HomeMy WebLinkAbout20220830 14 MacArthur Drive 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,Alternate
W W W.SARATOGA-SPRI NGS.ORG
#20220830
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Robert Kear
14 MacArthur Drive
Saratoga Springs NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 14 MacArthur Drive in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 166.14-2-21 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 to construct
a deck on the rear of the residence in the Urban Residential—1 (UR-1) District and public notice having been duly
given of a hearing on said application held on October 24th and November 28th, 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 variance for the following amount of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF
DIMENSIONAL REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
REAR SETBACK 30 FT. 25 FT. 5 FT OR 16.7%
SIDE YARD SETBACK 12 FT. 6 FT. 6 FT.OR 50%
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 applicant seeks to construct a 4 6' x 28' deck on the rear of the residence. The
applicant stated that the size of the desk was optimal for the intended use. The applicant noted that
alternative plans were considered however they were not practical.
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
proposed deck will be located behind the residence resulting in majority of the deck not being visible from
the street. The Board further notes that public comment included support from a neighboring property.
3. The Board does not find the rear setback variance to be substantial. The Board does find the side yard
setback to be substantial,but notes that the chosen location of the deck was the result of the orientation of
the residence on the property. The existing principal home is closer to the side yard setback than the
proposed deck.
4. This Board finds this variance will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the
neighborhood or district. District permeability requirements will be met.
5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicant desires to construct a rear deck,however this
is not fatal to the application.
It is so moved.
Dated: November 28, 2022
Adopted by the following votes:
AYES: 5 (G. Simpson, B. Gallagher, B. Dailey C. Grey, E. Bergmann)
NAYES: 0
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 the Unified
Development Ordinance.
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 12/09/2022
CHAR DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS
DEPT.