HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230966 11 Ritchie Place Public Comment January 31, 2024
To: Zoning Board of Appeals
From: Concerned Neighbors (2)
RE: 11 Ritchie Place Subdivision Application
This is our amended version in which we further illustrate our concern for the request for a
subdivision of 11 Ritchie Place. We are adding a neighbor to the list and would like to point out a
particularly substantial gap in the application.You will notice that pagination goes from page 1 to
page 6. In the ZBA's original form (which does not appear in the uploaded application), page 4B
asks if the property has been listed for sale. It further asks (112) if it has been advertised. This
property is currently, listed online as `sale pending,' and it appeared in a ATY Times feature on
Saratoga ("Saratoga Springs, N.Y: An Urban Oasis at the Foot of the
Adirondacks," htti2s://Nvww.nytimes.com/2023/09/13/realestate/saratoga-springs-n�:.htm1) in
September 2023.
We are seriously concerned about this property becoming something very different from the rest of
our community. The footage and plans (see attached visual) seem to tell the story of the inadequacy
of the property and the inaccuracy of the claims concerning the neighborhood (setbacks), but
perhaps the members of the ZBA could have a live look at the space to more deeply understand our
position.
January 25, 2024
To: Zoning Board of Appeals
From: Concerned Neighbors
RE: 11 Ritchie Place Subdivision Application
We are writing to voice our concern in opposition to the proposed subdivision at 11 Ritchie
Place. Below we will address the various issues we see arising from this proposal.
PROCEDURAL:
It is our understanding that when applying,for a variance it is required that you notify neighbors
within a certain radius of the proposed changes. While the application was.filed in October
2023, no neighbors were informed of this request. We learned about it completely by chance
Monday January 22 because the original property, 11 Ritchie Place, is for sale and is currently
listed on realtor websites as `sale pending. 'No sign regarding sale pending nor one announcing
application for a variance has appeared on the property.
If the property sale is `pending, ' does the Zoning Board grant a variance to the current owners
(Richard J. and Dana Bush) when they will be handing over the property to a buyer?
Is it commonplace that a variance is part of a sale?
1of3
DIMENSIONS AND CODE:
In the Area Variance of the application, we see the dimensions of the proposed two lots. While
Lot #1 predates zoning laws in the City, the proposed Lot #2 is woefully short of any plausible
building lot. Proposed Lot #2 is more than 2000 sq.ft. smaller than Lot #1, and the reliefs
requested in the proposal are extreme given current guidelines. The most concerning number
would be the 93% requested setback relief on Forest Avenue. In,fact, the next property up the
street (22 Forest Avenue) is set back approximately 60,fee(from the road.
CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD:
The data in the proposal concerning neighborhood character are skewed because they do not
consider the different dates of construction and changing building codes over the decades. If we
were to hark back eighty years (current residents and their families have lived here that long),
we see that many of the houses submitted in this proposal as examples of smaller lots predate
Saratoga Springs City zoning laws.
Many immediate neighbors and their.families have lived here.for decades, some well-over half-'
a-century. For some of these residents the visual impact of this proposal will greatly alter views
and perspectives enjoyed since the neighborhood began. There has never been a structure on
this proposed property: allowing one to be built would negatively impact the esthetic that has
been enjoyed for decades.
A further potential impact on the neighborhood is traffic and parking. That block of Forest
Avenue is frequently overwhelmed with Eastside Rec traffic: in summer,fall and spring it is often
difficult to access Lake Avenue. Adding vehicles would further exacerbate existing congestion
problems.
IMPACT ON PROPERTY VALUES:
In general people feel that high prices on neighboring real estate brings direct value to the
neighborhood. However, in this case the opposite is true. Building a structure on an inadequate
lot, with limited parking or space for a yard, will transform this corner into an eyesore instead of
the current open space which has been enjoyed by all for decades. Furthermore, this proposal
does nothing to support the spirit of community in our special corner of Saratoga Springs. The
proposed variance is not an investment in the community: it is merely means to complete a real
estate transaction.
Thank you.for your attention to this matter. Since this proposal just recently came to our
attention, we reserve the right to add additional concerned neighbors to the list below.
Robert and Kathleen Tomaski
22 Forest Avenue
Stacie Mayette Barnes and Howard Barnes
200 York Avenue
A.M. Manon Sabatier
23 Forest Avenue
2of3
Shirley Smith and Giacomo Smith
16 Ritchie Place
Susan Flanagan
24 Forest Avenue
Gabe and Jennifer Anderson
50 Forest Avenue
Annette DeCresce-Lawson
33 Forest Avenue
Jill Regan
180 York Avenue
Darin and Heather Hart
29 Forest Avenue
Marylee Lee
25 Hutchins Street
3 of 3