HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200545 Valente Area Variance Public Comment (2) MICHAEL J. CATALFIMO
230 Caroliile Street
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
July 12, 2021
Zoning Board of Appeals
City of Saratoga Spi•inbs
474 Broadw�y
Saratoga Spi�in�s, Ne�v York 12866
Re: #20200545 — 64 Ludlo�v Condominium Garage
Dear Board Members:
I live at 230 Caroline Street. The pi•operty �vhich is the subject of the above-referenced
area variance application (the "Property") is visible from the south-facing windows of my home
and fi•om inost of my yard. Addition�lly, I drive along the northerly boundary line of the Property
daily to obtain in�ress and egress to and fi�onl my gai•age, which ti�onts on LaBelle Lane. My
property will be�direc�tly affected by the grant or denial of the pending application (the
"Application").
As the Boat•d is aware, the Pi•operty is the slibjeet of an eYistin� site plan �ppi•oved by the
Planning Boat•d in or about 1987 (the "Site Plan"). The approval of this Site Plan was conditioned,
among other thin�s, upon(i)the conveyance to the City of a stt•ip of land or right-of-way for public
access �long the southerly edge of LaBelle Lane, commencing at a point approximately opposite
my garage; (ii) the maintenance and/or erection of fencing and vegetative screening along the
northerly boundaiy li�1e of the Property, so as to create a bai�rier bet�veen the Property and LaBelle
Lane; and (iii) the estlblishment of a n�i•i•owed ctirb-cut access bet�veen the Property and LaBelle
Lane (the "OriQinal A�proval Conditions"). To n1y kno�vledge, the specified Original Approval
Conditions have never been complied �vith; althou�h asstirances of cornpliance were offered to
this Board in 2004 �vhen an earliei•are� variance request was made.
I am generally suppot•tive of the Application no�v before you, as I believe the proposed
garage will be more visually atti•active th�n the e�isting parking lot. I au� troubled, however, by
the continuing disregard of the Original Approval Conditions which has been sho�vn by successive
o�vners of the Property for over thirty (30) years; and I am also concerned that the constr�iction of
the proposed improvements nlay serve to e�acerbate problems of flooding and icinb which occlir
it1 LaBelle Lane durin�� the winter months. Coilsequently, I request th�t any approval of the
Application this Board inay choose to issue be made stibject to the followin� e�pi•ess conditions:
l. That all Original Approval Conditions nitist be coinplied �vith as soon after the
determination of the Application as is reasonably practicable;
Zoning Board of Appeals
#20200�45 —64 Ludlo�v Condonlinilim Garage
July 12, 2021
Page 2
2. That no builc�ing permit for the contemplated improvements to the Property may be
issued until coinpliance �vith the Origin�l Approval Conditions has been
documented and confirmed by the Zonin� Enforcement Ofticer; and
3. That the Application must be referred to the PlanninQ Boarcl for consideration of
potential draina�e and runoff issues related to the proposed improvements, as �vell
�s any other design oi•construction issues of concern to that Boai•d.
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
/�2,��� � � �.
Michael J. Catalfinlo
MJC: