HomeMy WebLinkAbout20260588 222 Grand Ave Area Variance Public Comment (5)TO: Saratoga Springs ZBA members
RE: Project #20260588 222 Grand Ave Variance Request
DATE: October 5, 2026
FROM: Jane Belote (107 Oak St.), Eden Compton, Erin Lindsay
We are writing to vehemently object to the area variance request for the property
located at the corner of Grand Avenue and Birch Street (known as the "Gallant Fox"
short-term rental property on Airbnb).
Our property at 107 Oak St. is located adjacent to and downhill from the applicant and
shares a connected backyard parcel with this home and two other neighbors. While we
maintain individual rear borders and fences, our homes encircle a shared, cohesive
backyard ecosystem.
Approval of this variance to construct a fifth bedroom would create a severe detriment to
our neighborhood, and to our property specifically. Below, we’ve taken a stab at
addressing the five statutory criteria that the Board needs to consider under New York
State and City of Saratoga Springs zoning guidelines:
1.Feasible Alternatives
The benefit sought by the applicant can be easily achieved without a variance: by
simply maintaining the home's current footprint. The applicant asserts a future intent for
two adults and two small children to eventually occupy the home. Currently, the property
boasts 4 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. According to the 67 five-star Airbnb reviews that
"Gallant Fox" has received in the 2+ years that it has been rented as an STR, the
existing layout is repeatedly described by renters as "comfortable," "spacious," and
"perfect" for groups of up to 8 people (although groups have exceeded that number). A
4-bedroom home is more than sufficient for a family of four. The addition of a 5th
bedroom serves no legitimate residential necessity, especially since owner and family
currently reside in an NYC apartment. A covered porch is nice to have but obviously not
a necessity.
2. Substantiality of the Request
The variance requests, at 43 and 44%, are substantial.
3. Impact on the Physical and Environmental Conditions of the Neighborhood
Granting this variance could cause severe, adverse physical and environmental impacts
on the immediate surroundings:
•Stormwater Runoff & Flooding: This specific block of Grand Avenue lacks
sufficient storm drainage. Increasing the roof area will significantly increase
impervious surface runoff. Because our home at 107 Oak Street sits directly
downhill, we already suffer from occasional flooding during heavy rains—a risk
heightened by shifting climate patterns. Directing more water downhill is an
immediate threat to our property.
•Traffic & Pedestrian Safety: This house sits on a prominent corner lot with limited
offstreet parking, and there is no available street parking on Grand Avenue or
Birch Street. The offstreet parking attached to the house allows for two spaces,
but there are often three cars sandwiched in to this spot (see attached photo
from 9/26). This intersection is already busy and serves as a critical walking
route for neighborhood children. There are no sidewalks here. Expanding guest
capacity will inevitably increase vehicle traffic and illegal parking, creating safety
hazards for pedestrians and local students.
•Neighborhood Character & Noise: For over two years, this property has been
operated as a commercial STR. Our once-quiet, tranquil shared backyard parcel
has been disrupted by excessive noise and a revolving door of large groups of
strangers, erasing our sense of security. We have also had our sleep disrupted
on numerous occasions.
•Excavation Risks: The environmental and structural impact of digging into the
foundations so close to downhill properties remains entirely unknown and
unstudied.
4. Self-Created Difficulty
The difficulty here is entirely self-created. The applicant purchased this home with full
knowledge of its boundaries, its intersection constraints, its neighborhood context, and
its current 4-bedroom layout. Any "hardship" regarding space or capacity is a direct
result of a calculated investment strategy, not a structural restriction of the land.
The applicant is an entrepreneur, real estate investor, and content creator who actively
teaches courses on leveraging STRs to build wealth. By her own published business
curriculum, a primary rule of investing is to "know your neighborhood" and evaluate if an
STR will be welcomed. But here, Katie and Joe did not do their research.
Kindly indulge a bit of emotion here: 222 Grand Avenue is NOT a 6 acre private home
in Lake George, like STR #1 in the portfolio, nor a seasonal waterfront cottage on the
Finger Lakes, like STR #3. THESE ARE HOMES THAT SHARE A COMMON PLOT
OF LAND. OUR FULL TIME HOMES WHERE WE HAVE LIVED, RAISED
CHILDREN, AND SHARED CONNECTIONS WITH AND CARED FOR OUR
NEIGHBORS FOR DECADE(S).
It’s hard not to feel resentful when the owners have bent over backward providing 5-star
hospitality for their guests, and have made zero effort or overtures to get to know their
neighbors (other than trying to get us to split the price of fencing with them) and how we
might feel about having a miniature boutique hotel in our backyard. These do not feel
like choices that people who want to build an enduring relationship with neighbors would
make. Furthermore, their recent letter to the board stating that they bought the home
because they intended to move here is a false claim that is contradicted by the wealth of
content the owner herself has made available on her platform (bykatiecline.com).
5. Balancing Benefit to the Applicant vs. Detriment to the Neighborhood
The benefit of this variance appears to be purely financial for a single investor looking to
maximize overnight rental margins. Conversely, the detriment to us neighbors, as I have
described, is sweeping.
For these reasons, the burden on the neighborhood vastly outweighs any perceived
benefit to the applicant. We respectfully urge the Zoning Board of Appeals to deny this
variance request.
In addition, We have provide photos from the rear of 107 Oak St. so the board can have
another perspective on the properties concerned and how they are laid out.
Please also note that neither the photos submitted with the application nor the survey
depict the 6 foot fence that was erected around the property by Joe and Katie last
summer. You can see it in the attached photos. Additionally, the survey is dated June
2026 but still erroneously shows an old wooden fence on our property. We took it down
and replaced it with an arborvitae tree divider in the summer of 2024 (a year before the
new owners put up their fence).
Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to protecting and preserving our
zoning laws, as well as the safety, quality, and character of our beloved West Side tree
district, and our standing as long-time property owners to enjoy it without further
diminishment.
Sincerely,
Jane Belote
107 Oak Street
Daughter #1: Eden Compton
50 Hyde Street
edencompton@mac.com
Daughter #2: Erin Lindsay
67 Hyde Street
erinlindsay2@gmail.com
3 car pile up
\