HomeMy WebLinkAbout20220446 1 Alger Area Variance NOD OGA Gage Simpson, Chair
�P¢PTS,A�
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
4 r� Emily Bergmann
K. v� ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Cheryl Grey
.;.s z Matthew Gutch
U `•• CITY HALL- 474 BROADWAY
Brendan Dailey
�N�ORP ,9 5 SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 John Daley,A/ternate
ORATEO 51 8-5 87-3 5 50
Alice Smith,A/ternate
W W W.SARATOGA-SPRI NGS.ORG
#20220446
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Luke and Lauren Boughton
1 Alger St.
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 1 Alger Street in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 165.43-4-18 on the Assessment Map of said City.
The applicants having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the
addition of a screened porch in an Urban Residential-3 (UR-3)District and public notice having been duly
given of a hearing on said application held on the 27th day of June through the 12th day of September,
2022.
In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicants 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 PROPOSED RELIEF
REQUIREMENT REQUESTED
MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL COVERAGE 30% 56.7% 26.7% (89%)
FRONT SETBACK TO HOUSE ALGER ST 10, 7.1' 2.9 29%
FRONT SETBACK TO PORCH(ALGER ST) 10, 0.3' 9.7' (97%)
as per the submitted plans, be DENIED for the following reasons:
1. While the applicants have demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to
the applicants, the Board finds the applicants' desire for a screened porch does not outweigh the
negative impact the structure creates to the zoning requirements. Per Zoning Board Resolution
"2865 Boughton"the Board noted that several neighboring properties exceed 50% coverage and
the approved coverage of 54%would be at the upper end of the range in the neighborhood. That
Board also noted that further relief for maximum principal coverage would be inconsistent with
neighborhood character. This Board agrees with that sentiment.
2. The applicants have not demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable
change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicants provided
several neighbor comments in support of the screened porch. The previous resolution also had a
condition of no additional accessory structures. The applicants have noted that they
unintentionally built an accessory screened porch structure and now would like to convert it into
part of their principal structure.
3. The Board notes the requested variances of 89%, 29%, and 97% are substantial. The substantiality
of the maximum principal coverage can be reduced if the Board considers the previous resolution
approval of 54%being increased by 2.7% to 56.7%. However, the previous Board's decision to
allow the 54% coverage is still considered at the upper end of the range in the neighborhood and
this Board notes adding an additional 2.7%would be considered substantial in this case. The 29%
variance is mitigated by the house being pre-existing, non-conforming and any work done would
require a variance. The Board finds it difficult to mitigate the substantiality of the 97%variance of
the front setback to the porch. While neighboring properties have porches that extend to the
sidewalk, the Board's responsibility is to reduce the number and size of the variances whenever
possible.
4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the
neighborhood or district. The existing home meets district required permeability.
5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicants desire to build the
screened porch. However, this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
It is so moved.
Dated: October 24, 2022
Motion failed to pass by the following votes:
AYES: 2 (C. Grey, A. Smith)
NAYES: 3 (G. Simpson, B. Gallagher, B. Dailey)
Dated: October 24, 2022
This variance shall expire 18 months following the filing date of such decision unless the
necessary building permit has been issued and actual construction 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, five
members of the Board being present.
SIGNATUR 10/28/2022
CHAR R DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS
DEPT.