Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20250239 36 Hyde St Area Variance Public Comment (5)Outlook Online Form Submittal: Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment From noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Date Sun 4/27/2025 9:33 PM To Mark Graham <Mark.Graham@saratoga-springs.org>; Aneisha Samuels <Aneisha.Samuels@saratoga- springs.org> Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment SUBMIT COMMENTS REGARDING CITY PROJECTS Thank you for submitting your comments. Your feedback will be forwarded to the City's Planning Department and Land Use Board members. NOTE: Comments submitted later than 12:00 noon on the day before the Land Use Board meeting may not be reviewed prior to their meeting. All comments will be added to the project file in the Planning Department. Land Use Board Zoning Board of Appeals Name EMILY BERGMANN Email Address emilybergmann@gmail.com Business Name Field not completed. Address 35 Hyde St City Saratoga Springs State NY Zip Code 12866 Phone Number 202-427-2877 Project Name Crenshaw Carriage House Project Number 2025039 Project Address 36 Hyde Street Comments I am writing to express my hope that you will oppose of the current project as it stands, at 36 Hyde Street. There are many concerns that I have. First, the positives. The Crenshaws are great people and we are lucky to have them for neighbors. They are thoughtful, quiet and the kind of people that bring you vegetables from their garden, give your kids gifts when the graduate 8th grade and snow plow the walkway when you are out of town. Anyone would be lucky to have them in their 4/28/25, 8:05 AM Mail - Mark Graham - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGIxYTcxODdiLTE4ZmUtNDdlMy05MTNlLTA4ZjY5NTFhMDAzMQAQAMrNoidP7rhEs5F3p8CfZ4w%3D 1/2 neighborhood. The project before the board as it stands, does not have my support. I have absolutely no problem with there being an office in the second story of the garage. My issue is with the plumbing for a bathroom/cooking and the guest room for over night stays. That is not allowed in UR-2 and is a 100% variance. I believe the Crenshaws to be good, honest people and I believe if this variance is granted, that they will use the space for occasional visitors and an office. However, variances stay with the property, not the owner. And if the Crenshaws decide to sell their property at any given time, our neighborhood will be faced with the possibility of an Air B&B each time the property is sold. That is not a precedent we want to set in our neighborhood. Secondly, these variances are all substantial and two of them are retroactive, meaning, the builder did not have the right to build the carriage house where it was built and circumvented zoning laws. It really butters my toast that it was handled in that way and now it appears the Crenshaws have to “clean up” the builders mess through no fault of their own. Thirdly, there are no other properties in our neighborhood that have a variance for two principle structures on a 6700 sq foot lot. To approve this project would set a dangerous precedent. Lastly, how did this property receive a C/O without the proper variances? Why wasn’t a stop work order issued? A one story, one car garage could have worked legally. Attach Photo (optional)Field not completed. Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. 4/28/25, 8:05 AM Mail - Mark Graham - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGIxYTcxODdiLTE4ZmUtNDdlMy05MTNlLTA4ZjY5NTFhMDAzMQAQAMrNoidP7rhEs5F3p8CfZ4w%3D 2/2