HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190938 Sanson & Wright Residence NOD r CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS Keith Kaplan, Chair
Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
11-'} * `. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Cheryl Grey
; A Matthew Gutch
Christopher Mills
._� �-x, CITY HALL-474 BROADWAY
SARATOGA SPRINGS,NEW YORK 12866 Suzanne Morris
�
����������er �` Simpson
Sim
PH)5 I8-587-3550 Fx)5 I8-580-9480 Gag p
,'\`' VVWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG Chris Hemstead,alternate
Kathleen O'Connor,alternate
#20190938
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Robert Sanson and Cynthia Wright
39 York Avenue
Saratoga Springs,New York 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 39 York Avenue in the City of
Saratoga Springs,New York being tax parcel number 166.42-1-21 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 addition to an existing single-family residence in a UR-3 District, and public notice having
been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 28th day of October 2019.
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 PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL BUILDING 30% 39.9% 9.9%(33%)
COVERAGE (PRESENTLY 41.9%)
As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions,be approved for the following reasons:
1. The applicants have demonstrated that the benefit sought cannot be achieved by other means feasible to
them. Per the applicants, alternative designs were contemplated including building upon the existing
structure, and a previous design that the Board disapproved. The Board notes that the proposed plan is of
lesser coverage than the existing structure, and that the proposal addresses the issues enumerated by the
Board in its previous denial of relief.
2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in
neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. As noted by the applicants,the revised
proposed addition"will align with the existing texture of the neighborhood" and"the roof height has been
reduced to not exceed the parapet height of the existing house,while changing the configuration of the
addition to pull the second floor wall away from the property line."The Board finds these revisions to the
plan to have sufficiently addressed the concerns brought up by Board relating to the prior plan.
3. The Board finds the variance sought to be substantial on a percentage basis,however that is mitigated by
the fact that the existing improvements on the property required greater lot coverage than the proposal.
4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or
district. The lot as shown in the application materials will still well exceed permeability requirements of
25%, and as noted above,the mass and scale reduction in this revised plan reduces the physical impact of
the addition.
5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicants seek approval to construct the proposed
addition; however the Board notes that the pre-existing structure exceeded maximum lot coverage, and the
lot is 32% smaller than required in the UR-3 district.
Adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 4 (K. Kaplan, G. Simpson, C. Grey, M. Gutch)
NAYE S: 0
Dated: October 28, 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: 10/29/2019
CHAIR DATE RECEIVED BY ACCOUNTS DEPT.