Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20240838 45 Stockholm 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 Chris Maslak(Alternate) ccRPo�ASE� ,�� SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 Robert West(Alternate) 518-587-3550 W W W.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG 20240838 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF James Burns 45 Stockholm Ave Saratoga Springs NY, 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 45 Stockholm Ave in the City of Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 193.5-1-15 on the Assessment Map of said City. The applicant having applied for an area variance to permit an addition to a single-family home and obtain approval for a pre-existing, non-conforming addition in the Rural Residential District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on December 2nd 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 variances for the following amounts of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED REQUIREMENT MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL COVERAGE 20% 23.6% 3.6%(18%) SETBACK-FRONT 60 FT 17.1 FT 42.9 FT(71.5%) REAR SETBACK(EAST) 100 FT 27.5 FT 72.5 FT (72.5%) REAR SETBACK(NORTH) 100 FT 14.6 FT 85.4 FT (85.4%) REAR SETBACK 100 FT 19.3 FT 81.7 FT (81.7%) IMPERVIOUSNESS 25% 41% 16% (64%) 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 and seek approval for a pre-existing, non-conforming deck. Alternatives were considered for the expansion but deemed infeasible by the applicant. Page 1 of 3 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The addition is consistent with other homes in the neighborhood and does not alter the character of the neighborhood, and the deck was a pre-existing addition. The applicant provided district comparables to demonstrate a consistency in neighborhood context. The applicant also noted that no property is available for purchase. 3. The board notes that the requested variances are substantial, but is this mitigated by the following considerations: a. The lot is pre-existing as a significantly undersized and oddly shaped lot, with 3 "rear" property edges rather than "side"property lines. b. The Front Setback encroachment is pre-existing; the proposed construction encroaches only into the Rear Setbacks. c. With the exception of the Front, all sides of the property face a body of water rather than an adjacent lot. d. Based on the already existing structures , the existing encroachment of the main structure is significant, the addition will increase this minimally 4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical effect on the neighborhood or district. Although imperviousness is above the required percentage for the district, the property is surrounded on 3 sides by lakefront or pond. The board also notes a Floodplain Development permit would be required for the project, and that the City Floodplain Administrator notes there are no currently-identified issues that would prelude this approval. Page 2 of 3 5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicant desires to construct the addition and maintain a non-conforming deck; however, this is not necessarily fatal to the application. It so moved dated December 02, 2024 Passes by the following votes: AYES: 7 (G. Simpson, B. Dailey, J. Cohen, C. LaPointe, S. Gaston, O. Maxwell, B. Gallagher) 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: 12/13/2024 jV CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT. Page 3 of 3