HomeMy WebLinkAbout20220207 131 Excelsior NOD (2) OG,4 Gage Simpson, Chair
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
Emily Bergmann
CIOZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Cheryl Grey
_ 4.
Matthew Gutch
CITY HALL- 474 BROADWAY
Brendan Dailey
Ic �5 SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866
oRPoRASE� John Daley,Alternate
518-587-3550 Alice Smith,Alternate
WWW.SARATOGA-SPRIN GS.ORG
920220207
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Conifer, LLC
1000 University Avenue, Suite 500
Rochester,NY 05420
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 131 Excelsior Avenue in the
City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 166.30-1-3 on the Assessment Map of said
City.
The applicant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit
demolition of an existing building and new construction of an apartment building in the T-5 District and
public notice having been duly given of a hearing on application held on April 25, 2022 through to
December 12, 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 variance for the following amount of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL PROPOSED RELIEF
REQUIREMENT REQUESTED
MINIMUM%BUILD TO FRONTAGE 70% 44% 26%(37.1%)
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. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing building on this property and build a
102-unit apartment building. The applicant states that they want to maintain the vegetative barrier
on the east side of the property to not impact the single-family home on that side. On the west side
of the property,there is a NYSDOT easement and Spring Run stream that makes that area unfeasible
to develop. If that portion of the frontage were eliminated from the total frontage, the build out
would be increased and would potentially not require a variance. The Board notes that both of these
borders will create a more aesthetic appearance by leaving buffering areas.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in
neighborhood character or detriment to the nearby properties. The neighborhood has a variety of
commercial and residential buildings. This will be similar to new construction in the neighborhood
with the building fagade toward the front of the property and the parking in the rear.
3. The requested variance is substantial, however substantiality is mitigated by the points noted in 1
and 2 above.
4. The Board finds this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the
neighborhood. Permeability will meet district requirements.
5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicant's desire to construct an apartment
building, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
Notes:
Planning Board negative declaration (November 17, 2022)
Saratoga County Planning Board: No significant county-wide or intercommunity impact(June 20, 2022)
Design Review Board Favorable advisory opinion (September 28, 2022)
It is so moved, dated: December 12, 2022
Adopted by the following votes:
AYES: 4 (G. Simpson, B. Gallagher, B. Dailey C. Grey,)
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, four
members of the Board being present.
4
SIGNATURE: 12/19/2022
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS
DEPT.