Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES (FINAL) MONDAY, APRIL 8, 2013 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. M. PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman, Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; Adam McNeill, Secretary; Gary Hasbrouck; Skip Carlson; Shirley Poppel; Oksana Ludd STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs SALUTE TO THE FLAG ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING: The proceedings of this meeting are being recorded for the benefit of the secretary. Because the minutes are not a verbatim record of the proceedings, the minutes are not a word-for-word transcript of the recording. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ADJOURNED APPLICATIONS: 5. #2688 REJUVENATION HOMES, 24 Lafayette Street, area variance to reconfigure three existing lots #24, 25 and 30 into two lots #24 and 30 and construct a new single family residence and detached garage; seeking relief from the minimum average lot width requirement, minimum front, one side, total sides and rear yard setbacks, minimum setback between principal and accessory buildings and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-4 District. Adjourned to April 22, 2013 6. #2689 REJUVENATION HOMES, 30 Lafayette Street, area variance to reconfigure three existing lots #24, 26, and 30 into two lots #24, 30 demolish a portion of the existing residence and construct an addition and a detached garage; seeking relief from the minimum average lot width requirement, minimum one side, total sides and rear yard setbacks, minimum setback between principal and accessory buildings and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-4 District. Adjourned to April 22, 2013. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2686.1 HOME OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD, 394-402 Church Street, area variance to construct a senior assisted care facility and senior housing units on the property; seeking relief to permit more than one principal building on a lot and from the maximum lot coverage for a principal building requirement in the Urban Residential-1 District. DISCLOSURE: Oksana Ludd stated her office represents this client; therefore, she recused. SEQRA: Planning Board accepted SEQRA Lead Agency status for the environmental review and issued a Negative SEQRA declaration on February 27, 2013. ZBA deferral of Lead Agency status on February 11, 2013. DRC deferral of Lead Agency status on February 6, 2013. PARCEL HISTORY: Planning Board approval of a proposed 13 lot residential subdivision, April 9, 2008. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum number of principal buildings on one lot: 1 7 6 (600%) Maximum building coverage – principal building(s) 20% 24% 4% (20%) Applicant: Home of the Good Shepherd, Denise Cote. Agents: Jason Tommell, Tommell and Associates; Owen Nitzel, Harris A. Sanders Architects. Jason Tommell provided the Board with a visual overview of the project which has been reworked since the appearance before the Planning Board. Cottage size duplexes and triplexes are proposed, which are complimentary to the residential area which surrounds. The addition of the cottages exceeds the amount for principal structures but is still less total building coverage allowed under zoning. Currently it is at 28%. The Planning Board through sketch discussions suggested reducing the mass of two large buildings and providing smaller buildings for the senior housing component. The main building would be along the frontage with the smaller cottages located at the rear of the site closer to, and more in scale with the abutting single-family residential neighborhood. Stormwater management is better controlled with the new plan. Only one curb cut is proposed off of Route 9. 43% of the site will remain permeable. Parking currently is at 64 spaces. Owen Nitzel, Architect presented the Board with a brief overview of the project architecturally. Materials will be those which will be complimentary to Saratoga Springs. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:22 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. Zoning Board of Appeals is awaiting Saratoga County Planning Board approval. We will return in two weeks at which time we will present a resolution. 2. #2696 PLAZA 15 SELF STORAGE EXPANSION, 43 Plaza Road, area variance to construct three additional self storage buildings to the existing self storage use of the property; seeking relief from the build-to line and minimum two-story requirements of the Transect-4 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be an Unlisted Action – Exceed the Type II threshold "Construction or expansion of a primary City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 2 of 20 or accessory/appurtenant, non-residential structure or facility involving less than 4,000 square feet of gross floor area and not involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent with local land use controls, but not radio communication or microwave transmission facilities”. Part I of the Full EAF was submitted. Other involved agencies include the Planning Board for Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review. Design Review Commission for Architectural Review. Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. The DRC deferred Lead Agency status to the Planning Board in anticipation of it being sought on April 3, 2013. PARCEL HISTORY: Site Plan Review approved September 8, 2004. DRC Architectural Review approval November 6, 2003. Area Variance granted from the build to frontage build out and two story requirements of the T-4 to construct five additional self storage structures totaling 24,300 sq. ft. on October 22, 2003. Permanent Special Use Permit issued “to allow outdoor storage" (.30 acres) on October 22, 2002. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum build to line: 12' – 18' 105' Min. 42' 24' (300%) Buildings B and C Minimum two story: Two story 55,200 sq. ft. One story 26,200 sq. ft. of additional one story area Buildings A, B one story (pre-existing (totaling 26,200 for the 3 proposed buildings. and C nonconforming) sq. ft.) (totaling 24,300 sq. ft. 26,200 sq. ft. one-story (permitted by prior variance). Applicant: Plaza 15 Self Storage, LLC Agent: Michael Toohey, Attorney; Don McPherson, LA Group Mr. Toohey gave a visual presentation to the Board outlining the location of the proposed buildings. He reviewed the questions for an area variance. This is an ideal use. No real traffic, no noise or vibration. Environmentally, all stormwater is handled within the site. This is a 24 hour a day controlled site operation. The new buildings would result in greater compliance with the Transect requirements, and buildings B and C would meet the minimum frontage build out. As the application indicates the variances are not substantial, the placements of the buildings will move toward compliance with the Zoning Code as each new building conforms to the setback requirements. The site design visually screens the use by maintaining a 30 ft natural growth and tree buffer. This type of facility is primarily auto oriented and City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 3 of 20 the buildings associated with this use are one story. Lighting will be placed within the site so that it does not impact adjacent neighborhoods. Discussion ensued regarding how buildings B and C sit on the site. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman noted he has issues with buildings B and C regarding the buffering. In the process of the building of this project some of the vegetative buffer will be destroyed. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman, opened the public hearing at 7:48 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Susan Arnold, 32 Christine Court. The buffer is really important to me and the trailer park. This has more of an impact on the green space. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Correspondence received from John W. Clark, 18 Maxwell Drive, Clifton Park, New York 12965, dated April 8, 2013. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was a motion to defer Lead Agency to the Planning Board. Gary Hasbrouck made a motion to defer Lead Agency Status to the Planning Board for this application. Keith Kaplan seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Bill Moore, Chairman stated we will await information from the Planning Board. The application will then be placed on the Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda. 3. #2695 SECURITY SUPPLY EXPANSION, 50 West Avenue, area variance to construct a 3,900 sq. ft. addition to the existing retail business; seeking relief from the build-to line, minimum frontage build out and two story requirements of the Transect-5 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, "Construction or expansion of a primary or accessory/appurtenant, non-residential structure or facility involving less than 4,000 square feet of gross floor area and not involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent with local land use controls, but not radio communication or microwave transmission facilities", and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 4 of 20 Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. Planning Board Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review required. DRC Architectural Review required. PARCEL HISTORY: DRC Architectural Review of a wall sign, approved November 1992. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum build-to line: 0'-12' 43.2' 43.2' 31.2' (260%) Minimum frontage build- 70% 0% 0% 70% out: Minimum two-story: Two-story 7,567 sq. ft one story Additional 3,900 sq. 3,900 sq. ft. additional area ft. one-story area Applicant: Kim Willey, Security Supply. Agent: Rob Frasier, LA Group. Mr. Frasier stated the applicant is looking for an area variance for an addition of 3,900 sq ft addition to the rear of the existing building and will result in it being out of sight of the general public. This location was chosen since the current building cannot support a second story expansion. The addition will improve the appearance of the area as it will take an existing storage/receiving yard and enclose it. Façade improvements are proposed for the front of the building. Access to the site and circulation around the site would remain as currently exists. An existing paved area along the sidewalk would be removed and 650 sq. ft. will be replaced with lawn. This will increase the permeable lawn area by 20 sq. ft. A freshwater wetland permit from the DEC is required and has been obtained for the proposed disturbance within the wetland buffer area. Copy was provided to the Board for the record. Parking will be maintained as currently exists. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:59 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman stated we are awaiting the referral from the Saratoga County Planning Board which we should have by the next Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting on April 22, 2013 and at that time a resolution will be presented. 4. #2697 BALLSTON AVENUE TOWN HOMES, 316-318 Ballston Avenue, area variance to construct attached town homes on separate lots; seeking relief from the average side yard setback requirement for each of the 12 units in the Transect-4 District. SEQRA: The applicant should submit a revised Part I identifying ZBA as an involved agency as well as indicate that City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 5 of 20 Subdivision approval is also required. Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on January 25, 2012. DRC deferred Lead Agency status to the Planning Board on January 5, 2012. DRC Architectural Review approval May 16, 2012. Planning Board Special Use Permit "for 12 units of multi-family residential use" issued January 15, 2012. Planning Board Site Plan Review approval with conditions on January 25, 2012. Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. Planning Board subdivision approval is required. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: 316 Ballston Avenue REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Side yard setback: Corner unit Ballston and Peck Avg. 12' Avg. 6' 6 ft (50%) Side yard setback: Each of four middle units Avg. 12' 0' 12 ft. (100%) Side yard setback: End unit Avg. 12' Avg. 9' 3 ft. (25%) 318 Ballston Avenue REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Side yard setback: Corner unit Ballston and Peck Avg. 12' Avg. 6' 6 ft. (50%) Side yard setback: Each of four middle units Avg. 12' 0' 12 ft. (100%) Side yard setback: End unit Avg. 12' Avg. 9' 3 ft. (25%) Applicant: Steve Ethier, Steve O'Shea. Agent: John Carusone, Attorney. Mr. Carusone stated this is a request for an area variance in a T4 zone. We are now requesting these to be town homes. The relief requested is for each townhouse unit to be on its own lot. The relief is to allow the units to remain attached and not meet the side yard requirement. The site plan which was approved for the project met the requirements of the district. The site layout is proposed to remain as approved. Bill Moore, Chairman requested the applicant to resubmit Part I of the SEQRA indicating the ZBA as an involved agency. Adam McNeill, Secretary made a motion for the Planning Board to continue as Lead Agency. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 6 of 20 Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:09 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. A resolution prepared for the next Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on April 22, 2013. OLD BUSINESS: 5. #2694 MADDEN PORCH AND ADDITION,, 30 Fifth Avenue, area variance to construct a new front porch and rear addition; seeking relief from the minimum side yards and total side yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential-1 District. This application was heard at the March 25, 2013 meeting, the public hearing was opened and the application was adjourned to April 8, 2013. The public hearing remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: DRC Historic Review to replace an existing covered porch with a two story addition at the rear of the existing residence, approved 4/20/2006. Area Variance to replace an existing covered porch with a two story addition at the rear of the existing residence, approved 06/19/2006. DRC Historic Review for construction of a detached garage, approved 05/06/2004. Bill Moore, Chairman stated we asked the applicant to provide the amount of permeability. Susan Barden, Senior Planner stated the applicant provided the information and permeability is at 52%. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 7 of 20  PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing remains opened. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:11 P.M. Shirley Poppel presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Anne and Dan Madden 30 Fifth Avenue Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 Appeal #2694 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the premises at 30 Fifth Avenue, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York, being tax parcel number 166.62-2-2, in the Inside Tax District, on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance for the construction of a new front porch and rear addition to the existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setbacks and the maximum principal building coverage requirement in the UR-1 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on March 25 and April 8, 2013. In consideration of the balance between the benefit to the applicant with the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, the Board makes the following resolution that the requested area variance for the following relief, as described in the submitted application, BE APPROVED: Required: Existing: Proposed: Total relief requested: Minimum side yard setback: East 12 feet 1.4’ 3.8’ 8.2 feet (68%) Minimum side yard setback: West 12 feet 9.6’ 9.4’ 2.6’ (22%) Minimum total side yard setback: 30 feet 11’ 13.2’ 16.8’ (56%) Maximum building coverage – principal building: 20% 19.8% 27.2% 7.2% (36%) 1. The applicant has demonstrated that this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible. The applicant states, “Attempted to purchase land from neighbors, but was declined”. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character, or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant states, “The porch on the left side will not extend past the existing porch on house” and “The rear addition will line up with existing house”. 3. The relief could be considered substantial; however, the existing side yard setbacks are preexisting nonconforming with regard to the district requirements. 4. The variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The site survey identifies 52% to remain permeable, which exceeds the minimum 30% in the district. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 8 of 20 5. The difficulty is considered to be self-created. This however is not necessarily fatal to the application. Note: DRC Historic Review is required Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 The Board recessed at 8:18 P.M. The Board reconvened at 8:27 P.M. 6. #2693 CROSS LOTS, 95 and 97 Catherine Street, area variance to create a new building lot for a single-family residence on 97 and maintain existing single-family residence on 95; seeking relief from the minimum lot area and average lot width requirement for each of the lots, and minimum side yard setbacks and total side yard setback requirements to maintain the existing single-family residence on 95 in the Urban Residential-2 District. DISCLOSURE: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman stated that he serves on the same committee with the applicant. He has no financial interest in this application, and can remain impartial. Gary Hasbrouck, Board Member also disclosed that he serves on the same committee with the applicant. He has no financial interest in this application and can remain impartial. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. Bill Moore, Chairman stated a reconfigured tax map was received from Saratoga County. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Murray Levith, 32, 34 and 38 Second Street property owner. I am opposed to the variance. Parking is a concern, traffic is a concern and the aesthetics of the neighborhood. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:34 P.M. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 9 of 20 CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Letter from Christina and Murray Levith, dated March 19, 2013. Letter from Robert and Dorothy, 8 Bryan Street, dated March 22, 2013. Email from Clifford Van Wagner, 18 Rolling Brook Drive, dated April 8, 2013. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Sandra Cross 95 Catherine St Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the lots at 95 Catherine Street and 97 Catherine Street, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcels number 165.36-2-12 and 165.36-2-11, respectively, in the Inside District, on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City, as amended to permit the creation of a new building lot for a single family house on the lot designated as 97 Catherine St. and to maintain the nonconforming status of an existing single-family residence on the lot designated as 95 Catherine St. in a UR-2 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 25th of March and 8th of April 2013. 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 requested area variances for the following amounts of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT 95 CATHERINE: MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6600 SF 5625 SF 975 SF, OR 14.8% MINIMUM AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 60 FT 37.5 FT 22.5 FT, OR 37.5% MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK 8 FT 7.5 FT 0.5 FT, OR 6.25% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 20 FT 8.7 FT 11.3 FT, OR 56.5% 97 CATHERINE: MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6600 SF 5625 SF 975 SF, OR 14.8% MINIMUM AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 60 FT 37.5 FT 22.5 FT, OR 37.5% As per the submitted application materials, be denied, after weighing the following considerations: 1. The Board notes the applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. In this case, two undersized lots have been owned in common and used in common as one conforming residential lot for over 50 years; allowing a second residential lot to be created with the shape of the two lots cannot be done without the requested variance. Land is not available to be purchased on the north side to allow a lot line adjustment or some other means of creating a less impactful proposal, or reducing the number or degree of variances. 2. However, the applicant has not demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant has stated, and the Board agrees, that there are multiple properties in the neighborhood that are significantly non-conforming. However, this does not make the compelling case to this Board to create two more undersized lots on this City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 10 of 20  block and in this neighborhood. While the Board typically grants lot size variances in cases where a building exists or separate lot status has been established based on weighing on facts and circumstances, the Board does not generally view the existence of some undersized lots in a neighborhood as a justification to set aside lot size requirements for the creation of a new allowable building lot for a parcel owned in common with an adjacent lot. The board acknowledges that the 97 Catherine lot is a separate parcel, however it has not been in use as a building lot for over 50 years from the information that has been made available on this application. In fact, numbers 95 and 97 Catherine have been used as one 75-foot-wide lot for that entire period of time. This 75 foot combined width is consistent with the current width of the neighboring lot, which also had been historically more than one parcel (91-93 Catherine). These facts support the status of the two lots in question being used as one in the context of current neighborhood conditions. Furthermore, the Board notes that the shape of the proposed lots makes this variance more impactful on the neighborhood, since the lots are relatively narrow and deep (37.5 by 150 feet), and in both cases much of the lot area is in the back. This shape creates the need for larger side setback variances, and greatly reduces off-street parking capability. Additionally, the proposal limits the size and shape of any house on 97 Catherine to such a significant degree that a house similar in size to most of the houses in the neighborhood could not be accommodated without additional variances, considering the lot would be 37.5 feet and the side setbacks are 10 feet each and 20 feet in total. 3. The Board considered the substantiality of the proposed variances. The lot width variance of 37.5% is substantial in this case, as is the total side variance on 95 Catherine of 56.5%. The square footage variance of 14.8% for both lots, and the side yard setback for 95 Catherine of 6.25% are not considered substantial. However, the most relevant variance in terms of substantiality is the lot width, since as noted above the narrowness of the lots constrict their use and magnify their adverse impact. The Board notes the narrow shape creates a greater impact than the mathematical shortfall in square footage, since the back area is of limited help in avoiding side setbacks and off-street parking problems for both lots. The degree of substantiality for these variances is found to be adverse in this case. 4. These variances will have some adverse physical and environmental effect on the neighborhood / district. As noted above, the parking capacity reduction, particularly when snow removal is needed on those small areas that may remain for vehicles on these lots, will be impactful compared to current conditions in which there is ample room for vehicles to be parked for 95 Catherine. Permeability is most likely not a major consideration in this case due to the area available for permeability in the back of the lots. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created as the applicant wishes to designate 97 Catherine as a building lot. As noted above, while the board acknowledges that the 97 Catherine lot is a separate parcel, it has not been in use as a building lot for over 50 years. In this case, there is no preservation of a non-conforming status; this was not an allowable building lot at time of purchase by the applicant in 1986. While self creation by itself is not fatal to an application, it is a consideration that can and does come into play particularly when the difficulty is not self created; that is not the case here. Oksana Ludd seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Gary Hasbrouck stated he disagrees with the resolution he believes there would no change in the character of the neighborhood with granting these area variances. VOTE: City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 11 of 20  Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 7. #2692 BOWTIE CINEMA, 19 Railroad Place, area variance to construct wall signs; seeking relief from the maximum number of wall signs, maximum total area of wall signs, maximum extension from wall for wall signs, maximum height of logo and lettering, to permit internally illuminated individual letters, to permit moving lights and to permit one off-premise sign in the Transect-6 District. 7. #2692 BOWTIE CINEMA, 19 Railroad Place, area variance to construct wall signs; seeking relief from the maximum number of wall signs, maximum total area of wall signs, maximum extension from wall for wall signs, maximum height of logo and lettering, to permit internally illuminated individual letters, to permit moving lights and to permit one off-premise sign in the Transect-6 District. This application was heard at the March 11, 2013 meeting; the public hearing was opened and remains open. The Board requested an advisory opinion from the DRC. The DRC issued an advisory opinion on March 20, 2013. The application was adjourned to March 25, 2013. The application was further adjourned to April 8, 2013 at the request of the applicant. PARCEL HISTORY DRC Architectural Review of details is pending. DRC Architectural Review for mass and scale approval only, 2012. Planning Board Site Plan Review approval, 2012. Saratoga County Planning Board referral issued no significant county wide or intercommunity impact on March 21, 2013. COMMUNICATION RECEIVED BY THE BOARD: Letter from J. Thomas Roohan, 519 Broadway, LLC, dated March 5, 2013. SEQRA Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. Applicant: Bowtie Cinemas Agent: Joe Masher, COO Bowtie Cinemas; Chris Yanna, Architect, CPA Architecture; Sonny Bonacio, and Tony Bonacio, Bonacio Construction. Copy of changes which were made following a review by the DRC were provided to the Board. Chris Yanna, Architect provided a visual presentation of the changes which were made following a review by the DRC. Also a video slideshow of signage used on other cinemas around the country. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 12 of 20 Christina Klein 63 Church Street. Concerns regarding the light along Church Street. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:10 P.M. Oksana Ludd presented the following resolution: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF 19 Railroad, LLC 18 Division Street, Suite 401 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Appeal #2692 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the premises at 19 Railroad Place, Saratoga Springs, New York, identified as Tax Parcel No.: 165.59-1-15.1 in the inside district of the City. The Applicant has applied for an area variance for construction of wall signs, seeking relief from the maximum number of wall signs, the maximum total area of wall signs, the maximum extension from wall for wall signs, the maximum height of logo and lettering, to permit internally-illuminated individual letters, to permit moving lights and to permit one off-premise sign the Transect - 6 District, and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on March 11, 2013 and April 8, 2013. Action appears to be a Type II action, “construction or expansion of a primary or accessory/appurtenant, non- residential structure or facility involving less than 4,000 square feet of gross floor area and not involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent with local land use controls, but not radio communication or microwave transmission facilities” and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review per 6 NYCRR Part 617.5 (C)(7). At the request of the Board, the City of Saratoga Springs Design Review Commission has provided an advisory opinion regarding this application and based on a proposed sign presentation by the Applicant on March 20, 2013, and acknowledging the unique activity that this cinema presents and in balance between the customary requirements and regulations covering all other signage and this singular circumstance, the Commission issued its opinion to the Board. In consideration of the balance between the benefit to the Applicant with the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, the Board makes the following resolution that the requested area variance for the following relief, as set forth in a revised plan dated March 15, 2013, based on BE APPROVED Type of Requirement Permitted Proposed Total Relief Requested North East corner elevation: Maximum Area: “Criterion Cinemas” 100 square feet 62.5 square feet 62.5 square feet (62.5%) Maximum Letter Height: “Criterion 18 inches 36 inches 18 inches Cinemas” (100%) Maximum logo height: Bowtie logo 18 inches 24 inches 6 inches (center) (33%) Channel lighted letters: “Criterion Permitted, subject to Cinemas” Not permitted Conditions set forth 100% below Maximum area: Under canopy 100 square feet 258.62 square feet 158.62 square feet (159%) attraction panel (5) City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 13 of 20 East Elevation: One wall sign per street frontage: Poster cases (13.36 square feet) 0 9 9 additional signs (900%) One wall sign per street frontage: “BTX” (14.33 square feet) 0 1 1 additional sign (100%) One wall sign per street frontage: Bowtie logo (4.5 square feet) 0 4 4 additional signs (400%) Maximum logo height: (4) Bowtie 18 inches 46 inches per sign (4) 28 inches per sign – for 4 logo (4.5 square feet) signs (155% each) Maximum extend from face of 18 inches per sign - for 4 signs building: (4) Bowtie logo (4.5 square 6 inches 24 inches per sign (4) (300% each) feet) One wall sign per street frontage: Bowtie logo (6.8 square feet) 0 3 3 additional signs (300%) Maximum logo height: (3) Bowtie 18 inches 54 inches per sign (3) 36 inches per sign – for 3 logo (6.8 square feet) signs (200% each) North elevation: One wall sign per street frontage: Poster cases (13.36 square feet) 0 5 5 additional signs (500%) One wall sign per street frontage: Bowtie logo (4.5 square feet) 0 2 2 additional signs (200%) Maximum logo height: (2) Bowtie 28 inches per sign – for 2 logo (4.5 square feet) 18 inches 46 inches per sign (2) signs (155% each) Maximum extend from face of 18 inches per sign - for 2 signs building: (2) Bowtie logo (4.5 square 6 inches 24 inches per sign (2) (300% each) feet) One wall sign per street frontage: Bowtie logo (6.8 square feet) 0 1 1 additional sign (100%) Maximum logo height: Bowtie logo 18 inches 54 inches 36 inches (6.8 square feet) (200%) West elevation: One wall sign per street frontage: “Criterion Cinemas” (63.5 sq. ft.) 0 1 1 additional sign (100%) Off-premises sign: “Price Chopper Limited” (43.35 square feet) Not permitted Permitted 100% 1. The Applicant has demonstrated that this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible. Nature of the business and need to notify public of the proposed movies being shown require additional signs. Availability of other types of signs, such as one free standing, awning signs over windows or window signs, while permitted would not conform with the overall design of the structure and may be more detrimental to the neighborhood. 2. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting these variances will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or a detriment to nearby properties. Applicant has indicated that the new use will not generate more traffic than that generated by the supermarket which previously occupied this parcel. The proposed building will be more attractive and will not created an undesirable change in neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties and the addition of the signs will not adversely impact on the neighborhood character. 3. The variances requested by the Applicant taken as a whole are substantial. Applicant indicates that signage is minimum needed for proposed tenant use. The use of the building as a cinema and the desire to conform to some of the City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 14 of 20 historic nature of signs used in cinemas dictate the number of signs requested. The added review by the Design Review Commission and the Planning Board to ensure the project as a whole conforms with the requirements of the City of Saratoga Springs zoning requirements mitigates the substantial nature of the requested variances. 4. The Applicant has demonstrated that the variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The revitalization of this corner of Saratoga Springs with the structure that will be constructed and lighted to address adverse physical and environmental effects on the neighborhood and the determination that the current design of the structure does not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood demonstrates that the granting of the variances for requested signs will be reviewed regarding the totality of the project and will not, in and of itself, have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. 5. The alleged difficulty may be considered self-created, however, this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Notifications/Approvals/Conditions of Approval: Applicant agrees that the Board’s grant of the variance relates to number and size of signs, that the grant of any variance provided in this Resolution does not include illumination criteria, and that the color, materials, strength and type of lighting is solely within the jurisdiction and determination of the Design Review Commission. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 8. #2683 SARATOGA HONDA EXPANSION, 3402 Route 9 (South Broadway), use variance to expand the nonconforming use of the property (auto sales) on the property and to expand the use onto two adjacent, vacant parcels; seeking relief from the permitted uses in the Office Medical Business 1 and 2 Districts. This application was heard at the March 11, 2013 meeting; the public hearing was opened and remains open; the Board requested the full appraisal of the property and the contract for sale. SEQRA: The Planning Board provided specific comments to the ZBA regarding Part 2 of the EAF on March 20, 2013. The DRC provided specific comments to the ZBA regarding Part 2 of the EAF on March 20, 2013. The Land Use Boards met on March 11 to review Parts 1 and 2 of the Long EAF and assist the ZBA in its role as Lead Agency for the environmental review of the project. The DRC deferred Lead Agency status to the ZBA on March 6, 2013. The Planning Board deferred Lead Agency status to the ZBA on February 28, 2013. The ZBA initiated Coordinated SEQR Review and sought Lead Agency status on February 11, 2013, other involved agencies are the Planning Board (site plan review; lot line adjustment) and the DRC (architectural review). Action appears to be a Type I action, "any Unlisted action occurring wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous to, any historic building, structure, facility, site or district or prehistoric site that is listed on the National City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 15 of 20 Register of Historic Places, or that is listed on the State Register of Historic Places. Coordinated SEQR review is required for all Type I actions. PARCEL HISTORY: ZBA heard an interpretation appeal on February 11, 2013; the request was withdrawn by the applicant on same date. DRC architectural review approval July 20, 2009 for installation of solar panels. DRC Architectural Review approval March 7, 2002. ZBA Use Variance to expand the automotive sales and service operation (7439 sq. ft.) and parking area in OMHBD. DRC Architectural Review approval for a freestanding sign on May 21, 1998. DRC Architectural Review approval to enclose existing porte-cochere (two) on November 6, 1997. DRC Architectural Review approval to install awnings on January 12, 1995. ZBA Use Variance to construct an addition to the existing new car showroom/office and service building and to construct an addition to the used car auto sales office in the C-4 District, 1992. Interpretation appeal denied March 25, 1992. Planning Board Site Plan Review approval October 15, 1985. Applicant: Tim Higgins, President, Saratoga Honda Agent: Mike Toohey, Attorney; Mike Ingersoll, LA Group; Bill Kernan, LA Group SEQRA: Bill Moore, Chairman reviewed Part II EAF with the Board. No large or important areas of concern noted. Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion for a negative SEQRA declaration. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Gary Hasbrouck posed some financial leasing/renting questions to Mr. Roohan. The Board recessed at 10:09 P.M. The Board reconvened at 10:22 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman, closed the public hearing at 10:23 P.M. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 16 of 20 CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY THE BOARD: Letter received from Barbara Glaser, 110 Spring Street, Saratoga Springs, dated March 28, 2013. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. In the Matter of the Appeal of Timothy Higgins/3402 Route 9, LLC P.O. Box 797 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Appeal #2683 I move the application of Timothy Higgins/3402 Route 9, LLC for a USE variance for the premises at 3402 Route 9 (tax parcels 178.-2-20, 178.-2-14 and 178.-2-11.21) to permit the expansion of an existing auto sales business in the Office Medical Hospital Business Districts-1 & 2; seeking relief to allow an expansion of a use not permitted in that district and having heard testimony at public hearings initiated March 11th through April 8th, 2013, be approved based on submitted plans because the applicant has demonstrated and proven all 4 standards of hardship as follows: 1) The applicant has demonstrated that this property cannot realize a reasonable financial return on initial investment for any currently permitted use on the property. As per submitted appraisal, the value of the land and improvements on the existing parcels currently owned or controlled by the applicant totals $2.1 million. In a letter from Balzer & Tuck Architecture dated February 20, 2013, renovating the existing building and the constructing related site improvements in order to create a building which could be used for permitted uses in the district would total between $2.5 million and $3.4 million. Total investment in the property would be between $4.6 and $5.5 million, which equates to a construction cost of between $314 and $372/square foot. During the public hearing, Tom Roohan, owner of Roohan Realty, testified that the maximum cost for a class 1 building that would serve the needs of the permitted uses in the district would be $250/square foot based upon his experiences of developing other properties with the same uses. This disparity in construction costs ($64- $122/sq’) would put the applicant at a significant disadvantage in finding a tenant to pay a lease fee that would cover the extra construction costs. Mr. Roohan also testified that medical use lease fees currently range from $21-23 per square foot which would generate $323,400 per year (14,700 sq’ x $22/sq’) of lease revenue. Subtract real estate taxes ($55,000 per application), management fee costs of 5% ($16,000), maintenance ($16,000 per application), and a vacancy rate of 5% ($16,000), (standard operating costs as per Mr. Roohan) total costs to the applicant would be roughly $103,000/yr. leaving roughly $220,000 toward financing and return on investment. $220,000/$5 million investment leaves a 4.4% return on investment. Mr. Roohan also testified that allowed uses in the district “are not compatible with the needs in the area.” He went on to say that in his professional opinion that the newly improved property would not rent for the stated purposes of the district. Adding further to the discussion during the public hearing, Timothy Higgins, Owner of Saratoga Honda, testified that his “turnkey operation” is valued at $10 million. He testified that when location, business reputation, and franchise area is taken into consideration along with profitability of the business, a franchise designated by American Honda Motor Company (American Honda) is of significant value. As per the applicant, the sales territory designated by American Honda is limited to the areas of northern Town of Malta, the area of the City of Saratoga Springs and the southern portion of the Town of Wilton since there are other Honda dealerships located in surrounding areas. Relocating the dealership within the city limits appears to be impossible given the requirements of American Honda that the dealership must maintain an inventory of 500 vehicles. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 17 of 20  Furthermore, Mr. Toohey, the applicant’s attorney, testified as to the lack of available property within the limited zones where the zoning code allows car dealerships. He specifically pointed to the Route 50 area south of SPAC where a parcel with a former car dealership just changed ownership. He mentioned that both car dealerships on that parcel “failed.” He also specifically mentioned a small parcel on Route 50 next to Espy Manufacturing that “couldn’t fit a bicycle sales shop.” Mr. Higgins testified that if his expansion was not approved, he would lose the Honda franchise and his dealership would be “worth zero.” 2) The applicant has demonstrated that the financial hardship relating to this property is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the neighborhood. As noted in the Zoning Code, T-4 and T-5 Districts within the “Northern South Broadway Area” Special Development Area, auto sales and services are prohibited. The OMB- 1 and -2 districts also prohibit auto sales and service. This makes this property very unique since the usage of this property as an auto sales and repair establishment pre dates the Comprehensive Plan and related Zoning Ordinances passed associated with that plan. The application states “This is the only automobile dealership in this Zone and as a result, the demanded pressure and requirement to increase its size from the Franchisor is unique to this property.” Additionally, as noted above, the applicant notes that his business requires local placement and there is a lack of available sites to choose from, further increasing the uniqueness of this hardship. 3) The applicant has demonstrated that the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The applicant wishes to expand an existing car dealership. The current occupants of the immediate area include a car dealership, some vacant parcels, a golf driving range, an empty restaurant with a use variance for an exercise facility, a psychiatric facility, a state park, and a dog park on state owned land. The public road system is a 4 lane highway with middle turning lane (Rte 9) and Crescent Avenue, a 2 lane highway leading to the Harness Track and Adirondack Northway. The project is located at the intersection of these 2 roadways and traffic is controlled by a traffic light. The project is accessed by an entrance off Route 9 and an entrance off Crescent Avenue. None of these conditions will change as a result of the expansion of the dealership, and the Board concludes that none of the current occupants will suffer adverse impact from this expansion. The County Planning Board concluded in a letter dated March 11, 2013 that “We note that by the very willingness to sell the property necessary for the proposed expansion the principal adjoining neighbor concurs that there will be no negative impact to the character of the immediate area.” A letter dated January 3, 2013 from Creighton Manning, a traffic engineering firm, concludes “the proposed expansion is expected to generate 48 new vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 47 new vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. This magnitude of traffic represents peak hour traffic volume increases of less than 5% on the adjacent roadways of US Route 9 and Crescent Avenue and does not meet established thresholds for requiring a detailed traffic study. The site generated traffic will be accommodated for by the existing roadway network.” The applicant has testified and shown in the application improvements to be made to the entrance from Route 9 however, no change is required for off site traffic improvements. The Board notes that per the plans submitted, the appearance of the building will change significantly. This is a “gateway” location, however this change in appearance is subject to Design Review Commission (DRC) approval. The DRC letter dated March 20, 2013 comments on the applicant’s revised plans that they “begin to incorporate more natural materials and represent a more positive approach to complying with identified Gateway aesthetics.” The letter goes on to say they “eagerly anticipate solutions to these architectural and design challenges.” The DRC concludes that “with additional modifications to the proposed design, colors and materials to ensure compatibility with City requirements, this project may result in no more than small to moderate impacts on the City’s aesthetic and historic resources and that any potentially negative impact may be mitigated through appropriate design modifications.” City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 18 of 20  4) The applicant has demonstrated that the alleged hardship has not been self-created. As per the application materials, the parcel has been used continuously for auto related businesses since the 1940’ to 50’s time frame when a service station was on the site. The ZBA issued a special permit for auto repairs, used car sales and automobile salesrooms on October 16, 1985 when the area was zoned B-3 Planned Business District. The Planning Board granted site plan approval on October 15, 1985. The ZBA issued a use variance to construct various additions to the existing dealership in 1992 when the area was zoned C-4. Furthermore, the applicant’s hardship requiring relief on this site was brought about not by the applicant himself but rather by a requirement imposed by American Honda on its franchisees, as per a letter from American Honda Motor Company dated February 11, 2013. In summary, the letter states that Saratoga Honda is in violation of the “2014 minimum square footage requirements set forth by American Honda Motor Company and immediate corrective action is required.” The letter further states “Saratoga Honda will have until January 1, 2014 to achieve compliance with these requirements.” Mr. Toohey testified that American Honda Motor Company requires each dealership to maintain an inventory of 500 vehicles for sale. Based upon testimony from Mr. Higgins, Mr. Toohey, and a review of the existing site plan, storage of 500 vehicles would be impossible without expansion of the dealership. As noted above, Mr. Higgins has testified that Honda would take away his franchise if the violation is not corrected, thereby adding to the applicant’s financial hardship if relief is not granted. The Board notes that the following approvals are required: Planning Board Site Plan Review and Lot Line Adjustment DRC Architectural Review Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 7-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Bill Moore, Chairman deferred approval of minutes to the April 22, 2013 meeting. MOTION TO ADJOURN: Adam McNeill, Secretary made a motion to adjourn. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:35 P.M. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 19 of 20  Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary Approved: 5/20/13 City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, April 8, 2013 - Page 20 of 20