HomeMy WebLinkAbout20221034 31-33 Marion Avenue Interpretation Appeal NOD Gage Simpson,Chair
OG, CITY OF SARATOGA Brad Gallagher,Vice Chair
Q A� Emily Bergmann
e SPRINGS Cheryl Grey
CIO Brendan Dailey
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Shafer Gatson
John Daley,Alternate
r -µ CITY HALL-474 BRoADwAY Alice Smith,Alternate
cORPORAIf�) ��1h SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEwYORK12866
518-587-3550
W W W.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
#20221034
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
John Iacoponi
4 Avenue A, Saratoga Springs,NY 12866
WHEREAS,Applicant John Iacoponi having applied for an interpretation appeal of a Determination issued
on September 12,2022 by the City Zoning and Building Inspector involving the applicability of Section 240-1.7 of
the City Zoning Ordinance enacted on October 4, 2012 to property located at 31-33 Marion Avenue and identified
as Tax Map Parcel Nos. 166.5-4-1.1, 166.5-4-1.2 and 166.5-4-1.3 (the"Property"); and
WHEREAS, Stewart's Shops Corps. is the owner of the Property and the Building Inspector's
Determination was rendered in the context of certain land use approval applications made by Stewart's in
furtherance of its proposed development of the Property (the"Project"); and
WHEREAS,the Building Inspector initially rendered a determination regarding the Project by letter dated
May 16, 2022, but subsequently modified his determination by letter dated September 12, 2022 (both letters are
attached and incorporated herein) and the September 12, 2022 Determination is the subject of the present appeal;
and
WHEREAS,under the Zoning Ordinance,the boundary between the Tourist Related Business District and
the Urban Residential-2 District runs coincident along the lot line between Tax Map Parcels 166.5-4-1.1 and 166.5-
4-1.3; and
WHEREAS,Zoning Ordinance Section 240-1.7 states:
"INTERPRETATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Where there is uncertainty
as to the boundary of any district contained within this Chapter or as shown on City maps,
the following rules shall apply:
A. Unless shown to the contrary on a City map, the boundary lines of districts are
the center lines of streets, or such lines extended, the center lines of railroad rights-of way,
the center lines of creeks and waterways.
B. Where district boundaries are indicated as approximately following the City
boundary line, lot lines, or projections thereof, said boundaries shall be construed to be
coincident with such lines.
C. If a center line or right-of-way line of a street, highway, railroad, public utility,
or watercourse, which is approximately coincident with a district boundary, is moved up
to a distance of 50 feet, the district line shall be automatically adjusted to be coincident
with such line.
Page 1 of 3
D. Where a zoning district boundary line divides a lot or land in single ownership
as existing at the time of this enactment, the district requirements on either side of the
boundary may be construed, at the property owner's option, as extending into the remaining
portion of the property for a distance not exceeding 100 feet;" and
WHEREAS, the Building Inspector's Determination found that 1) the Property owner "is not
required to establish uncertainty as to the location of the boundary between districts in order to request
utilization of the provisions of Section 1.7(D)," 2) for application of Subsection 1.7(D) lands must have
been in single ownership at the time of the October 2012 enactment of the Zoning Ordinance ; and 3)
accordingly, requirements of the TRB District "may be construed to extend 100 feet north into parcel
166.5-4-1.1;" and
WHEREAS, Applicant filed this appeal of the Determination on November 09, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Board opened a duly-noticed Public Hearing on this appeal on February 27, 2023 and
closed the public hearing on May 08,2023; and
AND NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY,
RESOLVED, that the City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals makes the following
findings:
1) The first sentence of Zoning Ordinance Section 240-1.7 is clear and unambiguous. The Section
requires that there be "uncertainty as to the boundary of any district contained within [the Zoning
Ordinance] or as shown on City maps" before the"rules" of subsections A through D shall apply.
2) There has been no uncertainty established or even alleged as to the location of the district
boundaries as related to the Property. The district boundary between the Tourist Related Business
District and the Urban Residential-2 District of the Zoning Ordinance runs coincident along the
lot line between Tax Map Parcels 166.5-4-1.1 and 166.5-4-1.3. The location of the boundary line
between these Districts was clear at the time of enactment of the 2012 Zoning Ordinance and at
the time the Building Inspector rendered his Determination. Therefore,none of Subsections A, B,
C or D of Section 240-1.7 the Zoning Ordinance can apply to this Property or the related Zoning
District boundaries.
3) The Board agrees that the Property at issue was in single ownership under Stewart's at the time
that the 2012 Zoning Ordinance was enacted and remains so today. However, the ownership
requirements for the lands set forth in Zoning Ordinance Section 240-1.7(D) are irrelevant as this
provision does not apply as the required uncertainty of the Zoning District boundary has not been
established.
Page 2 of 3
4) The Board acknowledges that the City Building Inspector may have previously allowed property
owners/applicants to avail themselves of the benefits of Section 240-1.7(D) without first
establishing uncertainty as to Zoning District boundaries. However, the Board believes that the
present Application is the first instance in which the ZBA has been directly called upon to interpret
this provision and the Board is not bound by the Building Inspector's previous application of this
provision; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Building Inspector's September 12, 2022 Determination is hereby
overturned and Zoning Ordinance Section 240-1.7(D) does not apply to extend the district requirements
for the TRB District into Tax Map Parcel 166.5-4-1.1, which is located in the UR-2 District under the
2012 Zoning Ordinance.
Duly adopted this_08 day of_Maw 2023,by the following vote:
Passes by the following votes:
AYES: 7 (G. Simpson, B. Gallagher, C. Grey, E. Bergmann, B. Dailey, A. Smith, S. Gaston)
ABSTAINED:
RECUSED:
NAYES:
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.
SIGNATURE: - 05/11/2023
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS
DEPT.
Page 3 of 3