Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20260311 9 Cleveland Ave Area Variance Public CommentRe: Area Variance, 9 Cleveland Ave. (Application: 20260311) July 12, 2026 Dear Mr. Simpson and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: I am writing in support of Mr. James Fahey’s application for an area variance associated with the proposed extension of a deck at 9 Cleveland Ave. I live at 16 Cleveland Ave. and am among neighbors who were mailed a notification about this application. Foremost, I’d like to express appreciation for recent improvements Mr. Fahey has made to his home. Before his purchase of this house last year, the property was used as a short- term rental property by an out-of-state property owner, who inconsistently maintained the property and used it primarily as a summer weekend rental for visitors to the Saratoga Race Course. Mr. Fahey now resides at the property and has made multiple visible improvements to home and restored it to its use as a single-family residence, consistent with the primary purpose of this zoning district. As Mr. Fahey planned his proposed deck extension, he consulted with surrounding neighbors, including those immediately next to and behind him, and made sure that it would not adversely affect his neighbors or the neighborhood. To the best of my knowledge, nearby property owners all support this project. • Mr. Fahey also explained to us why other approaches would not allow him to build a deck appropriate for entertaining. For instance, a smaller deck will not accommodate the deck furniture Mr. Fahey already owns, and purchasing new furniture may be cost-prohibitive. Additionally, other placements of the deck are either not feasible or might require additional variances. The proposed size and location seem to be the only feasible option. • The proposed deck is consistent with the neighborhood. There is already a deck at the home, but it is not large enough to achieve the benefits that Mr. Fahey seeks. Other neighbors have decks or patios of similar or even larger size. Ariel footage of neighboring properties to the rear and south appear to show patios that are significantly closer to the property line than what is proposed by Mr. Fahey. Mr. Fahey’s proposed deck is both tasteful and consistent with the neighborhood. • Although the variance appears to be substantial, only a single variance is being requested (for the rear setback). All other dimensions of the deck are preexisting and conform to zoning requirements. Mr. Fahey’s deck will maintain a 15-foot setback, which appears to be significantly farther from the property line than the patios to the rear and south of his property (as shown in the ariel photographs submitted with this application). The relief sought in this application is also consistent with relief previously granted by this board. For instance, on June 24, 2014, the ZBA granted 9 feet of relief (36%) to the rear setback (in addition to relief for maximum principal lot coverage) for a covered deck addition at 5 Maria Lane (one street east of Cleveland Avenue). • There is no indication that this property will have any adverse environmental or physical impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Fahey’s project will meet permeability requirements for the district and likely exceed that of many newer properties in the neighborhood. Even with the new deck, t he size of Mr. Fahey’s home will carry a significantly smaller physical footprint in terms of lot coverage than any of the new homes in the newer Chloe Way’s development to the immediate rear of Mr. Fahey’s property. I again would like to applaud Mr. Fahey’s efforts to improve his home and, by extension, the neighborhood as a whole and hope that you will consider granting him this area variance. Sincerely, James C. Helicke, Ph.D. 16 Cleveland Ave. Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 Tel. 614-634-1610