Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MONDAY, JUNE 23, 2014 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; Adam McNeill, Secretary; Skip Carlson; James Helicke; Gary Hasbrouck; ABSENT: Oksana Ludd STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs 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: #2772 BELMONTE RESIDENCE, First and State Streets (northeast corner) area variance to construct a new single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback (State St.) minimum front yard setback (First St.) and maximum principal building coverage in the Urban Residential-1 District. Application adjourned to July 14, 2014. #2773 BELMONTE RESIDENCE, State Street, area variance to construct a new single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback and maximum principal building coverage in the Urban Residential-1 District. Application adjourned to July 14, 2014. #2708 CELLCO/VERIZON WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY, 2202 Route 50 South, use and area variance for a new telecommunications facility including a 110' high stealth tower; seeking relief for the use and from minimum setback to the tower in a Highway General Business District. Adjourned to July 14, 2014. #2747 CONGREGATION & YESHIVA PARDES DORMITORY, 1 Veterans Way, area variance for expansion of the existing school including construction of an approximate 10,000 square foot residential building; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage in the UR-1 district. Adjourned to July 14. 2014. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2775 ARNOLD RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 795 North Broadway, area variance to construct a 308 sq. ft. sunroom addition to an attached garage structure; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage requirement in the Urban Residential-1 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: Area variance approved November 18, 2013 for construction of a two-story attached garage. Applicant: Jay and Alysa Arnold Agent: Tom Frost, Frost Hurff Architects Mr. Frost stated the applicants were before the Board on a previous area variance for construction of a two story attached garage. They just obtained a building permit for that project. Several weeks ago the owners stated they wanted to place a sunroom on the east side facing North Broadway. They are requesting a 23 x 13 sunroom, approximately 300 sq. feet which will increase the lot coverage from 21.6% to 22.6%. Sketch plans were submitted for the Boards review. New construction creates the need for the new application and variance. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF APPROVED REQUESTED Maximum principal building 20% 21.6% 22.6% Additional 1% (5%) coverage Total 2.6% (13%) Discussion ensued regarding the location on the property where a sunroom could be constructed other than what was chosen. The sunroom will be 138' from the front of the property line and will have no impact on the two neighboring properties. A 300 sq. foot sunroom addition should not have adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:10 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 will be prepared and presented at the next meeting scheduled for July 14, 2014. 2. #2776 RHODES FRONT PORCH, 115 Walnut Street, area variance to construct a front porch addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback in the Urban Residential-2 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback: 10 feet 0 feet 1" 10 feet (100%) Maximum principal building coverage 30% 30.6% 31.6% 1% additional (3.3%) 1.6% total (5.3%) Applicant: Matt Rhodes City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 2 of 12 Mr. Rhodes stated the enclosed porch is atypical in size and style. Looking to construct something which is more in line with what is in the neighborhood. We would like to open up the porch and extend it the length of the front of the house. The existing porch encroaches over the property line and is in the City's Right of Way. The proposed porch addition is stepped back to be located wholly on the property. The porch will be in keeping with existing architectural details on the building. 51% of the site would remain permeable, which exceeds the minimum 25% in the district. James Helicke stated that the existing aluminum fence appears to be in the right of way, would the applicant be willing to move this fencing. Discussion ensued regarding the encroachment. The applicant was encouraged to apply for an easement from the City or to make arrangements to move the fencing. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DRC Architectural Review is required. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:17 P.M. 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 7:18 P.M. James Helicke presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF MATT RHODES 115 WALNUT STREET SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 115 Walnut Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York, being tax parcel number 165.65-2-14 in the Inside Tax District, on the Assessment Map of said City, The appellant having applied for an area variance for construction of an addition to an existing front porch, seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback and lot coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-2 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on June 23, 2014, In consideration of the balance between the benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, I move that the following variance for the following amount of relief: Required: Existing: Proposed: Total relief requested: Minimum front yard setback: 10 feet 0 feet 1inch 10 feet (100%) Maximum principal building coverage: 30% 30.6% 31.6% 1.6% As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, BE APPROVED for the following reasons: 1.) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible. The application states that City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 3 of 12 “any addition to the front of this house would require a variance” and “alternatives would require similar relief.” Increasing the setback to the porch addition might also negatively impact the function of the proposed porch. 2.) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character, or detriment to nearby properties. The application notes that “the porch will be in keeping with existing architectural details on the building and that adjacent houses also have full front porches,” some of which do not appear to meet current setback requirements. The house is also situated on a corner lot more than 40 feet from any adjacent structure on Walnut Street, limiting the impact to nearby properties. 3.) The variance may be considered substantial; however, the existing front yard setback and maximum principal building coverage are preexisting nonconforming. The proposed variance for maximum principal building coverage exceeds the existing amount by only 1 percent. The existing porch encroaches over the property line and is in the City’s right of way. The proposed porch addition is stepped back to be located wholly on the property, thereby mitigating the extent of the front yard setback variance. 4.) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The applicant has stated that 51 % of the site would remain permeable, exceeding the district’s 25 percent permeability requirement. 5.) The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Notes: Applicant shall remove existing aluminum fence from the city’s right of way or seek an easement from the City. Design Review Commission Architectural Review is required. 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; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 OLD BUSINESS: 3. #2769 HEWITT RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 115 Catherine Street, area variance to construct a rear addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback (north), minimum side yard setback (south) and minimum total side yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential-2 District. This application was heard at the June 9 meeting and adjourned to June 23, 2014. The public hearing was opened and remains open. The applicant provide a proposed permeability calculation on June 12, 2014 and a revised plot plan on June 16, 2014. Permeability is calculated at 64%. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there were any questions requested of the applicant. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 4 of 12 None heard. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:29 P.M. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman presented the following resolution. #2769 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Christopher and Sara Hewitt 115 Catherine St Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 115 Catherine St. in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 166.21-1-17 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 to permit the construction of an addition to an existing single-family residence in a UR-2 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 9th and 23rd days of June 2014. 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: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK (NORTH) 8’ 2’ 6’ OR 75% MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK (SOUTH) 8’ 6.8’ 1.2’ OR 15% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 20’ 8.8’ 11.2’ OR 56% As per the submitted plans 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 applicants. The applicants note that alternative designs were contemplated that could have reduced the needed variance including eliminating the bump-out on the south side, which is the one portion of the relief proposal that is incremental to the pre-existing setback encroachment. The applicants note that if they were to eliminate that bump-out, which is the proposed mudroom, then they would have to alter the floor plan completely, given that the mudroom is proximate to the driveway area. The Board notes that the root of the issue for this property is its shape; the lot is narrow and long at 50’ by 200’, resulting in a great deal of rear yard space but very little area to work with on the sides. Per the applicants, they consulted with 3 different architects when planning this addition, and all 3 came to the same conclusion, to leave the proposed mudroom where it is pictured in the application materials. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 5 of 12  neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. On the north side, the applicant notes that the addition, placed as it is to the rear of the home and within the existing side yard setback encroachments of the existing house, minimizes impact to the neighborhood impact in terms of visual mass and scale. Furthermore, the applicants note that it is their intention to incorporate details characteristic to the existing house into the addition. On the south side, the setback encroachment to be caused by the mudroom will be minor, at 1.2 feet, and it will also be in back of the driveway without extending further towards the neighbor to the south than the driveway itself. 3. The north side yard setback variance is substantial and results in a total side setback that is substantial as well; however, as noted above the north side relief request is a continuation of a pre-existing nonconformity and the substantiality is mitigated by the resulting reduced visual impact and the fact that the back yard is quite large due to the shape of the lot. The Board notes the south side yard setback variance is not substantial. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The proposed amount of permeable surface calculated and reported by the applicants, 64%, will exceed the district requirement of 25%. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicant desires to construct the proposed addition, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Gary Hasbrouck 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; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 4. #2770 SEAMAN SHED, Old Ballston Avenue, area variance to construct a 336 sq. ft. shed, seeking relief from the minimum front yard and rear yard setback requirements in the Rural Residential-1 District. This application was heard at the June 9, 2014 meeting and adjourned to June 23, 2014. The public hearing was opened and remains open. Applicant: Gerald and Susan Seaman Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there were any questions requested of the applicant. None heard. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like to comment on this application. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 6 of 12 None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:37 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Gerald and Susan Seaman 338 Old Ballston Avenue Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the same premises, identified as Tax Parcel Section 203-1-44, Outside District of the City of Saratoga Springs, New York. WHEREAS, the appellant has applied for a AREA VARIANCES for relief from the current City Zoning Ordinance for Minimum front and rear year setbacks in an RR-1 zoning district in order to construct a shed; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on June 9 and June 23, 2014 WHEREAS, in consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, the Board makes the following resolution that the requested AREA VARIANCES for the following relief or lesser dimensions, be APPROVED: Required: Existing/Proposed: Total relief requested: Minimum Front Yard Setback 60 feet 25.9 feet 34.1 feet. (57%) Minimum Rear Yard Setback 50 feet 16.3 feet 33.7 feet (67%) 1) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The applicant wishes to purchase a 14’ x 24’ movable shed and place on the property as a means of blocking the view of the railroad according to testimony by the applicant. The applicant testified that planting vegetative landscaping material was not feasible because it would take a long time to mature into a buffer. The applicant also did not want to build a fence because the fence would not serve a dual purpose of storage and visual buffer. The applicant also stated he didn’t want to move the shed further south on the property to reduce the variance requested because moving the shed would bring the railroad back into view. 2) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The property sits as the 2nd to last property on a dead end street near a railroad. A wood frame barn is located diagonal to the property and a single family home is situated just south and across the street. The application states, “It is a rural area. It will blend in with the rest of the neighborhood well.” 3) The relief requested is substantial. However, this is mitigated by the fact that the railroad abuts the rear of the property and the shed will only be visible to 2 neighbors on the dead end road. 4) The applicant has demonstrated this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. Minimum percent to remain permeable requirements are met. 5) The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, is not necessarily fatal to the application. Keith Kaplan seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 7 of 12 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; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 3. #2774 COMPLEXIONS SPA, 268 Broadway, area variance to install a wall sign, seeking relief from the maximum extension from the face of the building requirement for wall signs in the T-6 District. This application was heard at the June 9, 2014 meeting and adjourned to June 23, 2014. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum extension from wall: .5 ft 4.33 ft. 3.83 ft. (767%) NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITION OF APPROVAL: Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. DRC Architectural Review is required. Applicant: Denise Dubois, owner Ms. Dubois owner of Complexions stated although the locations is convenient but not very visible. Entranceway is under the porch. Mr. Dubois is concerned regarding visibility, it is critical for the success of her business. The Board voiced their concern regarding the type of signage Ms. Dubois is requesting. The Board does recognize there is a need. This type of signage is fundamentally different from all the signage on Broadway. Detriment to the neighbors was discussed as well as the size of the proposed signage. It was recommended that Ms. Dubois speak with the building owner regarding signage, table the application for this evening and meet with the City staff and return with several suggestions. Also a suggestion was made that perhaps meeting with the DRC with several different suggestions would also be helpful. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing is open and will remain open. Bill Moore, Chairman stated, the applicant should speak to staff when the application is ready to return on the agenda. This application was tabled with a request for further information. 4. #2771 McKENZIE ESTATES RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 5 Maria Lane, area variance to construct a rear screened porch addition to a new single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum rear yard setback and maximum principal building coverage in the Urban Residential-6 District. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 8 of 12 RECUSAL: James Helicke recused himself from this application. This application was heard at the June 9, 2014 meeting and adjourned to June 23, 2014. The public hearing was opened and remains open. PUBLIC HEARING: 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 8:18 P.M. Adam McNeill presented the following resolution. #2771 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF McKenzie Estates 5 Maria Lane Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 5 Marie Lane, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 178.52-5-12 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 to permit construction of a porch in a UR-2 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on June 9th and 23rd, 2014. 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: REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK 25’ 16’ 9’ (36%) MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL BUILDING COVERAGE 30% 33% 3% (10%) As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible. The applicant considered building the porch off of the other corner of the rear of the house, however it would require the porch to be located off the master bedroom and therefore would not be feasible to the homeowner. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties in that it is characteristic of homes in the neighborhood to have a screened in porch off of the rear of the house. 3. The relief requested for the rear yard setback could be considered substantial at 36%, however, the proposed porch will not require the removal of additional trees or vegetation. 4. The construction will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. The applicant identifies 59% of the lot will remain permeable, which exceeds the minimum 25% in the City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 9 of 12  district. In addition, the proposed porch will not require the removal of additional trees or vegetation. 5. The applicants’ desire to construct a screened in porch is self-created, however this is not necessarily fatal to the application. 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; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 James Helicke resumed his position on the Board. 7. #2768 KAY-GRAHAM MULTI-FAMILY, 109 Washington Street, area variance for a three-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum lot size and minimum parking requirement in the Urban Residential-4 District. This application was last before this Board on May 12, 2014 and adjourned to June 9, 2014. The public hearing was opened on May `12, 2014 and remains open. The Planning Board and ZBA discussed the variance at a joint workshop on May 28, 2014. Following feedback from the Planning Board the applicant provided a revised site plan providing 3 on- site parking spaces. DISCLOSURE: James Helicke stated he did see the architect at the City Carousel. They did speak however they did not discuss this application. PUBLIC HEARING: 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 8:55 P.M. Adam McNeill presented the following resolution. #2768 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Valerie Kay and Bruce Graham 109 Washington St. Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 109 Washington St. in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.66-2-12 in the Inside District, on the Assessment Map of said City. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 10 of 12 The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to permit a three-family residence in a UR-4 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on May 12th and June 9th and 23rd, 2014. 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: REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED MINIMUM LOT SIZE: THREE DWELLING UNITS 9,000 SQ. FT. 5,931 SQ. FT. 3,069 SQ. FT. (34%) MINIMUM SETBACK TO PARKING 25’ 0’ 25’ (100%) As per the submitted plans 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 applicants. This residence has been used as a three family prior to the current ownership. The applicant notes that there is no additional land available to purchase which would avoid this non-conforming situation. Given the shape and topography of the property, oriented on the corner of Washington and Walworth Sts., the parking area is limited to the absolute rear of the lot. The alternative would be to have no off street parking, which would not be feasible to the neighborhood. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties as the neighborhood is characterized by a mix of single, two, and multi-family residences. In addition, neither the existing footprint nor height of the building will be altered with the proposed variance. Three new off-street parking spaces will reduce current on-street parking. 3. Both areas of relief may be considered substantial; however no change in the practical use of the property is proposed and the current use of the property will be improved by the creation of on-site parking for the units. 4. The proposed construction will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district as the applicant is proposing to restore the property to a properly functioning residence with a quality appearance which will be a benefit to the neighborhood. 5. The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, is not necessarily fatal to the application. Gary Hasbrouck 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; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of meeting minutes was deferred to the next meeting. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 11 of 12 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary Approved: 7/14/14 City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, June 23, 2014 - Page 12 of 12