Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230820 332 Caroline Street Area variance NOD �f0G' CITY OF SARATOGA Gage Simpson,Chair �A Brad Gallagher,Vice Chair !�d Cheryl Grey SPRINGS Shafer Gaston ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Brendan Dailey 1 = Jonah Cohen Otis Maxwell CITY HALL-474 BROADwAY Alice Smith,Alternate �RPORATVD 19 SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK12866 518-587-3550 W W W.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG 20230820 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Doranne and Danial Mullan 111 51h Avenue Saratoga Springs NY, 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 332 Caroline Street in the City of Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 166.14-1 on the Assessment Map of said City. The applicant having applied for an area variance to permit an expansion to a single-family home in the Urban Residential 2 (UR-2) District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on November 20fl' and December I Vh, 2023. 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 amount of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED SETBACK-FRONT TO PORCH 10, 7.7' 2.3' (23%) SETBACK-FRONT TO HOME 10, 3' 7' (70%) INTERIOR SIDE 8' 5' 3' (37.5%) 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 wants to construct an addition to their current home. The design requirements include making the residence handicap accessible to support an elderly family member. The applicants note they have considered other alternatives, however, maintaining the design objective without violating setback requirements would be excessively costly. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant demonstrated that there are nearby properties with similar setback variances. 3. The board notes that the variances requested are substantial, but is mitigated by similar variances in neighboring properties and the objective of accessibility. 4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. Standard district permeability requirements will be met. 5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicant desires to construct the addition; however, this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Page 1 of 2 It is so moved, dated December 1 lrh-2023. Passes by the following votes: AYES: 5 (G. Simpson, B. Gallagher, B. Dailey, S. Gaston, J. Cohen,) RECUSED: NAYES: This variance shall expire 1S 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. SIGNATURE: 12/14/2023 OV CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT. Page 2 of 2