HomeMy WebLinkAbout20191198 Mayhew & Hurly Residence NOD
Keith Kaplan, Chair
C ITY OF S ARATOGA S PRINGS
Brad Gallagher, Vice Chair
Cheryl Grey
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Matthew Gutch
Christopher Mills
C ITY H ALL - 474 B ROADWAY
Suzanne Morris
S ARATOGA S PRINGS, N EW Y ORK 12866
Gage Simpson
PH) 518-587-3550 FX) 518-580-9480
Kathleen O’Connor, alternate
WWW.SARATOGA-SPRINGS.ORG
#20191198
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF
Ian Mayhew & Francoise Hurly
127 Division Street
Saratoga Springs NY 12866
from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 127 Division Street in the City of
Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.58-2-19 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 in an Urban Residential-3 (UR-3) District and public notice having been duly given
of a hearing on said application held on the 6th and 27th days of January, 2020.
In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health, safety and welfare
of the community, I move that the following area variance for the following amount of relief:
T YPE OF R EQUIREMENT D ISTRICT DIMENSIONAL P ROPOSED R ELIEF REQUESTED
REQUIREMENT
S INGLE S IDE Y ARD S ETBACK (W EST) 4’ 2.2’ 1.8’ (45%)
T OTAL S IDE Y ARD S ETBACK 12’ 10.3’ 1.7’ (14.2%)
M AXIMUM PRINCIPAL COVERAGE 30% 39.9% 9.9% (33%)
A CCESSORY TO S IDE (E XISTING S HED) 5’ 1.3’ 3.7’ (74%)
As per the submitted plans and documents or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons:
1. The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant.
The lot is pre-existing, non-conforming and the addition has been located as far as possible to the East
side in order to minimize the single side setback relief required while maintaining vehicular access to the
property.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in
neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The addition is located at the rear of the
property. The property is also surrounded by larger structures (e.g., fences, buildings, sheds) than the
addition making it “imperceptible” from the street.
3. The Board notes the requested variances of 74%, 45%, and 33% are substantial, however the impact of the
substantiality is mitigated by the lot being a pre-existing, non-conforming lot. The applicant is seeking to
develop the property at a scale that is consistent with the neighborhood, and the proposed addition has a
greater West side setback than the currently existing, non-conforming house. The Board notes that the
total side yard setback relief at 14.2% is not substantial.
4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or
district. Per the applicant, the addition will be consistent with the height, footprint, and density of the
surrounding properties and will have no measurable impact of natural light or stormwater runoff.
5. The alleged difficulty is considered self-created insofar as the applicant desires to build the proposed
addition. However, this is not necessarily fatal to the application
Conditions:
1. Applicant to obtain an easement for the existing front porch and steps that encroach into the City
right-of-way.
Adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 4 (K. Kaplan, C. Mills, M. Gutch, S. Morris)
NAYES: 0
Dated: January 27, 2020
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.
S IGNATURE: _______________________________ 1/29/2020
C HAIR D ATE R ECEIVED BY A CCOUNTS D EPT.