HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200827 Gregory Single-Family Addition NOD Keith Kaplan, Chair
0 G4 CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Terrance Gallogly
; I Cheryl Grey
�.� h•
sew Matthew Gutch
-x, rCITY HALL-474 BROADWAY
SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 Rosemary Ratcliff
`- Gaga Simpson
•
,\B'`- VVWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG Kathleen O'Connor,alternate
'FOR AT'ED
#20200827
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
MARINA GREGORY
328 CAROLINE STREET
SARATOGA SPRINGS NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 328 Caroline Street in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 166.14-1-16 on the Assessment Map of said City.
The applicant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the
construction of second story to an existing principal structure in a UR-1 District and public notice having been
duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 11th day of January and the 1st day of February 2021.
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 following area variances for the following amount of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
DIMENSIONAL
REQUIREMENT
MAXIMUM COVERAGE FOR PRINCIPAL 22% 23.5% 1.5%OR 6.8%
STRUCTURE(PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)
MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK 30 FT 13 FT 17 FT OR 56.7%
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK 12 FT 5.4 FT 6.6 FT OR 55.0%
(WEST)
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR 5 FT 0.8 FT 4.2 FT OR 84.0%
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE(SHED)
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR 5 FT 3 FT 2 FT OR 40.0%
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE(A/C UNIT)
MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK FOR 5 FT 2.5 FT 2.5 FT OR 50.0%
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE(SHED)
MINIMUM SETBACK FOR PATIO 10 6 FT 4 FT OR 40.0%
As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions,be approved for the following reasons:
. The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant.
The applicant is adding a second story to the existing principal structure and the accessory structures are
already located on the property. With respect to the variances for the principal structure, according to the
applicant,the only other alternative would be to knock down the existing principal structure and construct a
new structure in conformance with the district requirements.With respect to the variances for the accessory
structures and the patio, according to the applicant, it is not feasible to relocate the accessory structures or
reconfigure the patio,based on the layout of the applicant's property.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting these variances will not create an undesirable change in
neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. According to the applicant, the coverage of the
principal structure and the front yard setback are not changing from their existing configuration and,as such,
the renovated principal structure will not impose on the adjacent properties in any different manner than the
existing principal structure. With respect to the accessory structures and the patio, the applicant has stated
that each is located behind large fencing and, as such, they are almost "imperceptible" from the adjacent
properties. In addition, the A/C unit is located on the west side of the principal structure that abuts the
property of a public school and, therefore, the applicant states that its location mitigates the impact on the
applicant's neighbors.
3. The Board notes the requested variances are substantial. However,the Board notes that the relief requested
is mitigated by its nature and its overall minimum impact on the neighboring properties,as discussed above.
4. These variances will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or
district.
5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicant desires to add the second story to
the existing principal structure. However,this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
Adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 6 (K. Kaplan, B. Gallagher, T. Gallogly, C. Grey, M. Gutch, R. Ratcliff)
NAYES: 1 (G. Simpson)
Dated: February 1, 2021
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 240-8.5.1.
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.
SIGNATURE: 2/08/2021
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT.