HomeMy WebLinkAbout20250249 538 Union Ave Demolition and Construction ZBA NODOG,4 CITY OF SARATOGA
Gage Simpson,Chair
Qg A Brad Gallagher,Vice Chair
Shafer Gaston
t SPRINGS
Brendan DaileyCIO
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
20240948
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Kimberly and Joshua Altschuler
538 Union Ave
Saratoga Springs,NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 538 Union Ave in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 180.4-6 on the Assessment Map of said City.
The applicants having applied for an area variance under the UDO of said City to permit the construction
of an addition to a single family home in the Rural Residential(RR)District and public notice having been
duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 2nd day of December 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 variance for the following amount of relief:
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
SETBACK-FRONT 60' 8.2' 51.8' (86.3%)
SETBACK INTERIOR SIDE 30'1.5' 28.5' (95%)
SETBACK TOTAL SIDE 100, 73.8' 26.2' (26.2%)
as per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons:
1. The applicants have demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the
applicants. The applicants desire to rebuild the garage in the current footprint and connect to the
principal home via a covered breezeway. The Board notes the property is pre-existing, non-
conforming undersized for this district The applicants desire to have additional bedrooms and
provided information demonstrating this is the most feasible alternative. There is no additional
land for purchase. The applicant considered alternate plans but they all proved infeasible due to
the site constraints including topography and steep slopes
2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change
in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The Board notes all of the setbacks
are pre-existing, non-conforming. The magnitude of the front setback relief is created by
converting the accessory structure into a principal structure by connecting it to the main house.
The applicants note the property is significantly shielded from view by mature vegetation and site
topography.
3. The Board notes the requested variances are substantial, however the impact of the substantiality
is mitigated by the nature of the pre-existing, non-conforming undersized lot and the discussion
above.
Page 1 of 2
4. The variances 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 applicants desire to add an addition
to their house. However,this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
It is so moved, December 2, 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: 12/09/2024
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS DEPT.
Page 2 of 2