Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:03 P. M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; Adam McNeill, Secretary; Skip Carlson; Gary Hasbrouck; James Helicke 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: #2778 GUARINO & HANER TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES, 21 Park Place, area variance to construct two additional two family residences and two detached garages; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-4 District. Adjourned to September 22, 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 September 22, 2014. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2783 SARATOGA VISION SIGN, 235 Washington Street, area variance for construction of a wall sign; seeking relief to permit installation above the first floor level of the building in the Transect-4 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: Washington Commons – Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals granted 09/29/2010. Washington Commons – DRC Architectural Review approval granted 10/06/2010. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Placement of wall sign Below first floor level Above first floor level. Permit placement above first floor level 100% Agent: Daniel Roicki, Adirondack Sign Company Mr. Roicki stated the proposed sign will be a dimensional lettering reverse lit sign above the first floor level. Alternate locations were researched however the visibility will be poor and hard for customers to identify. The architectural design of the building with the receded entranceway would impede the visibility of a sign in that location. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. DRC Architectural review is required. Skip Carlson questioned other alternatives for building signage. Mr. Roicki stated Saratoga Vision has recently purchased the building. They do have approval for a freestanding sign which is currently under construction. The entire second floor is residential. The design of the building with the receded entranceway would impede the visibility of the sign in that location. The signage color will be red. Discussion ensued among the Board members regarding the proposed signage. A copy of the site plan was requested from the applicant. Matthew Miller 10 Central Avenue stated he has a copy of the site plan. This was provided to the Board. Bill Moore, Chairman requested from the applicants agent a copy of the site plan be provided to the Board. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:29 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Mike Chusano, Central Avenue. Questioned the Board as to why this signage could not be placed on Washington Street. When you put this on the back side, there are three homes on Outlook and they will be looking right at this signage. These bright lights will shine right into these homes. The street lights in the parking lot are bright as well. Also, does this sign need to be lit at night. This would be less impactful for the neighborhood. Ann Marie Verbal, 10 Outlook. We are looking right at this. We know this is mixed use development, however this sign is an advertisement not a directional sign. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. The applicant will return before the Board in two weeks. Additional information requested from the applicant should be provided to staff for dissemination to the Board. 2. #2781 MCCARTHY & THEOBALD ADDITION, 16 James Street, area variance for construction of an approximate 220 sq. ft. two-story addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-3 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and exempt from further SEQRA review. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 2 of 11 AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum side yard setback 4 feet 2.2 feet 1.8 feet (45%) Agent: Tonya Yasenchak, Engineering America Applicant: Sherri McCarthy & Kent Theobald Ms. Yasenchak stated the applicants purchased this home last year. They are in the process of making renovations to this 1878 home. They are requesting a 12 foot by 18.4 foot two story addition to this home. This encompasses a mud room, basement stairs and a pantry off of their kitchen which is on the first floor. There is a deck off of the home and this addition will be in that same area. Upstairs they will be expanding their back bedroom. The walls will be 6'8", so it will not be a full story but they are looking to match the existing roofline. The relief may be considered substantial at 45%, however the house location is existing at 2.2' side setback. We have looked at other options. The benefit may be achieved by moving the addition to the right, away from the property line; however, with the addition not aligning with the existing home, the rooflines would not match or be consistent with the home. The existing house is 27.2 feet from the side property line and 100' from the rear property line. Photographs were provided for the Boards review. There are many homes in the neighborhood which are close to the property lines, so we do not feel this would result in an undesirable change to the neighborhood. Due to current building codes no windows will be allowed on the left side of the addition. The existing house is preexisting nonconforming with regard to the side yard setback. The request for relief for the new construction could be considered self created. The overall permeability of the lot remains compliant within the zoning regulations. James Helicke questioned if other alternative designs were investigated by the applicant. Ms. Yasenchak reviewed the advantages to the placement of the addition as requested versus alternate feasible means to achieve the benefit to the applicants. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:43 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 7:44 P.M. James Helicke presented the following resolution. #2781 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF SHERI MCCARTHY AND KENT THEOBALD 16 JAMES STREET SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 16 James Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York, being tax parcel number 166.45-2-70 in the Inside Tax District, on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance for construction of a two-story residential addition to an existing City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 3 of 11 single-family residence, seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-3 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on September 8, 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: Proposed: Total relief requested: Minimum side yard setback: 4 feet 2.2 feet 1.8 feet (45%) 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 the benefit could be achieved by moving the addition away from the northern property line, but with this configuration the addition would not align with the existing home and the rooflines would not match or be consistent with the home. 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 homes on the street are already in close proximity: “This proposed addition is consistent in character and architectural style to the existing home and others in the neighborhood.” No windows will be placed on the north side of the addition, providing more privacy to the neighbor on that side. 3.) The variance may be considered substantial; however, the side yard setback is preexisting nonconforming. 4.) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The application notes that the increase in lot coverage is minimal and the property will remain compliant with the permeability requirements of the zoning district. 5.) The house is preexisting nonconforming with regard to the side yard setback, but the request for relief for the construction of a new addition may be considered a self-created hardship. In this case, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to this 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 3. #2785 HOSTETLER & HUIBREGTSE ADDITION, 9 Pinewood Avenue, area variance for construction of an approximate 350 sq. ft. two-story addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard and minimum total side yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential-2 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 4 of 11 AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum side yard setback 8 feet 6 feet 2 feet (25%) Minimum total side yard setback 20 feet 18 feet 2 feet (10%) Agent: Thad Smith, Teakwood Builders Applicants: Renee Hostetler, Mark Huibregtse Mr. Smith stated this is a two story addition to their home in the Pinewood Neighborhood. The lot is a tight lot to work with. The homeowners have lived here since 1987. They are looking to update this home with the addition of a powder room on the first floor and update the laundry to the first floor. Mr. Smith stated the existing residence is preexisting nonconforming with regard to the total side yard setbacks at 13.8'. Alternative designs were considered providing for "the aging in place" accommodations within the existing home. Much of the addition will not be visible from the street. The second story dormer might be visible. Extensive consideration was given to develop an exterior design that compliments the existing home and the surrounding neighbors with regard to scale massing and detailing. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman requested a revised survey to be submitted. Questioned alternative designs. NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT Karl Sleight, 7 Pinewood correspondence in support of the application. Tina Morris, 8 Pinewood correspondence in support of the application. Paul and Betty Bedrey, 11 Pinewood, correspondence in support of the application. Patrick Brundage, 156 East Avenue, correspondence in support of the application. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:58 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 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting on September 22, 2014. 4. #2782 BROWN & DAVIDSON ACCESSORY BUILDING, 10 Perry Street area variance to construct and finish interior of a shed; seeking relief to permit finished/habitable space in an accessory building in the Urban Residential-3 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and is therefore exempt from further SEQRA review AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Accessory structure Unfinished and Finished and habitable 100% (residential): uninhabitable space. Interior of constructed shed space City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 5 of 11 Applicant: Charles Brown Mr. Brown is looking to add space to their home. Currently habitable space is under 700 sq. ft. within the first floor of the existing three family residence to provide for additional living space. We looked at numerous options to add space. The basement being only 5.5' in height. The back of the home is broken up by four different roof lines, a number of angles and one outdoor staircase. The applicant indicates that the constructed accessory structure is compliant with the district requirements. The new structure replaces a decrepit shed of comparable size which was nonconforming 2.5' from the property line. We are adding a bath and a heated common space. The building is barely visible from surrounding street and is surrounded by trees. We are using dark sky lighting on the outside so as not to add extra light to anyone's yard. The lot will remain 25% permeable. This construction was begun without benefit of the variance. Susan Barden, Senior Planner provided information concerning the difference between needing an area variance versus a use variance in this particular situation. Discussion ensued regarding the need to confer with counsel seeing as this could potentially be a precedent setting situation. James Helicke requested a copy of the floor plan of the home, as well as alternative designs. This is precedent setting and I still have serious concerns regarding this application. Adam McNeill, Secretary stated that he also has reservations regarding this application. Also would like to see the floor plans of the first and second floor of this building to determine if this habitable space could have been attached to the building. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman stated he agrees with James and Adam. He is not supportive of this project. I do feel that unless there is something severely wrong with the terrain between the buildings I am not seeing where it is not feasible although I understand there would be a cost involved there is no reason why it could not be attached. Also there is the concern in setting a precedent. Bill Moore, Chairman questioned why the applicant did not appear before the Board prior to this. Mr. Brown stated he never thought it needed a variance for this perfectly legal building on his property. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:40 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Claudia Braymer, attorney representing James Naples who lives next door. A letter was submitted to staff. Mr. Naples requests that the Board deny this variance. The applicant is seeking an area variance which is not proper. What they need to request is a use variance. The applicant admits this will become additional habitable space for their home. They are looking to use this space for reading, band practice, dance, etc., gatherings and meetings. This is an improper building in the rear of their lot. The uses the applicants are proposing make this a second habitable space which is not permitted under the Zoning Code in the UR-3. This will not meet the criteria for a Use Variance and will create an undesirable change in the neighborhood. James Naples,12 Perry Street. I was approached about a year ago with a request to build this structure. I informed him to get a permit. He obtained a permit for a shed. A year later I am supposed to agree to an accessory structure with a bathroom. I was never advised what this shed was to be used for. It adversely affects the value of my property. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 6 of 11 Steve Lapp, 6A Perry Street. This does not adversely affect the neighborhood. This structure is more appealing than what was there previously. No problem with his requesting a variance. Adam McNeill, Secretary stated the Board received the following correspondence: Rachael Thorn correspondence dated 09/05/14. Diane Parisi, 14 Perry Street, correspondence dated 09/02/14. Cliff Starling, correspondence received. Steve Lapp, correspondence dated 09/05/14. Claudia Braymer correspondence received 09/08/14. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. Floor plans have been requested of the applicant. The applicant will return before the Board in two weeks. 5. #2784 SARATOGA HOSPITAL SIGN, 211 Church Street, area variance for construction of a wall sign; seeking relief from the maximum width and color requirements for signs within the Saratoga Hospital Medical/Professional PUD. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: Area variance for temporary 40 sq. ft. freestanding sign approved 04/20/2005. Area variance to modify existing on-site signage, approved 02/22/2005. Area variance for signage 09/27/2000, 06/10/1998, 09/23/1981. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum width: Large façade mounted identification sign (FID.1) 240" 796.6" 556.5"(232%) Purple, gold, Permitted colors for signs blue, red, teal, Silver 100% white Applicant: Saratoga Hospital Agent: Matthew J. Jones, Attorney; Kevin Ronyane, Vice President for Facilities and Operations, Saratoga Hospital; Tom Wheeler, AJ Signs, Alex Besso, Law Clerk, Jones Firm. Mr. Jones provided the Board with a visual presentation of the proposed signage. This area variance application is for signage to denote the Mary Lou Whitney and Desmond DelGiacco, MD Intensive Care Unit. Mrs. Whitney is an icon in the City of Saratoga Springs. She is very philanthropic and it would be difficult to name an endeavor in which she was not involved in. Saratoga Hospital would like to pay tribute to her. Dr. DelGiacco came to Saratoga Hospital in 1981 to specifically develop the Intensive Care Unit and has been the Medical Director of that unit since he arrived. He has dedicated his life to his patients and Saratoga Hospital. It is absolutely appropriate to honor him in this way. Mr. Jones stated it is an area variance application in a PUD. The variance is not for the size of the sign but it is for the length and width of the proposed signage. An alternative sign that would be three lines instead of one line would require stacking of the sign as an alternative would require variances. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 7 of 11 Mr. Wheeler stated the signage will be halo lit lettering approximately 2" deep adhered to the building. At night the signage will project a soft light. Mr. Ronyane stated the font of the proposed signage will be the same as that used on the Emergency Room signage. Discussion ensued regarding the proposed signage size, lettering size and the color selection. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL County Planning Board referral required. DRC Architectural Review required. Saratoga County Planning Board correspondence dated August 26, 2014, no significant county wide or inter community impact. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 9:25 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 9:26 P.M. Adam McNeill, Secretary presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF The Saratoga Hospital 211 Church Street Saratoga Springs, New York from the Building Inspector’s determination for the premises at 211 Church Street, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 identified as Tax Parcel Section 165.-3-35, Inside District of the City of Saratoga Springs, New York WHEREAS, the appellant has applied for an AREA VARIANCE for relief from the current City Zoning Ordinance for maximum width of a wall sign and from the permitted colors of such sign in the Saratoga Hospital Medical/Professional PUD; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on September 8, 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 VARIANCE for the following relief or lesser dimensions, be APPROVED: Required: Proposed: Total relief requested: Maximum width of wall sign: Large façade- 240” 796.6” 556.6” (232%) mounted identification sign (FID.1) Permitted colors for signs: Purple, gold, blue, red, Silver 100% teal, white 1) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The applicant identified an alternative sign that would be three lines instead on one line; however, that alternative City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 8 of 11  would require a variance. And, as the application states, “Stacking of the sign lettering was not feasible because of this façade”. 2) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The proposed sign is similar to existing signage to the south. 3) The relief requested is substantial; however, as the application states, “The square footage of the maximum permitted signage (226.67 sq. ft.) is significantly greater than the square footage of the proposed signage (82.84 sq. ft.)”. 4) The applicant has demonstrated this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood The sign will be halo-lit and the location and silver lettering color will complement the building façade. As the application indicates, clear and concise signage improves traffic flow and relieves congestion in the neighborhood. 5) The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, is not necessarily fatal to the application. Note: Saratoga County Planning Board issued a recommendation dated Aug. 26 of “No Significant County Wide or Inter Community Impact”. Design Review Commission Architectural Review is required. Skip Carlson 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: 6. #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. This application was first heard at the February 24, 2014 meeting. The Board requested an advisory opinion from the DRC with regard to the proposed disguise of the tower (monopine or silo). In addition, the Board requested that the applicant consider the existing Canadian Pacific Railway tower as a collocation opportunity. This information was received March 3, 2014 and mailed to the Board. The DRC issued a favorable advisory opinion for a silo structure on April 15, 2014. Subsequently, the DRC and ZBA City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 9 of 11 held a workshop to discuss the two disguises. At that meeting the DRC consented to reconsider the pine tree disguise if provided additional information including construction drawings of a similar well designed structure in the Village of Port Henry. Upon review of the additional information, the DRC issued a favorable advisory opinion for the pine tree on July 16, 2014. The public hearing was opened on February 24, 2014 and remains one. The proposed telecommunication facility, including a 110' high stealth monopine tree tower and 12' x 30' equipment shelter. The host parcel includes H& V Auto/Enterprise and is located within the Highway General Business (HGB) District. The property is located within the Gateway Design District 1A. The intent of the district is to encourage appropriate development while preserving and maintaining a rural "Country" character in this gateway area to complement the natural conditions of the neighboring Saratoga Spa Park. The property is adjacent to INST-PR district including lands of Spa State Park. SEQRA: Part 1 Long EAF identified "Yes" to the project site location in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY SHPO archeological site inventory. Additional information/clarification requested from applicant and/or SHPO. The Planning Board deferred Lead Agency status to the ZBA on September 25, 2013. The DRC deferred Lead Agency status to the ZBA on September 18, 2013. The ZBA initiated Coordinated SEQRA review and sought Lead Agency Status on September 9, 2013. Action appears to be an Unlisted Action. Other involved agencies include Planning Board for site plan review and the DRC for Architectural Review. PROJECT HISTORY: Use Variance application submitted April 2013 for a 95' high tower. At the September 9 ZBA meeting the Board requested the wetland delineation report referenced in the EAF and a completed visual EAF addendum as well as a balloon float that could be witnessed by the Boards and staff. An October 2013 balloon float determined that a 95' tall structure would not sufficiently clear the existing surrounding trees. The application indicates that the project is necessary to provide adequate and safe public utility/personal wireless service to this portion of the City for use by emergency personnel and the general public. The application states that the project will increase the applicant's wireless communications capacity and coverage which will help ensure that adequate levels of service exist for emergency and non-emergency wireless communications in the service area. The proposed facility will also permit Verizon Wireless to provide its 4G wireless service to the surrounding area. Applicant: Verizon Wireless Agent: Scott Olsen, Attorney for Verizon Wireless Mr. Olsen stated the applicant has worked with the DRC regarding the appearance of the monopine cell tower. We have worked with the City staff with the stormwater management program. We are now in compliance with the City's regulations. SEQRA: Bill Moore, Chairman reviewed Part I of the EAF and there were several areas of concern which were reviewed with the applicant. The appropriate corrections were made. Part II of the SEQRA form was reviewed by the Board. No large or important areas of concern were noted. Susan Barden, Senior Planner informed the Board we are still awaiting the SHPO report. It was recommended that the Board wait for the SHPO report prior to confirming a SEQRA Negative Declaration. This application will be placed on the agenda again in two weeks when we can confirm the negative declaration, and present a resolution. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 10 of 11 NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS: Saratoga County Planning Board referral required. City Planning Board Site Plan Review required. DRC Architectural Review required. Saratoga County Planning Board correspondence dated February 20, 2014 stating no significant countywide or inter community impact. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Gary Hasbrouck made a motion to approve the July 9, 2014 minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals as submitted. Skip Carlson seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, abstained Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, abstained MOTION PASSES: 4-0-2 Keith Kaplan made a motion to approve the July 14, 2014 minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals as amended. 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, abstained; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 5-0-1 Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion to approve the July 28, 2014 minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeal as amended. James Helicke, 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; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary Approved: 9/22/14 City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 8, 2014 - Page 11 of 11