HomeMy WebLinkAbout20210053 Meehan Single-Family Addition NOD ` .y OC.-1 Sr Keith KapIan, Chair
r CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
.^
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Terrance Gallogly A ,r �1:
t .;. Cheryl Grey
CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY Matthew Gutch
Ga e
%y SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 Simpson g
°�poRar
�n �a 518-587-3550 Emily Bergmann
WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
#20210053
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Edward and Mary Meehan
15 Benton Drive.
Saratoga Springs NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 15 Benton Drive in
the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 166.14-2-58 on the
Assessment Map of said City.
The applicant having applied for an area variances under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to
permit the construction of a residential addition to the existing house in a Urban Residential
1 (UR 1 ) District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held
on the 8th day of March and the 10th day of May, 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:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL COVERAGE 20% 25% 5% (OR 25%)
MIN. FRONT YARD SETBACK 30 FT. 20.8 FT. 9.2 FT. (OR 30.7%)
MIN. SIDE YARD SETBACK (SOUTH) 12 FT. 8.1 FT. 3.9 FT. (OR 32.5%)
MIN. TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 30 FT. 22.8 FT. 7.2 FT. (OR 24%)
ACCESSORY TO SIDE SETBACK (AC UNIT) 5 FT. 3 FT. 2 FT. (OR 40%)
as per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons:
1 . The applicant has demonstrated that this benefit cannot be achieved by other means
feasible to the applicant. The applicant desires to build an addition to their home in
order to add living space on the existing first floor and a new second floor. In addition,
the applicant would like to add a covered entrance to the front of the house. The
applicant notes that alternative options for the design of the addition were explored,
but due to the undersized proportions of the applicant's lot, the benefits sought by
the applicant are not able to be accomplished without the requested variances.
Furthermore, in response to concerns raised by the Board, the applicant revised the
original design of the addition to reduce the size of the second floor dormer and the
front porch.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an
undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. Per
the applicant, the proposed addition has been designed to be architecturally and
aesthetically consistent with neighboring homes, including maintaining the existing
color of the home in order to match that of the surrounding properties. Furthermore,
the applicant notes that a number of neighboring homes exceed the district
requirement for maximum principal coverage and have covered entrances similar to
the applicant's planned entrance.
3. The Board notes the requested variances are substantial, however, the substantiality of
these variances is mitigated by the lack of adverse impact on the neighborhood as
noted above.
4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on
the neighborhood or district. Permeability will meet the district requirement.
5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicant desires to
build the addition. However, this is not necessarily fatal to the application
Condition: Accessory structures to be limited to 3% of total lot coverage.
It is so moved.
Dated: May 10, 2021
SIGNATURE: _ 05/11/2021
C R DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT.