HomeMy WebLinkAbout20240118 169 Union Avenue NOD �TOG,4 CITY OF SARATOGA Gage Simpson,Chair
Qg �A Brad Gallagher,Vice Chair
Shafer Gaston
t SPRINGS Brendan Dailey
CIO
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Jonah Cohen
Otis Maxwell
Chris LaPointe
r -µ CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY
Robert West(Alternate)
ccRPo�ASE� ,�� SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 Chris Maslack(Alternate)
518-587-3550
W W W.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
20240118
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Thomas R. Grossman
23 Old Fort Rd.
Walkill,New York 12589
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 169 Union Avenue in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 166.69-3-12 on the Assessment Map of said City.
The applicants having applied for an area variance under the Unified Development Ordinance of said City to permit
the demolition of the existing garage and construction of a new garage in a UR-4 District and public notice having
been duly given of a hearing on said application held between April 8 through to May 6,2024.
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 variances for the following amounts of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
DIMENSIONAL
REQUIREMENT
MINIMUM AVERAGE WIDTH 80 FT. 50 FT. 30 FT.(37.5%)
MAX.PRINCIPAL COVERAGE 40% 146.5% 16.5%(16.3%)
MAX.DRIVEWAY PERCENTAGE 25% 40% 1 15%(600%)
As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions,be approved for the following reasons:
L The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant.
The lot is pre-existing,non-conforming with regard to width(50 ft.). The Board notes that the requested
driveway width is standard for a 2-car garage. The applicant submits that there is no other land for
purchase as the property is a corner lot.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in
neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The Board finds that the applicant has
established that the unique location of the property adjacent to the Racing Museum,near commercial
businesses and in a neighborhood that includes several other properties that have more than a single
primary residence supports the applicants desire to construct a second dwelling unit above the garage. The
Board also finds that the applicant has demonstrated that the building coverage requested is similar in
density to other properties in the neighborhood.
3. The Board finds these variances for the are substantial,but notes the character of the neighborhood
mitigate this concern as the proposed design and density are similar to other properties.
4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or
district. The proposed garage will be set further from the property lines than the current garage,which
will assist in improving water and drainage on the project site. The applicant submits that the project will
Page 1 of 2
improve permeability on the site.
5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicants desire to construct the proposed addition,but
this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
It is so moved. Dated: May 6,2024
Passes by the following votes:
AYES: 7 (B. Gallagher G. Simpson, S. Gaston, O. Maxwell, C. LaPointe, B. Dailey,J. Cohen)
RECUSED:
NAYES:
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, seven
members of the Board being present.
SIGNATURE: 05/10/2024
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS
DEPT.
Page 2 of 2