Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20210059 Donovan Single Family Porch NOD Keith Kaplan, Chair C ITY OF S ARATOGA S PRINGS Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair Terrance Gallogly ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Cheryl Grey  Matthew Gutch C ITY H ALL - 474 B ROADWAY Gage Simpson S ARATOGA S PRINGS, N EW Y ORK 12866 Emily Bergmann 518-587-3550 WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG #20210127 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Carrie and Dan Donovan 4940 Spruce Bluff Drive Atlanta, Georgia 30350 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 138 Nelson Avenue in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 166.77-4-1 on the Assessment Map of said City. The applicant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to seek relief from the minimum front yard setback to construct porch additions to the front and rear of the existing primary residence in the Urban Residential – 2 (UR-2) District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on March 8 and 29, 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 variance for the following amount of relief: T YPE OF R EQUIREMENT D ISTRICT P ROPOSED R ELIEF DIMENSIONAL REQUESTED REQUIREMENT M IN. F RONT Y ARD S ETBACK 10 FT. 8.7 FT. 1.3 FT. (13%) (N ELSON) M IN. F RONT Y ARD S ETBACK 10 F T. 4.0 FT. 6 FT. (60%) (L INCOLN) As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The Board finds that the applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The Board finds that the applicant has demonstrated that portions of the existing residence have existed since the 1800s. The residence is located on a corner lot with front and rear porches that were added in the 1990s and are in need of repair and replacement, according to the applicant. The applicant desires to demolish the existing front porch and restore it to a historical representation that is consistent with the residence’s architecture. By doing so, the front porch roof overhand will extend into the front yard setback by approximately 1 foot. The applicant further desires to re-construct the rear porch to its existing proportions, but seeks to re-locate the entry steps in order to align with the rear entry door of the residence. The Board finds that the applicant has demonstrated that the desired changes will improve the functionality and aesthetic of the residence and result in a residence that is more in character with the neighborhood. The Board finds that the desired benefits could not be achieved through other alternative designs that were considered by the applicant and as set forth in the record before the Board. 2. The Board finds that the applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. According to the applicant, the front porch located on Nelson Avenue will be re-constructed in a manner that will reflect the historical character of the original residence. In addition, the rear porch located on Lincoln Avenue will be re-constructed in its current proportions with the exception of relocating the entry steps to align with the entry door to the residence. 3. The Board does not find the variance for the front porch located on Nelson Avenue construction to be substantial, as only a small portion of the front porch overhang will encroach into the setback. The Board does find the request for the variance for the relocation of the entry steps for the rear porch located on Lincoln Avenue to be substantial; however, this is mitigated by the fact that the applicant only desires to relocate the entry steps to the porch within the setback the purpose of which is to improve the functionality and aesthetic by aligning them with the entry door to the rear of the residence. 4. This Board finds this variance will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The Board finds that the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed re-construction of the front porch reflects the historical porch that previously existed on the residence and that the rear porch is not a significant change from the current rear porch on the property. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicant desires to re-construct and re-locate the entry stairs to the rear porch, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application. It is so moved. Dated: March 29, 2021 S IGNATURE: _______________________________ 03/30/2021 C HAIR D ATE R ECEIVED BY A CCOUNTS D EPT.