HomeMy WebLinkAbout20240269 139 Elm Street NOD OG,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
20240269
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Nick Tisenchek
5 Lori Lane
Clifton Park,NY 12065
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 139 Elm St in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 165.74-1-48 on the Assessment Map of said City.
The applicant having applied for an area variance under the UDO of said City to permit the construction
of a second principal structure in the Urban Residential-2 (UR-2) District and public notice having been
duly given of a hearing on said application held on the loth day of June and the 8th day of July 2024.
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 variance for the following amount of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES 1 2 1 100%
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 desires to combine two parcels of land and then build a 2-family and a 1-
family structure. The combined lot will have more than double the district required square
footage. The applicant notes the current structure has been operating as a 4-family property for
many years and will revert to a 3-family property. The Board Notes the applicant has been
working with the Zoning Officer for several years regarding the status of this property to find a
suitable resolution.
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 notes part of the property
legally had a 2-family dwelling prior to the ratification of the UDO that changed the zoning
district from UR-3 to UR-2. This structure will be renovated and remain a 2-family structure
utilizing the current foundation. The applicant provided many comparables in support of this type
of structure in this district. Per the applicant, a second principal structure will be built in the rear
of the newly combined property to blend in with the neighborhood. The Board notes the combined
property is significantly large enough that a second principal structure will have little impact on
the neighborhood.
3. The Board notes the requested variance is substantial,however the impact of the substantiality is
Page 1 of 2
mitigated by the lack of impact and comparables noted above.
4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the
neighborhood or district. The property will meet minimum permeability.
5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicant desires to build a second
principal structure. However, this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
Dated: July 8, 2024
Passes by the following votes:
AYES: 6 (B. Gallagher, S. Gaston, O. Maxwell, C. LaPointe, J. Cohen, B. Dailey)
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,six members
of the Board being present.
07/09/2024
DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS DEPT.
Signature:
Irrterim Chair(Brenda ailey)
Page 2 of 2