Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190834 Byrne Ramp Addition NOD r CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith Kaplan, Chair vitj 0G4 Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair } *Si `.� ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Cheryl Grey '; Christopher Mills ,. s w Suzanne Morris ► -x, r.T CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY ` `l SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 Gage Simpson `- 7' ' Chris Hemstead,alternate ' "'L PH)5 I8-587-3550 FX)5 I8-580-9480 Kathleen O'Connor,alternate 'io , T ,'\G' VVWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG #20190834 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Sharon Byrne 454 Maple Ave Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 203 Church Street in the City of Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 165.50-1-70 on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the construction of an ADA compliant accessible ramp addition to the existing building at 203 Church Street in an OMB-2 (Office/Medical Business) District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 16th day of September, 2019. 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 DIMENSIONAL PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED REQUIREMENT MINIMUM YARD SETBACK-SIDE 15' 4.1' 10.9'OR 73% (WEST) MINIMUM YARD SETBACK- 30' 10.3' 19.7'OR 66% TOTAL SIDES MINIMUM YARD SETBACK- 40' 17.0' 23.0'OR 58% FRONT(SOUTH) 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. Per the applicant, a) relocation of the ramp closer to the main building to reduce the variance is difficult as it would not align with the parking area for access. Also, location closer to the main building may cause issues with roof drainage and snow between the building and ramp. b) Relocation of the ramp along the back of the main building would reduce the number of variances required by eliminating the required front setback variance. However, the building interior layout is configured for the main access to be from the front porch. Significant interior renovations would be required to allow for exterior access from the rear of the building. c) A Handicap lift was reviewed but not considered due to cost and lack of consistency with the architecture of the main building. A ramp may be blended better to the landscape and is not required to be covered. 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 notes that a) the dense use and development coverage of the Saratoga Hospital is directly adjacent to this project site. The addition of this proposed ramp is minor in comparison of scale to the Hospital complex. b) The ramp is designed to be consistent in scale with the existing building and buildings adjacent to the East. Furthermore, the ramp design must be approved by the City Design Review Commission for its proposed architectural character. c) The ramp location provides better circulation from the parking area to the building to the main entry along Church Street. d) the height of the ramp rail will only be 36-42", much less than a full wall or roof covered structure. The variance will have minor visual impact. e) The ramp will be located adjacent to property that is deeded for parking, therefore the impact on the property to the West is minimal as it directs pedestrian traffic on the project site and not on the existing adjacent lot sidewalk. 3. The Board notes these requested setback variances, at 73%, 66%, and 52%, are substantial, however the impact of the substantiality is mitigated by the following: a) The required lot width in this zoning district is 100' and the pre-existing lot is 50'. The lot width is 50' less than that required and is similar to lots to the East and South. b) The pre-existing West side setback is approximately 12' instead of the 15' required. The ramp is located 8' closer to the adjacent parking lot than what currently exists. This is not substantial and was already out of compliance. c) The porch of the main house is located 15.2' from the front property line and was built in 1902. The proposed ramp is located 17' from the property line. The 23' variance is not deemed substantial since the existing porch is closer to the front property line and is out of compliance. d) The ramp area is proposed to be 140 sq ft; only 1.7% of the site. The minor nature of the proposed addition is not substantial. 4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. a) The ramp is located so to contain runoff from the roof and to contain snow between the building and the ramp. b) The ramp is located so as to encourage pedestrian traffic directly onto the project site, reducing pedestrian travel on the adjacent property sidewalk. c) The construction of the ramp is proposed to be on piers which would not require any major excavation. d)No large or significant trees are proposed to be removed for this project. e) The ramp slope drains onto the project site and not towards adjacent lots. f) The overall Principal Building coverage, including the ramp, is 21.1%; well under the 30% maximum coverage allowed. g) The permeability of the lot is 53%; well above the 30% minimum permeability required. 5. The alleged difficulty may be considered self-created insofar as the applicant desired to construct the ramp,but this is not necessarily fatal to the application Adopted by the following vote: AYES: 7 (K. Kaplan, C. Grey, G. Simpson, S. Morris, B. Gallagher,K. O'Connor, C. Mills) NAYE S: 0 Dated: September 16, 2019 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 240-8.5.1. 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: 09/17/2019 CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT.