Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20250524 17 Tommy Luther NODPage 1 of 2 CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS  CITY HALL - 474 BROADWAY SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 518-587-3550 WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG Gage Simpson, Chair Brendan Dailey, Vice Chair Shafer Gaston Amanda Demma Jonah Cohen Otis Maxwell Chris LaPointe Chris Maslak (Alternate) #20250524 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Lisa & Mark Larkin 17 Tommy Luther Drive Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 17 Tommy Luther Drive in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 177.16-2-19, in the Suburban Residential (SR) District on the Assessment Map of said City. This being an application for an area variance under the UDO of said City to permit the expansion of an existing porch on an existing single-family residence, and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on September 15, 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 variance for the following amount of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED REAR YARD SETBACK 30’ 15.3’ 14.7’ OR 49% RELIEF As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons: 1. Achievability by Other Means: The applicants have demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicants. The applicants would like to expand their existing covered porch to create a screened-in porch. The applicants considered other design options, but the proposed location was deemed most desirable due to the location of the existing porch, the existing patio, and the back corner of the residence. 2. Undesirable Change: The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. Relative to the existing structure, the applicants’ proposed addition would encroach only 4 feet farther into the rear yard setback. The Board notes that there are other nearby properties with comparable rear yard setbacks. The Board also notes that the addition will not be visible from the street and will be only partially visible to one adjacent neighbor, whom the Board notes has expressed approval of the proposal. 3. Substantiality: The Board notes that the requested variance may be considered substantial, but this is mitigated by the factors described above. 4. Adverse Effects: This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. Permeability will meet the district requirement. 5. Self-Created Difficulty: The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as it is motivated by the applicants’ desire to expand their existing covered porch to create a screened-in porch, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Page 2 of 2 Dated: September 15, 2025 Passes by the following vote: AYES: 7 (G. Simpson, B. Dailey, S. Gaston, O. Maxwell, J. Cohen, A. Demma, C. LaPointe) NAYS: 0 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: CHAIR