HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190649 Smith & DelFavero Residence NOD Keith Kaplan, Chair
vitjoG,1 r CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Cheryl Grey
; Christopher Mills
�.� rs ice: •
► -x, r CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY Suzanne Morris
SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 Gage Simpson
. , Chris Hemstead,alternate' PH)5 I8-587-3550 FX)5 I8-580-9480
Kathleen O'Connor,alternate
' , TVD '' VVWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
FORA
#20190649
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Kara Smith/James Del Favero
951 Van Hoesen Rd
Castleton on Hudson, NY 12033
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at l0a Nelson Avenue in the City of
Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 179-2-13 in the RR district, on the Assessment Map of
said City.
The appellant having applied for an area variance for relief from the RR zoning designation and minimum lot
size width, rear, front and side yard setback requirements, and minimum permeability under the Zoning
Ordinance of said City to permit the construction of a single-family residence in a RR District and public notice
having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 12th day of August and 16th day of
September 2019.
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 variance for the following amount of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
PRINCIPAL BUILDING COVERAGE 15% 20% 5.0%
MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK 60 FT. 41.6 FT 18.4 FT OR 30.7%
MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 100 FT 26.5 FT 73.5 FT OR 73.5%
SIDE YARD SETBACK 30 FT 27.2 FT 2.8 FT OR 9.3%
SIDE YARD SETBACK 30 FT 17 FT 13 FT.OR43.3%
TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 100 FT 44.2 FT 55.8 FT OR 55.8%
MINIMUM LOT PERMEABILITY 80% 59% 21%OR26.3%
As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions,be approved for the following reasons:
1. The Applicants have demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the
Applicants. The Applicant notes and the Board agrees that due to the pre-existing nonconforming lot,
any building would require variances. Additionally, there is no adjacent land available for purchase
which might eliminate the need for some or all of the variances.
2. The Applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in
neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The residence will architecturally resemble
traditional homes in the neighborhood. The house will be of similar"proportion, scale and design to the
neighboring homes."
3. The Board notes the requested relief for maximum principal building coverage at 20%may be considered
substantial, however, this is offset by the fact that the garage is attached to the home and is equal to the
combined allowance for principal and accessory coverage. The Board further finds that the request for
relief from the setbacks could all be considered substantial, however, the applicant has shown that the
proposed home is "comparable to homes to its immediate right and left" that are also situated on
nonconforming lots. While the relief from the minimum lot permeability could be considered substantial
at 26.3%, the applicant has provided findings from an Engineer that the lot can"support the development
of a single family home"without significant impact on neighboring properties.
4. This Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or
environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The Applicant's agent has demonstrated that the lot
is of sufficient size, layout, and soils to accommodate the necessary septic system required to build on
this lot without impact to neighboring properties.
5. The alleged relief may be considered a self-created hardship. However, self-creation is not necessary
fatal to the application.
Conditions:
1. No further accessory structures.
Adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 7 (K. Kaplan, C. Grey, G. Simpson, S. Morris, B. Gallagher,K. O'Connor, C. Mills)
NAYE S: 0
Dated: September 16, 2019
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, five members of the Board being present.
SIGNATURE: 09/17/2019
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT.