HomeMy WebLinkAbout20181124 Kotelly Residence NOD .s,,,I Bill Moore, Chair
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith Kaplan, Vice Chair
, 4..
,..:24 . . i ,, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Brad Gallagher,Secretary
CherylSusan Steer Grey
,,
:.•
_iii, ).
, ,--
h 1 ,41,..„ :-."
100,14
Jerry Luhn
CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY
: 'It
if ii '..- SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK I 2866
7
Chris Hemstead
PH)518-587-3550 FX)518-580-9480
Rebecca Kern,alternate
WAW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
rTf-Gkto t Kathleen O'Connor,alternate
#3081
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF RECEIVED
Doug Kotelly
47 Walnut Street FER, 0 D 7i-1,4q
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
ACC:L . i\ii ti „ ':77"
From a determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises located at 47 Walnut Street in
the City of Saratoga Springs, New York, tax parcel number 165.73-2-20 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 maintenance of a constructed terrace to an existing single-family residence in a UR-2 District and
public notice having been duly given of hearings on said application held on January 28, 2019 and
February 4, 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 variances for the following amount of
relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
REQU1REMENT_
MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK: TERRACE I 0 FT. 9 FT. 1 FT. (I 0%)
As per the submitted documents, or lesser dimensions, be APPROVED for the following reasons:
1. The Board finds the Applicant demonstrated that the benefit sought cannot be achieved by other
means feasible to the Applicant. The Applicant constructed the terrace within the setback
requirements. To remedy the oversight would require the Applicant to remove and reinstall of a
large portion of the terrace. This would require the removal of compacted soil and portions of
the perimeter wall and pavers that form the top of the terrace. The cost of this re-installation
project is not proportional to the requested relief and, thus, is not reasonable in considering the
feasibility of other means.
2. The Board finds the Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an
undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The terrace is
9' from the North adjacent property line, which is further than the existing house that is 8.5'
from the property line. The portion of the terrace requiring relief is not visible from the North
adjacent property because of the location of the garage on the adjacent property and the existing
vegetation.
3. The Board finds the relief requested of 1' for a terrace is not considered substantial. The Board
notes that if the Applicant had constructed a ground-level patio, a variance would not have been
required.
4. The Board finds that the variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental
effect on the neighborhood or district. The terrace is constructed of pavers, which allow for
drainage.
5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the Applicant made an oversight in constructing a
terrace within the setback requirements, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
It is so moved by B. Gallagher; seconded by C. Grey.
Adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 6 (K. Kaplan, S. Steer, C. Grey, B. Gallagher, J. Luhn, C. Hemstead)
NAYES:
Dated: February 4, 2019
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, six members of the Board being present.
SIGNATURE: 2/4/2019
CHAIR DATE