HomeMy WebLinkAbout20211221 ROD `���1�(�c::� S� Keith Kaplan, Chair
, CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Brad Gallagher, Vice [hair
-��� �� �� Emily Bergmann
�- ,��, A ; � ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
�, � .;. Justin Farrington
- /�,�..
•,t. � � GTY HALL-474 BROADWAY Cheryl Grey
. ��,
. SARATOGA$PRINGS, NEw YoRi< 1 2866 Matthew Gutch
^cOK�'oR"rE° ��h 518-587-3550 Gage Simpson
WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG John Daley, alternate
#2�211221
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
John and Karen Achenbach
32 Joseph Street
Saratoga Springs NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 32 Joseph Street in the City
of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.82-1-75, in the UR-2 district on the
Assessment Map of said City.
This being an application for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the
construction of a rear porch and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application
held on 14t" through to the 28`�' day of February 2022.
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 amounts of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
DIMENSIONAL
REQUIREMENT
MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL COVERAGE 3�% 32.4% 2.4%OR g%RELIEF
STDE SETBACK TO PATTO 1 O' g.�' 1.3' OR 13%RELTEF
As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions,be approved for the following reasons:
1. The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to
the applicant. Per the applicant, they would like to add a covered porch to the rear of the
house and have determined that the size of 277 square feet would meet the needs of the
applicant, while the existing home's lot coverage is close to the district maximum. The
applicant notes that both functionality and the grading of the site necessitate the proposed
location attached to the main residence.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting these variances will not create an undesirable
change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes the
porch is the same width as the rear of the hame and designed to be complimentary to the
existing structure. The patio is an extension of the retaining wall and the staircase to access
the rear lower level of the property. Further, the Board notes the proposed addition would be
a one story and located so that there would be no impact on the visual from the street.
3. The Board notes the requested variance is not substantial.
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 self-created insofar as the applicant's desire to construct a rear porch
to an existing single-family residence,but this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
Conditions: Any future accessory sti-ucture is limited to 7.6%.
It is so moved.
Dated: February 28, 2022
Adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 6 (K. Kaplan, M. Gutch, J. FaiYington, E. Bergmann, John Daley, G. Simpson)
NAYES: 0
Dated: February 28, 2022
This variance shall expire 18 months following the filing date of such decision unless the necessary
building permit has been issued and actual consnuction begun as per 240-8.5.1.
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, seven members of the
Board being present.
SiGNATu�: 3/02/2022
i.'T^ DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS
DEPT.