Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190071 Stellato Addition 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 #20190071 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Tony & Jerilyn Stellato 148 Woodlawn Ave Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 148 Woodlawn Ave in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.44-1-52 on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellants having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit the construction of an addition to a single-family residence and carport addition to the existing carriage house in the UR-3 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held between March 2019 through February 24, 2020. 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 variances for the following amounts of relief: T YPE OF R EQUIREMENT D ISTRICT DIMENSIONAL P ROPOSED R ELIEF REQUIREMENT REQUESTED M AXIMUM P RINCIPAL B UILDING C OVERAGE 30% 52.2% 22.2% OR 74% T OTAL S IDE YARD S ETBACK (C ARRIAGE H OUSE) 12 FT. 11.5 FT. 0.5 FT. OR 4.2% F RONT Y ARD S ETBACK (C ARPORT) 10 FT. 3 FT. 7 FT. OR 70% As per the submitted plans and documents or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The applicants have demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The Carriage House Structure: The applicants have demonstrated that the current configuration of the accessory garage space does not accommodate four vehicles, as it is only approximately 32 feet deep. Thus, the current configuration of the garage leaves almost ⅓ of the existing garage space unusable for storage of vehicles, according to the applicants. As such, the applicants seek to construct a bump-out that is 5 feet deep by 23 feet wide. According to the applicants, this bump-out follows the footprint of an existing concrete foundation that was attached to the rear of the garage that was previously demolished. Per the applicants, the additional covered vehicular storage space is necessary because of the black walnut trees that drop nuts, which has caused damage to vehicles in the past. The Board finds that the applicants have demonstrated that the bump-out is the most feasible option to maximize the garage storage space for vehicles, protecting the existing black walnut trees, and avoids having additional vehicles parked on the street. The Principal Residence Structure: The applicants have demonstrated that the replacement of the existing stairway to a safe, code compliant stairway is not feasible without the requested relief. According to the applicants, the current stairway has steep riser heights, shallow depth and are too narrow to accommodate a handrail. The condition of the current stairway has resulted in numerous falls per the applicants. The applicants have demonstrated that the proposed, new code compliant stairway is the most feasible option. The applicants have further demonstrated that the addition of a first floor full bath and stairway to accommodate a guest room configuration is the minimum feasible size. The applicants desire to replace the existing deck with a new deck that is similar in size and orientation. The applicants have demonstrated that the dimensions of the new deck are necessary to accommodate an outdoor dining table and barbecue grill. The proposed plan is the most feasible plan that meets the desired benefit. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The Carriage House Structure: The applicants have demonstrated that the bump-out addition to the existing carriage house previously existed at the property. Moreover, the carriage house/garage is pre-existing non-conforming, as it is approximately 17.6%. Thus, the applicants are seeking to increase the lot coverage of this structure by 3.8%. The Principal Residence Structure: Moreover, the Board finds that the increase of 4.0% to the coverage for the principal residence structure will not have a negative effect on the neighborhood character or serve as a detriment to nearby properties. Indeed, the applicants demonstrated that the majority of the principal building coverages for neighboring properties exceed the request of the applicants. For the foregoing reasons, the Board finds that increase in lot coverage of the house and carriage house structures will not have an undesirable change on the neighborhood character. 3. The Board finds the lot coverage variance to be substantial on a percentage basis, but this is mitigated by considering lot coverage for the both existing structures is 44.4% and the current requested relief is for 52.2% a relatively small amount of relief at 7.8%. The Board realizes that the variance for front yard setback to be substantial at 70%, however, this is mitigated by 0’ front yard setback for the existing Carriage House. The Board finds the total side yard setback variance for the Carriage House to be minimal at 4.2%. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The lot permeability, proposed at 35.5%, will exceed the permeability requirements of 25%. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicants desire to expand the proposed structures, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Conditions: 1. Accessory structures limited to 1.0% of lot area. Adopted by the following vote: AYES: 6 (K. Kaplan, B. Gallagher, G. Simpson, C. Mills, M. Gutch, K. O’Connor) NAYES: 0 Dated: February 24, 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, six members of the Board being present. S IGNATURE: _______________________________ 2/25/2020 C HAIR D ATE R ECEIVED BY A CCOUNTS D EPT.