPLICANT MONAHAN&EVERY PLUMBING&HEATING LLC 24 STONEHURST DRIVE 518-745-7586 Total Value of Work: 8700 Application Date: 07/31/2015 Permit Issued By: JB Permit Fee: 106.00 Scope of Work: R-3 OCCUPANCY, RENOVATION OF BARN TO HOUSE Comments/Conditions: Zoning . ►,:' :till ' echnician 02 $ o u7 2,2 1 1 N o4.: 2018 iiii By APPLICATION FOR PLUMBING PERMIT imam 9xi Location Information i TAX ID# 1 do x JOB SITE ADDRESS 3 � m j-p h- 0( COST OF PLUMBING WORK$ Qv PROP'ERTiY OWNER INFORMA`t1ON ,g#,NER S`NA'ME : l>P.n O iR G0 54,11\ PHONE F fiAD R SS $ 1urPK-t ep n. 4',' :'` .� t7.`r 'S'�S NAT IG t�RE � rDATE 1PLUMBING CONTRACTOR INFORIVIAtiblC. . .: ' ' '- .. . : . r. : . , ,....,:::'(,,,.,4,..,to,..,,:,;,:.;:.,.., CID#' COMPANY NAME OA A h!in'- 6\ICP / p,:: PHONE / 7 -7 5 ADDRESS ,: / 0 E• Ya Q FAX i s �; t , 11 I !� � 3 jT Ed .-'��. MASTER PLUM ER ;. r"' ' , f -,, ' 1 ,?,-.--:,,,,,,,:',-.;,,,,,'..----,.-:----....,. ,•-• PL'u V RAS SIGNA • -DATE '-- •.. , .y fl°a'm5 ' xA $3$u ' 'w. �- cum `YY'4'Ti 'Y 4 W3° 44 oit 6. 7. ° Yew` im 1e,leo 4- ..":"..g.1.. q ; +2k ,:1"7,0-01..., _ 1 f x 'A"-s ,,�'s ^�iv 3 c'I r �.,-, r ,,u Er.CEISY B u*'..."'.'..' r tBU I G ER t k. TI ® Y #° ,- 'A'' :‘,44,e, 1 .I' tit kcal �g ug` 3;.. .. : "ft,,: _ yr pc! dtfo(te - Ins- off The Individual filing this application,to the fullest extent provided by law,shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Saratoga Springs, its Agents and Employees (hereinafter referred to as "City"), from and against all claims, damages, losses and expense(including,but not limited to,attorneys'fees),arising out of or resulting from the performance of the work covered by this building permit application, sustained by any person or persons, provided that any such claim, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death, or to injury to or destruction of property caused by the tortuous act or negligent act or omission of Applicant,its contractor or its employees or anyone for whom the Contractor is legally liable or Subcontractors. REVISED 1-21-15 . CALCULATION OF PERMIT FEE FOR INSTALLATION OF PLUMBING WORK 1. BASIC CHARGE BY OCCUPANCY TYPE: 379 ��� A. PERMANENT: #OF DWELLING UNITS X �v.uli PER UNIT = 6-0r / B. TRANSIENT: #OF SLEEPING ROOMS X $30.00 PER ROOM= C. COMMERCIAL: #OF TENANT SPACES X $75.00 PER SPACE= D. ALL OTHERS: #OF BUILDINGS X $75.00 PER BUILDING= 2. INDICATE QUANTITIES OF EACH FIXTURE AND/OR PLUMBING COMPONENT BELOW TO DETERMINE FEES IN ADDITION TO THE BASIC CHARGES: WATER CLOSET of BIDET URINAL LAVATORY BATHTUB(WITH OR WITHOUT SHOWER) / SHOWER STALL i SHOWERS(GROUP)-PER HEAD SERVICE SINK KITCHEN SINK LAUNDRY TRAY DISHWASHER HOSE BIBB DENTAL UNIT DENTAL LAVATORY DRINKING FOUNTAIN FLOOR DRAIN WASHING MACHINE CONNECTION HOT WATER TANK 1 HOT TUB OR JACUZZI ROOF DRAIN OTHER E. TOTAL#OF FIXTURES AND/OR COMPONENTS: X $6.00 PER ITEM= 51, 3. ADD ALL DOLLAR AMOUNTS IN THE FAR RIGHT COLUMN FOR ITEMS A,B,C,D&E TOTAL FEE AMOUNT = lo 6 REVISED 1-21-15 [ Job Truss Truss Type Qty Ply 39 Murphy Lane/Carriage House 15122597J T01 REP ROOF SPECIAL 7 1 Job Reference(optional) Universal Forest Products,5631 S.NC 62,Burlington,NC Run:8.130 s Dec 12 2017 Print:8.130 s Dec 12 2017 MiTek Industries,Inc. Wed Feb 21 15:11:39 2018 Page 1 8 19-5-12 ID:YFpKw4jtZaaANRS7wP74b8y3js8-rSDhuJPeU9K?9_IpMZsJHXXDdjcho8coxA$duiZziuS2 810 8 7-0-12 6-0-4 6-4-12 6-8-4 10-8 + Scale-1:47.0 4x6,--- 5 5 6.00,2 h 2'0" square x7/16 Plywd/ 20 OSB both sides, olued and 3x4. 6 3x6�� nailed to all members with 14' 7 Q.in4' , W N3 NN W4 i-.. W6 W7 6 5x6, / fi W2 r WO, / -� 13 , 410 1 � 9 ...1 HW2 0 N mi 4.00P1 12 11 11 14 3W II -~ 2W 11 • 1 5312 II 7-0-12 13-8-0 19-5-12 26-2-0 7-0-12 6-7-4 5-9-12 6-8-4 I REPAIR(S) REQUIRED Plate Offsets(X,Y)-- [2:0-4-15,0-2-8],[4:0-4-8,0-3-0],[4:0-0-0,0.1-12],[9:0-7.13,Edge],[12:0-5-12,0-2-8] , LOADING(psf) TCLL 3g.5 SPACING- 2-0-0 CSI. DEFL in (loc) l/defl Ud PLATES GRIP `r (Ground Snow 50.0) Plate Grip DOL 1.15 TC 0.86 Vert(LL) -0.18 12-13 >999 240 MT20 197/144 . , TCDL 10.0 Lumber DOL 1.15 BC 0.86 Vert(TL) -0.40 12-13 >786 180 BCLL 0.0' Rep Stress InaYES WB 0.69 Horz(TL) 0.22 9 n/a n/a BCDL 10.0 Code IRC2006ITPI2002 Matrix-MS Wind(LL) 0.06 13 >999 360 Weight:123 lb FT=4% LUMBER- BRACING- TOP CHORD 2x4 SPF No.2 TOP CHORD Structural wood sheathing directly applied, except end verticals. BOT CHORD 2x4 SPF No.2 BOT CHORD Rigid ceiling directly applied or 10-0-0 oc bracing. WEBS 2x4 SPF No.2`Except 1 WEBS 1 Row at midpt 3-12 1 W1:2x6 SPF No.2 MiTek recommends that Stabilizers and required cross bracing.be installed during SLIDER Right 2x8 SP DSS 2-6-0 truss erection,in accordance with Stabilizer Installation guide. - I REACTIONS. (Ib/size) 14=1625/0-5-8 (min.0-2-9),9=1601/0-5-8 (min.0-2-8) 4 - .. Max Horz 14=221(LC 7) ' Max Upliftl4=-77(LC 8),9=-71(LC 9) \ , FORCES. (Ib)-Max.CompJMax.Ten.-All forces 250(Ib)or less except when shown. TOP CHORD 2-3-3186/129,3-4=-1425/135,4-19=-1409/139,5.19=-1252/175,5-20=-1315/176,6-20=-1393/140,6-7=-1494/140,7-8=-1946/132, . 8-9=328/0,2-14=-1710/172 BOT CHORD 13-14=-246/531,12-13=-103/2646,11-12=-0/1509,9-11=-0/1509 WEBS .3-13=0/1520,3-12=-1927/185,5-12=-82/857.,7-12=-644/149,2-13=0/2046 NOTES- 1) OTES1)Repair Condition:web has 0-1-0 long break centered at 0-6-0 above joint 12. 2)Damage condition(s)located 0-6-0 above joint 12 have not been repaired. 3)Wind:ASCE 7-05;90mph;TCDL=6.0psf;BCDL=6.0psf;h=24ft;Cat II;Exp B;enclosed;MWFRS(low-rise)gable end zone and C-C Exterior(2)zone;cantilever left and right exposed;end vertical left and right exposed;C-C for members and forces&MWFRS for reactions shown;Lumber DOL=1:60 plate grip DOL=1.60 4)TCLL:ASCE 7-05;Pg=50.0 psf(ground snow);Pf=38.5 psf(flat roof snow);Category II;Exp B;Partially Exp.;Ct=1.1 5)Unbalanced snow loads have been considered for this design. ` 6)This truss has been designed for greater of min roof live load of 16.0 psf or 2.00 times flat roof load of 38.5 psf on overhangs non-concurrent with other live loads. 7)This truss has been designed for a 10.0 psf bottom chord live load nonconcurrent with any other live loads. 8)'This truss has been designed for a live load of 20.0psf on the bottom chord in all areas where a rectangle 3-6-0 tall by 2-0-0 wide will fit between the bottom chord and any other members. 9)Bearing at joint(s)14 considers parallel to grain value using ANSI/TPI 1 angle to grain formula. Building designer should verify capacity of bearing surface. f 10)Provide mechanical connection(by others)of truss to bearing plate capable of withstanding 77 lb uplift at joint 14 and 71 lb uplift at joint 9. 11)This truss is designed in accordance with the 2006 International Residential Code sections R502.11.1 and R802.10.2 and referenced standard ANSI/TPI 1. LOAD CASE(S) Standard ,ct,OF NEW y , 4, .2,.0*-, *c"; , .4) 1 w `YOFESS►ONi I IIIIIII � , I-job - Truss Truss Type - Qty Ply 39 Murphy Lane/Carriage House 115122597J T01 ROOF SPECIAL - 7 1 I_- . Job Reference(optional) Universal Forest Products 7.610 s Jan 29 2015 MiTek Industries,Inc.Tue Jan 05 14:58:51 2016 Page 1 Q 1 ID:YFpKw4jfZaaANRS7wP74b8y3js8-7y6?mminRkpiZFpuOCwsJig8H_H?a3DWpPQVEDzy022 0-10-HB 7-0-12 I 6-0-4 I 19-5-12 I 6-2-0 8-4 101-10-8 • a• 4x6= Scale:3/16"=1' ., t _ 8.00 FT 5 YN - \V .i . ",5x10-i 3x6�� 19 N.., 3x4 3 6 5x6 erilli5x10 LI 8 2W1 �13 \ 16 ,- O 1 y iRf``��wy 9 p N O L� \ 6X8- ; 11 �1M1 'I. Ia�N .. 12 11 17 15 14 5x8 2x4 II 5x12 II 3x4 II 4.001-12 7-0-12I 13-8-0 I 19-5-12 I 26-2-0 { 7-0-12 6-7-4 5-9-12 6-8-4 `Plate Offsets(X,Y)-- [2:0-4-15.0-2-8]_[4:0-3-4,0-3-41,[9:0-7-13,Edgel,[12:0-5-12.0-2-81 r LOADING(psf) • SPACING- 2-0-0 CSI. DEFL. in (loc) I/deft L/d PLATES GRIP TCLL 38.5 Plate Grip DOL 1.15 TC 0.86 Vert(LL) -0.18 12-13 >999 240 MT20 197/144 (Ground Snow 50.0) Lumber DOL 1.15 BC 0.86 Vert(TL) -0.40 12-13. >786 180 TCDL 10.0 Rep Stress Incr YES WB 0.69 Horz(TL) .0.22 9 n/a n/a BCLL 0.0 * Code IRC2006/rP12002 (Matrix-M) Wlnd(LL) 0.06 13 >999 360 . Weight:123 lb FT=4% BCDL • 10.0 _ LUMBER- -. BRACING- TOP CHORD 2x4 SPF No.2 TOP CHORD Structural wood sheathing directly applied, except end verticals. BOT.CHORD 2x4 SPF No.2 BOT CHORD Rigid ceiling directly applied or 10-0-0 oc bracing. WEBS 2x4 SPF No.2`Except* WEBS • 1 Row at midpt 3-12 W1:2x6 SPF No.2 SLIDER Right 2x8 SP DSS 2-6-0 REACTIONS. (lb/size) 14=1625/0-5-8 (min.0-2-9),9=1601/0-5-8.(min.0-2-8) Max Horz 14=221(LC 7) . Max Upliftl4=-77(LC 8),9=-71(LC 9) FORCES. (lb)-Max.Comp./Max.Ten.-All forces 250(Ib)or less except when shown. TOP CHORD 2-3=-3186/129,3-4=1425/135,4-19=1409/139,5-19=1252/175,5-20=1315/178,6-20=-1393/140,6-7=1494/140,7-8=-1946/132; 8-16=-328/0,9-16=-508/0,2-14=-1710/172 BOT CHORD 13-14=-246/531,12-13=-103/2646,11-12=0/1509,11-17=0/1509,15-17=-71/846 I WEBS 3-13=0/1520,3-12=-1927/185,5-12=-82/857,7-12=644/149,2-13=0/2046,9-15=-777/0,16-18=0/330,9-18=0/298,15-18=-1104/100, 8-18=-1815/155 • I NOTES- 1)Wind:ASCE 7-05;90mph;TCDL=6.Opsf;BCDL=6.Opsf;h=24ft;Cat.II;Exp B;enclosed;MWFRS(low-rise)gable end zone and C-C Exterior(2)zone; cantilever left and right exposed;end vertical left and right exposed;C-C for members and forces&MWFRS for reactions shown;Lumber DOL=1.60 plate grip DOL=1.60 2)TCLL:ASCE 7-05;Pg=50.0 psf(ground snow);Pf=38.5 psf(flat roof snow);CategoryII;Exp B;Partially Exp.;Ct=1.1 3)Unbalanced snow loads have been considered for this design. 4)This truss has been designed for greater of min roof live load of 16.0 psf or 2.00 times flat roof load of 38.5 psf on overhangs non-concurrent with other live loads. 5)This truss has been designed for a 10.0 psf bottom chord live load nonconcurrent with any other live loads. 6)'This truss has been designed for a live load of 20.0psf on the bottom chord in all areas where a rectangle 3-6-0 tall by 2-0-0 wide will fit between the bottom chord and any other members. 7)Bearing at joint(s)14 considers parallel to grain value using ANSI/TPI 1 angle to grain formula. Building designer should verify capacity of bearing surface. 8)Provide mechanical connection(by others)of truss to bearing plate capable of withstanding 100 lb uplift at joint(s)14,9. 9)This truss is designed in accordance with the 2006 International Residential Code sections R502.11.1 and R802.10.2 and referenced standard ANSI/TPI 1. 10)"Semi-rigid pitchbreaks induding heels"Member end fixity model was used in the analysis and design of this truss. LOAD CASE(S) Standard - 6 -OF Niki, ��t �Sy tui PRS �� y lir lc'LCO NO. 085777-.1. C' , L. -- pOF'LCrJ 1.0 �� ilii,oo..,i,mo b,Um-is-wed ler AssiIrpi opnatiny riumirensum.Plates Shull Is:of cies MIL!tyle shosm:md centered am joints link,otherwise named.This design is hosed upon parameters Jusvn,and is fin an individual ....._. bid Mine.1111111111.1 to be installed end Wailed strtirnlly.Ap1mIic;ohilimy or design pamnancrs and Anger ins-npon-.n'n of contpunent is responsibility attic Building Designer.Building Designer shall verily iill design In lin imni,m,mthis sheen lire eonfornmnee svimheondibons and requirements or the specific building and governing ensues and ordinances.Building Designer accepts responsibility lbr the correctness or accuracy of the design in lin illation as im m:iy relate 10 a sieeilis building.Certification is valid only when Puss is Iniricmcd by a UFP company.13rucing shown is fur lateral support of u'us.s members only and does not replace ereemio n and !WI nunem brucine.Relcr It,Building Cmnptnen surety Inlinntatitat(BM)for general guidance regarding smurnge.delivery.erection and bracing imitable Bunt SBCA and Truss Plate Institute. Job Truss Truss Type Qty Ply 39 Murphy Lane/Carriage House 15122597J TO1GE COMMON SUPPORTED GAB 2 1 Job Reference(optional) I Universal Forest Products 7.610 s Jan 29 2015 MiTek Industries,Inc.Tue Jan 05 14:56:53 2016 Page 1 1 . I D:YFpKw4jfZaaAN RS7wP74b8y3js8-3KEIBR31 zL3QpZyH Wd2yKP7mefn7K21 C pGjvbl5zy020 0-108 • 13- 1-0 I 226-2-0 CI-10-6 13-1-0 3x4 = Scale=1:62.8 8.0017-11 10 iiN 9 11 3x4 i 12 3x4 7 36 13�� �i 14116 15I4 ` 16 3x4 I 3x4 I I 3 3x 0 1 2 ,���. YY 18 1 � / 111 .�'1'n1 cl b179 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 3x4= 26-2-0 I 26-2-0 Plate Offsets(X,Y)_(10:0-2-0,Edgej • TCLLLOADING(psf) 38 5 • SPACING- 2-0-0 CSI. DEFL. in (tote) t/defl L/d PLATES GRIP (Ground Snow=50.0) Plate Grip DOL 1.15 TC 0.23 Vert(LL) -0.01 19 n/r 180 MT20 197/144 TCDL 10.0 Lumber DOL 1.15 BC 0.17 Vert(TL) -0.01 19 nil- 80 BCLL 0.0' Rep Stress Incr YES WB 0.40 Horz(TL) 0.01 20 n/a n/a BCDL 10.0 Code IRC2006/rPI2002 (Matrix) Weight:132 lb FT=4% LUMBER- BRACING- TOP CHORD 2x4 SPF No.2 • TOP CHORD Structural wood sheathing directly applied or 6-0-0 oc purlins, except end verticals. ' BOT CHORD 2x4 SPF No.2 BOT CHORD Rigid ceiling directly applied or 10-0-0 oc bracing. I WEBS 2x4 SPF No.2 OTHERS 2x4 SPF No.2 REACTIONS. All bearings 26-2-0. (Ib)- Max Horz34=229(LC 7) —'a • — Max Uplift All uplift 100 lb or less at joint(s)34,20,29,30,31,32,25,24,23,22 except 33=-220(LC 8),21=-214(LC 9) Max Gray All reactions 250 lb or less at joint(s)29,31,33,25,23,21 except 34=328(LC 1),20=326(LC 1),28=530(LC 2),30=252(LC 1),32=256(LC 1),27=530(LC 3),24=252(LC 1),22=256(LC 1) FORCES. (Ib)-Max.Comp./Max.Ten.-All forces 250(Ib)or less except when shown. TOP CHORD 2-34=-281/60,2-3=-254/85,18-20=-281/44 WEBS 9-28=-353/22,11-27=-353/8 NOTES- 1)Wind:ASCE 7-05;90mph;TCDL=6.0psf;BCDL=6.0psf;h=24ft;Cat.II;Exp B,endosed;MWFRS(low-rise)gable end zone and C-C Exterior(2)zone; cantilever left and right exposed;end vertical left and right exposed;C-C for members and forces&MWFRS for reactions shown;Lumber DOL=1.60 plate grip DOL=1.60 2) Truss designed for wind loads in the plane of the truss only. For studs exposed to wind(normal to the face),see Standard Industry Gable End Details as applicable,or consult qualified building designer as per ANSI/IP'1. 3)TCLL:ASCE 7-05;Pg=50.0 psf(ground snow);Pf=38.5 psf(fiat roof snow);Category II;Exp B;Partially Exp.;Ct=1.1 4)Unbalanced snow loads have been considered for this design. 5)This truss has been designed for greater of min roof live load of 16.0 psf or 2.00 times flat roof load of 38.5 psf on overhangs non-concurrent with other live loads. 6)All plates are 2x4 MT20 unless otherwise indicated. 7)Gable requires continuous bottom chord bearing. 8)Truss to be fully sheathed from one face or securely braced against lateral movement(i.e.diagonal web). 9)Gable studs spaced at 2-0-0 oc. 10)This truss has been designed for a 10.0 psf bottom chord live load nonconcurrent with any other live loads. 11)`This truss has been designed for a live load of 20.0psf on the bottom chord in all areas where a rectangle 3-6-0 tall by 2-0-0 wide will fit between the bottom chord and any other members,with BCDL=10.0psf. 12)Provide mechanical connection(by others)of truss to bearing plate capable of withstanding 100 lb uplift at joint(s)34,20,29,30,31,32,25,24,23,22 except(jt=lb)33=220,21=214. 13)This truss is designed in accordance with the 2006 International Residential Code sections R502.11.1 and R802.10.2 and referenced standard ANSI/TPI 1. O F N.E41 i 14)"Semi-rigid pitchbreaks including heels"Member end fixity model was used in the analysis and design of this truss. z fi' �N M PRfs a • LOAD CASE(S) Standard -� CT • ,..) Tf •L �tv `<(a No. 025777-1 C1 • ft__ I hi.....i.m In.thin ic:ac,l per ANSI/DS,pralitr rcr/uiren el..I'hnes.hull Ix of Si.and type Acorn and centu'ed at joints unless otherwise noted.'nii..Jcrign is based uprrn p:o:nnorcm rhornr.:md i.for an indirirmd ril.lingcomponent to he installed and totalled vertically.Applicability of design parameters and prior incorporation nl'component isro-prmsihility of the 13oilding Designer.Building Designer.shall veril'rall design int.oo:niotn,m Jti..iert tin'conliranntee with conditions and rcrpuiremems oldie specific building and governing aides and rodinnmro.Building Designer accepts responsibility Sr the correctness or....racy of t he desi n iobottotal;yah',.'it may relate t„a spccilio building.Certification is valid tint hen truss.is fabricated by a DFP company.Bracing shown is for lateral support of true.member..on ly and Jre.not replace 1.11:011/111111d ihti g ch t I r,ring Refer to Nailrine Component Safety Information It3CSn for general mud:nuc regarding storage.delivery.erection and bn;aring available from SBCA and Truss Pluto Institute. Job Truss Truss Type Qty Ply 39 Murphy Lane/Carriage House 115122597J T02 COMMON 10 1 Job Reference(optional) i.Universal Forest Products 7.610 s Jan 29 2015 MiTek Industries,Inc. Tue Jan 05 14:58:56 2016 Page 1 I Q 1 p l ID:YFpKw4jIZaaANRS7wP74b8y3js8-TvvupT5WGGR_g1hsBIW1010?e?3XE03Fyg7FuQzyOlz 0-10-88 3-7-13 3-3-7 2-8-10 10-9-97 12-7-9 15-8-9 2-7-9 10-9-92 2-8-10 ( 3-3-7 37 13 010-8 4x6= Scale=1:62.5 7 8.00 FIT 3x6= n 3x6= 6 8 3x6 II 23 • 24 3x6 II 4x10 i 5 9 4x1 2x4•�� 4 10 • 2x4,i AIL. �� 11 tlis r • r .121200 21,2 I/ s B1 II ii B2 � 19 13 19 16 15 14 22 20 17 8x8 = 6x6= 6x8= 6x6 = 8x8= 6-11-4I 19-2-12 26-2-0 6-11-4 12-3-8 I 6-11-4 Plate Offsets(X,Y)— [2:0-0-0,0-2-11,p:0-3-0,Edge),[12:0-0-0,0-2-11,[14:0-3-0,0-3-121,[16:0-3-0,0-3-121 TCLLLOADING(psf) 38.5 SPACING- 2-0-0 CSI. DEFL. in (log) I/deft Ud PLATES GRIP (Ground Snow=50.0) Plate Grip DOL 1.15 TC 0.88 Vert(LL) -0.51 14-16 >610 240 MT20 197/144 Tt'OL 10.0 Lumber DOL 1.15 BC 0.52 Vert(TL) -0.91 14-16 >346 180 6CLL 0.0 Rep Stress lncr YES WB 0.40 Horz(TL) 0.04 12 n/a n/a BCDL 10.0 Code IRC2006/TPI2002 (Matrix-M) Wind(LL) 0.1014-16 >999 360 Weight:169 lb FT=4% LUMBER- BRACING- TOP CHORD 2x6 SPF 2100F 1.8E*Except* ' TOP CHORD Structural wood sheathing directly applied or 2-2-0 oc purlins. T1:2x6 SPF No.2 BOT CHORD Rigid ceiling directly applied or 10-0-0 oc bracing. BOT CHORD 2x8 SP DSS WEBS 1 Row at midpt 6-8 WEBS 2x4 SPF No.2 WEDGE Left:2x4 SPF No.2,Right:2x4 SPF No.2 REACTIONS. (lb/size) 2=2132/0-5-8 (min.0-3-6),12=2132/0-5-8 (min.0-3-6) Max Horz2=-205(LC 6) FORCES. (Ib)-Max.Comp./Max.Ten.-All forces 250(Ib)or less except when shown. / TOP CHORD 2-18=-1274/0,3-18=-3184/0,3-4=2822/0,4-5=2654/0,5-23=2077/37,6-23=-1908/64,6-7=0/534,7-8=0/534,8-24=1908/64, 9-24=-2077/37,9-10=-2654/0,10-11=-2822/0,11-21=3184/0,12-21=1274/0 • t BOT CHORD 17-19=-72/693,16-19=0/2530,15-16=0/2058,14-15=0/2058,14-22=0/2530,20-22=0/693 WEBS 6-8=-2667/21,9-14=0/1037,5-16=0/1037,3-16=-650/112,11-14=-650/113,2-17=-1234/28,18-19=-384/152,17-18=-1380/0,2-19=0/841, 12-20=-1234/29,21-22=-384/152,20-21=-1380/0,12-22=0/841 NOTES- 1)Wind:ASCE 7-05;90mph;TCDL=6.0psf;BCDL=6.0psf;h=24ft;Cat.II;Exp B;enclosed;MWFRS(low-rise)gable end zone and C-C Exterior(2)zone; cantilever left and right exposed;end vertical left and right exposed;C-C for members and forces&MWFRS for reactions shown;Lumber DOL=1.60 plate grip DOL=1.60 2)TCLL:ASCE 7-05;Pg=50.0 psf(ground snow);Pf=38.5 psf(flat roof snow);Category II;Exp B;Partially Exp.;Ct=1.1 3)Unbalanced snow loads have been considered for this design. 1 4)This truss has been designed for greater of mill roof live load of 16.0 psf or 2.00 times flat roof load of 38.5 psf on overhangs non-concurrent with other live loads. 5)This truss has been designed for a 10.0 psf bottom chord live load nonconcurrent with any other live loads. 6)'This truss has been designed for a live load of 20.0psf on the bottom chord in all areas where a rectangle 3-6-0 tall by 2-0-0 wide will fit between the bottom chord and any other members. 7)Ceiling dead load(5.0 psf)on member(s).5-6,8-9,6-8 8)Bottom chord live load(30.0 psf)and additional bottom chord dead load(7.0 psf)applied only to room.14-16 . 9)This truss is designed in accordance with the 2006 International Residential Code sections R502.11.1 and R802.10.2 and referenced standard ANSI/TPI 1. 10)"Semi-rigid pitchbreaks including heels"Member end fixity model was used in the analysis and design of this truss. 11)Attic room checked for L/360 deflection. LOADCASE(S) Standard OF Nett' AAAI„ `rr �W 1,40 2s !/ I . .. `�v .fid No. 085777-1 0 This tats,is to ls-li,b,icated per ANSI/WI quality re,luirsntcnls.Pi:os..shall Ic of size and type shown and centered at joints unless otherwise noted.This design is based upon parameters shore».and is furan individual ...__. hoihling emnrymeot u,he installed and loaded vertically.Applicability of design paramcicrs and proper inenrporation acumponcnt is responsibility of the Building Designer.Building Designer.shall verily all design soli,union on this sheet li'rcuni'rl,,nczsilhrnnsilionsz,Jrc,loin:mous nl'the specific building and governing odes and nr,tinanna.Building Designer accepts responsibility its the correctness or accuracy of the design info nation os it may reline on a specific building.Ceti ihcati,n is valid only when ttats+is Iiohric:ned by a UFP c nnpany.Bracing shown is Iia lateral snppurt om 1 truss embers only;tin]does not replace erection and • 'W1.111.1/011'W1.111.1/011loin ire.Ilef,r to Building Component Wet),Ini,vv>ion(BM)for general guidance regarding storage,delivery.erection and bracing available front 5130,5 and Truss Plats Institute. '! ' J rit-t / LAME Z = Lts 3 S c s 4 -zaK zBotQ7ci-t:S, Ysi 15 \ "1-A}? SLSS ISG ? _ ` s 513g4-1 tom' 13��►►G c_ � S 4i2 S(AB ZLvt '_KIXAVA . iNVT(Fl _,. , M 5 Gt GAR , 4' 7 . ts-r 014 .5,P. Z11 Q 44f. sP 7 t L 1E388 5F �o. ,s74.F) = 263x20 BASE. FT - 3332-e 3 aR Fame)hvt5 FRP