HomeMy WebLinkAbout20250265 13 Wiswall Ln. Area Variance NOD
Gage Simpson, Chair
C ITY OF S ARATOGA
Brendan Dailey, Vice Chair
Shafer Gaston
S PRINGS
Amanda Demma
Jonah Cohen
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Otis Maxwell
Chris LaPointe
C ITY H ALL - 474 B ROADWAY
Chris Maslak (Alternate)
S ARATOGA S PRINGS, N EW Y ORK 12866
518-587-3550
WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
#20250265
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
John Witt
563 N Broadway Suite 1
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises 13 Wiswall Lane in the City of Saratoga
Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.44-1-47 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 a 2-
family residence and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on April 28 and May
12, 2025.
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 variances for the following amounts of relief:
T YPE OF R EQUIREMENT D ISTRICT P ROPOSED R ELIEF REQUESTED
DIMENSIONAL
REQUIREMENT
M INIMUM L OT S IZE 8000 SQFT 3996 SQFT 4004 SQFT. (50.1%)
M INIMUM L OT W IDTH 80’ 60’ 20’ (25%)
M AXIMUM C OVERAGE 40% 69% 29% (73%)
F RONT S ETBACK 10’ 2.2’ 7.8’ (78%)
R EAR S ETBACK 25’ 9.9’ 15.1’ (60.4%)
S IDE S ETBACK 5’ 0’ 5’ (100%)
T OTAL S IDE S ETBACK 12’ 9’ 3’ (25%)
M AXIMUM I MPERVIOUSNESS 70% 78% 12% (11.4%)
As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons:
1. Achievability by Other Means: The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other
means feasible to the applicant. The Board notes this application is similar to previously approved
application #20230281. The applicant failed to request an extension within the allotted 18 months and had
Page 1 of 2
to reapply. The applicant discussed a possibility of reducing the parking in order to reduce the variance for
maximum imperviousness, however this would result in an additional variance.
2. Undesirable Change: The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an
undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant provided
numerous nearby properties in the area that are comparable with the proposed renovation and furthermore,
there will be no significant changes in neighborhood context.
3. Substantiality: The Board finds the requested variances are substantial, but notes the character of the
neighborhood mitigates this concern as the proposal is similar to other neighboring properties.
4. Adverse Effort or Impact: The Board finds that these variances may have an adverse physical or
environmental effect on the neighborhood. However, the Board finds the impermeability will not be
substantially intensified as a result of the proposed project and site improvements.
5. Self-Created Difficulty: The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicant’s desire to construct
a 2-family residence, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application.
Condition: The variance shall remain in effect for this existing structure only and if the structure is demolished
whether intentionally or accidentally this approval shall be deemed to have expired and no longer in effect.
Dated May 12, 2025
Passes by the following votes:
AYES: 6 (G. Simpson, B. Dailey, J. Cohen, C. LaPointe, S. Gaston, A. Demma)
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.
SIGNATURE: 05/13/2025
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY
ACCOUNTS DEPT.
Page 2 of 2