Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20260253 10 Joseph St. Area Variance 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 Amanda Demma Jonah Cohen Otis Maxwell Chris LaPointe Steve Harrigan Chris Maslak (Alternate) #20260253 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Marian Roth and Stanley Potrzuski 10 Joseph Street, Saratoga Springs, New York From the determination of the Building Inspector determined that certain application involving the premises at 10 Joseph Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York (“City”) being tax parcel number 178.25-1-8.2 on the Tax Maps of City (the “Zoning Denial”). The Applicant appealing such Zoning Denial, has applied for an area variance under the UDO of the City to permit the extension and construction of a 12’x14’ deck addition in the Urban Residential-2 (UR-2) District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the May 4, 2026. In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicants with detri ment 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 Interior Side Setback 8 ft 4 ft 4ft (50%) Total Interior Side Setback 20 ft 19.8 ft 0.2 ft (1%) As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. Achievability by Other Means. The Applicant has demonstrated that this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The Applicants credibly established that alternative locations for the deck are constrained by the existing cellar entry and egress, driveway placemen t, and overall site configuration. 2. Undesirable Change. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting the area variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed deck is accessory in nature, modest in scale, and consistent with surrounding residential development. Adjacent neighbors at 90 Elm Street and 8 Joseph Street expressed support for the proposal. 3. Substantiality. The requested relief is numerically substantial with respect to the interior side yard setback; however, the Board finds that the physical impact is limited, involves a small residential deck, is partially mitigated by the de minimis total side yard variance of 0.2 feet (1%), and will not set an undesirable precedent. 4. Adverse Effect or Impact. The variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The property will meet the minimum permeability requirements. 5. Self-Created Difficulty. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the Applicant desires to enlarge their existing deck, however this is not fatal to the application. Dated: May 4, 2026 Page 2 of 2 Passes by the following vote: AYES: 5 (B. Dailey, J. Cohen, O. Maxwell, C. LaPointe, A. Demma, S. Harrigan) NAYS: 1 (G. Simpson) 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 re solution 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: CHAIR