HomeMy WebLinkAbout20210059 Donovan Single family NOD OGA Keith Kaplan, Chair
e. . k CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
1Y ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Terrance Gallogly
• .j. Cheryl Grey
tier •
c� fi; r" ;, t CITY HALL 474 BROADWAY Matthew Gutch
• lYgei
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 Gage Simpson
4`c°RPOR#T_O 518-587-3550 Emily Bergmann
WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
#20210059
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:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF
DIMENSIONAL REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
MIN. FRONT YARD SETBACK 10 FT. 8.7 FT. 1.3 FT.(13%)
(NELSON)
MIN. FRONT YARD SETBACK 10 FT. 4.0 FT. 6 FT. (60%)
(LINCOLN)
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
SIGNATURE: 03/30/2021
C R DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT.