Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MONDAY, JANUARY 12, 2015 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; Gary Hasbrouck, Skip Carlson, James Helicke STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs Tony Izzo, Assistant City Attorney arrived at 7:20 P.M. RECOGNITION OF OKSANA LUDD: Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion to Thank Oksana Ludd for her many years of service to the City of Saratoga Springs. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman 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 ELECTION OF OFFICERS Susan Barden, Senior Planner stated as an initial step in the first meeting of the year is the nomination and election of officers for the 2015 year. There are seven members of the Board present tonight. Tony Izzo, Assistant City Attorney conducted the annual elections for the year 2015. The nomination for officers will be held in the order in which they appear on the letterhead. Board Chair: A nomination of Bill Moore to continue as Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals was moved by Keith Kaplan. Motion was seconded by Gary Hasbrouck. No further nomination for the office of chair. All in favor to close the nominations for the office of chair signify by saying aye. All in favor - Ayes all, nayes none. Motion carries 6-0. Board Vice-Chair: A nomination of Keith Kaplan for the office of Vice Chairman was moved by Bill Moore. Motion seconded by James Helicke. No further nominations for the office of Vice-Chair. All in favor to close the nominations for the office of chair signify by saying aye. All in favor - Ayes all, nayes none. Motion carries 6-0. Board Secretary: A nomination of Adam McNeill for the office of Secretary was moved by Gary Hasbrouck. Motion was seconded by Skip Carlson. No further nominations for the office of Secretary. All in favor to close the nominations for the office of chair signify by saying aye. All in favor Ayes all, nayes none. Motion carries 6-0 Vote for Chair: Votes in favor of electing Bill Moore, Chairman were unanimous. 6-0. Vote for Vice-Chair: Votes in favor of electing Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman were unanimous. 6-0. Vote for Secretary: Votes in favor of electing Adam McNeill, Secretary were unanimous. 6-0. 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. DISCUSSION ITEM: Susan Barden, Senior Planner provided information on the following item: 1. #2774 COMPLEXIONS SIGN, 268 Broadway, area variance to install a wall sign in the Transect-6 District. This application was previously heard on July 14, and July 28, 2014, for an area variance for a wall sign. That application has been pending. The applicant went forward and sought DRC approval for a conforming sign - one that did not require area variances. She received approval, erected the sign and now wishes to come back before the Board, revive the application, seeking additional signage. This information was forwarded to Board members today. Additional information is required regarding number of signs, dimensions and banners which will be projecting on the front of the building. Even though this is a pending application we will re-notice the application for a public hearing for the next meeting on January 26, 2014. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ADJOURNED APPLICATIONS: #2792 STONE BUILDINGS, 68 Weibel Avenue, area variance to maintain existing buildings; seeking relief from the build-to, minimum frontage build-out and minimum two-story requirements in the Transect-4 District. #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. NEW BUSINESS: 2. #2777 CITY CENTER PARKING GARAGE, surface parking lot bound by York Street, High Rock, Lake and Maple Avenues area variance for construction of a parking structure, seeking relief to impede solar access to a neighboring property in the Transect-6 District. DISCLOSURE: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman disclosed that his father-in-law was a long time employee of the City Center. He has since retired and has been retired for several years. Mr. Kaplan has no financial interest in this application. No need for recusal simply a disclosure. SEQRA: - Action appears to be a Type 1 action. - In addition to the ZBA, the Planning Board, Design Review Commission, and the City Council are involved agencies. - On July 1, 2014 the City Council initiated Coordinated Review and deferred Lead Agency status to the Planning Board. - ZBA deferred Lead Agency to the Planning Board on July 9, 2014. – The Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on December 10, 2014. PARCEL HISTORY: City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 2 of 13  - DRC Architectural review approval of roof-mounted solar hot water panels for Mouzon House, 1 York Street, October 16, 2014. - Reaffirmation of DRC approval with clarifications/revisions, November 19, 2014. Agent: Matthew J. Jones, Attorney, Jones Firm; Alex Besso, Jones Firm; Jay Stasak, Envision Architecture Applicant: Mark Baker, President City Center Authority Mr. Jones provided information concerning the Solar Access Provision, 6.4.8 Solar Access No property owner may erect a structure or allow a tree or other flora to cast a shadow upon a solar collector greater than the shadow case by a hypothetical wall six feet high located along the property line between 8 AM and 4PM EST from September 21, to March 21. Mr. Jones provided the Board with some background information and history on the project. A visual presentation was provided as well. This project entails the development of a 2.6 acres of City owned property. This project also includes consideration under the solar access provision of the City Zoning Ordinance. This project has become zoning non- compliant not on its own but by the actions of a neighbor. PROJECT HISTORY: April 2012 – Public discussions on initial concept plan with community leaders. August 2012 – Discussions and input from surrounding property owners. November 2012 – Concept plan identified and presented to the City Council. Fall 2013 – Request for Proposals initiated. February 2014 – Responses to RFP received. June 2014 Mark Baker presents selected concept plan to the City Council. July 2014 SEQRA process begins involved agencies (City Council, DRC and ZBA) defer lead agency status to the Planning Board. August 2014 – Solar panels installed at the Mouzon House. September 1, 2014 – Stop work order issued for solar panels. September 2, 2014 – City Council adopts resolution permitting Applicant to file applications with the City's land use boards. September 17, 2014 - Presentation to DRC and the Planning Board of project concept, including shadow study. September 17, 2014 – Mouzon House applies to DRC for Architectural Review of solar panels. October 15, 2014 – DRC approves solar panels to Mouzon House. November 19, 2014 – DRC hears arguments from applicant and Mouzon House , issues clarification and revision of decision , reaffirm approval. December 10, 2014 – Planning Board concludes SEQRA process, issues a negative declaration. Mr. Jones also reviewed the Solar Access regulation 6.4.8 which states except as other wise provided by this Chapter, no property owner may erect a structure or allow a tree or other flora to cast a shadow upon a solar collector greater than the shadow cast by a hypothetical wall six feet high located along the property line between 8:00am and 4:00pm Eastern Standard Time from September 21 to March 21. Mr. Jay Stasak, Envision Architects provided a visual presentation of the shadow study for all four seasons with and without a structure in place. Copy of this study was provided to the Board for their consideration. For the project to be in compliance the building must be 28 feet in height to avoid shadowing of the solar panels. Mr. Jones stated the Board must balance the benefit the applicant stands to receive against any burden to the health, safety and welfare that may be suffered by the Community. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 3 of 13  - The owners of the Mouzon house had notice since 2004 of the development potential of this parcel. - The decision to install solar panels came subsequent to the beginning of the SEQRA process for the Applicant's project. As the SEQRA record reflects the financial impact on the Mouzon House if the parking structure is built will be approximately $122 per year. Pursuant to SEQRA EAF Part 2 questions 17c whether or not the proposed action is inconsistent with local land use plans or zoning regulations – the Planning Board concluded no or small impact. The project is dependent for parking structure or any future multi-story development of this portion of the City owned land. 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. Jonathan Tingley, Tucziski, Cavalier and Gilchrist, PC, Attorney for the Mouzon House. Mr. Tingley provided documents to the Board, as well as a comment letter which was provided to the Board and the applicant. Mr. Tingley requested additional time to gather information as well as a consultant to provide intelligent information to the Board. He was not made aware of this application until Monday of last week. We are requesting to keep the public hearing open until the February meeting. This is now the 4th time before the three boards that the client has at least felt the obligation to answer questions concerning the installation of solar panels. What you will see at the back of the comment letter is the purchase agreement for the solar panels dated November 2013. These panels were installed before DRC approval was granted and they then received approval. The City Center authority is looking to build a 70 foot structure as close as possible to the Mouzon House, which will violate the solar access provision. Mr. Tingley reviewed the criteria for a variance noting there will be an undesirable change in the neighborhood, to be compliant with the solar access restriction, the parking structure would need to be reduced to a height no greater than 28 feet. Other alternatives were not researched. This is a substantial project 250% of what is allowed in that location, with adverse physical and environmental effects on the neighborhood and the Mouzon House. He also discussed the self created issue. Reasonable alternatives have not been presented or discussed. Mr. Tingley requested this application be placed on the February 9, 2015 meeting agenda to give the applicant time to have a consultant review and report on the project. Denise Desmond, 11 Saratoga Farm Road. Over 500 people have signed a petition against the parking garage. The process has been horrible. There has been no public display of the project design. Why isn't there something in the City Center lobby that people could look at and comment on? Let everyone see it. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY THE BOARD: Letter dated January 12, 2015 from Karen Chandley, 110 Spring Street. James Helicke questioned how the Board feels about postponing this application to the February 9, 2015 date. Discussion ensued among the members of the Board regarding Mr. Tingley’s request for postponing the hearing until the February 9, 2015. It was the determination of the Board to place this item on the January 26, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals agenda. 3. #2808 EMBASSY SUITES, area variance for two wall signs, seeking relief to permit more than one wall sign, to permit placement on a building elevation without street frontage, for placement above the first floor level of the building, to exceed the maximum size of signs, maximum height of lettering and to permit internally illuminated channel letters in the Transect-6 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 4 of 13 Planning Board site plan review and DRC Architectural review approvals for the project. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Installation of wall sign on elevation without street 0 1 1 (100%) frontage: East elevation (parking lot) Installation of wall sign on elevation w/o street 0 1 1 (100%) frontage: East elevation (parking lot) Maximum number of wall signs permitted per street 1 2 1 (100%) frontage Maximum area for wall signage: Two signs 100 sq. ft. 104.2 sq. ft. 4.2 sq. ft. (4.2%) combined Maximum height logo: "E" 18" 84 ¾" 66 ¾" (367%) Maximum height lettering: "Embassy Suites" 18" 30" 12" (67%) Placement above first floor level: "E" Maximum first floor 6th floor Above first floor level of placement placement building Maximum extension from building: "E" 6" 10" 4" (67%) Request for both wall signs to be internally illuminated channel lit letters where only back-lighted opaque letter are permitted ("halo lighted"). Applicant: Donald MacElroy, David Congdon, DCG Development Agent: Matthew J. Jones, ALexandra Besso, Jones Firm; Tom Wheeler, AJ Signs Mr. Jones provided an overview of the application. A visual presentation was provided to the Board as well. The two wall signs on the Easterly façade. The letter "E" logo at the sixth floor level and "EMBASSY SUITES" over the front doors. The total square footage is over 100 sq. ft. (total of 1042 sq. ft.). One wall sign with elevation above the first floor level. Signage height over 18 inches. Channel lit lettering. Mr. Jones reviewed the balancing test criteria for an area variance. The proposed signage location to be visible from Broadway. Signage on the north face of the property does not offer any visibility to identify the structure or the building's use. Signage on the street frontage, Congress Street is not beneficial because of low traffic volume. The dimensions of the signage is so that it can be seen from Broadway and in keeping with the mass and scale of the building. Mr. Wheeler, AJ Signs provided an example of the size and shape of the proposed "E" signage as well as noting it will utilize LED lighting. Mr. Jones reviewed other area variances which were granted relief with the same type of lettering: - The Hampton Inn sign on February 4, 2008 for 24" high lettering. - The Hilton sign on November 21, 2011 for 24" high lettering. - The Criterion Cinema sign on April 8, 2013 for 36" high lettering. - The Pavilion Grand sign on February 24, 2014 to be above the first floor level. Skip Carlson requested other feasible alternatives to the proposed signage. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 5 of 13 Mr. Jones stated there are no other feasible means to accomplish what this signage will accomplish for the hotel. Discussion ensued among the Board members regarding the relief requested and the size of the lettering for the proposed sign. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:49 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVALS: - County Planning Board noted no significant countywide or intercommunity impact. - DRC Architectural Review required. The Board will have a resolution prepared to present at the end of this meeting. 4. #2786 RITE AID REDEVELOPMENT, 90 West Avenue and 242 Washington Street, interpretation and area variance for redevelopment and expansion of the pharmacy and associated sign package; seeking relief from the build-to, minimum frontage build out and minimum two-story requirements in the Transect-5 District. The applicant has requested consideration of area variances associated with the building only at this time to return for discussion of the sign package at a later date. SEQRA: - Action appears to be an Unlisted Action. - In addition to ZBA, the Planning Board (special use permit and site plan review) and Design Review Commission architectural review) are involved agencies. - The Board initiated Coordinated SEQRA Review and deferred Lead Agency Status to the Planning Board on September 22, 2014. - Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on October 8, 2014. INTERPRETATION: - The T-5 district requires a minimum of two-story building (50' maximum height). - Definition of story-that portion of a building designed for human occupancy between the surface of any floor and the surface of the next floor or roof above. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Build-to-line: West Avenue 0-12' 32' 10" 20.83' (173.58%) Frontage build-out: West Avenue 70% 52.23% 17.77% (25.39%) Minimum two story Two-story One-story One-story (100%) Applicant: Rite Aid Redevelopment Agent: Matthew J. Jones, Attorney; Alexandra Besso, The Jones Firm; Jaclyn S. Hakes, MJ Engineering City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 6 of 13 Mr. Jones stated the Board did see this application on September 22, 2014 when Lead Agency Status was deferred to the Planning Board. The Planning Board issued a negative SEQRA declaration on October 8, 2014. The relief sought is 3 area variances and one interpretation. - Build to line: from 0-12' to 32'10". - Minimum frontage build-out from 70% to 52.23%. - Minimum two-story; one story with 690 sq. ft. second story. - Interpretation – a floor that covers only a portion of the floor below it nevertheless constitutes a story within the Ordinance. Mr. Jones provided some background information on the project which the Board saw back in September 2014. He provided a brief background of the site location, and property. The existing Rite Aid has been in operation at this location for 22 years. They are currently under contract to purchase the Touch Free Car Wash at 242 Washington Street which is contingent upon receipt of the necessary approvals. An aerial view of the project was provided to the Board. The applicant is proposing to increase the footprint of the building to 14,000 square feet. It is the need and desire of Rite Aid to add two drive-through lanes for the pharmacy, and the need to treat the gateway of Washington Street. The district intent is to accommodate a wide variety of residential and non-residential uses, building and frontage types. The district also focuses on providing quality streetscape amenities and civic spaces to enhance pedestrian activity. Ms. Hakes, MJ Engineering provided a visual presentation of the proposed concept for the new project. Ms. Hakes reviewed alternative designs, elevations, signage, ingress and egress from the site. This is the same presentation the Board viewed on September 22, 2014, when the applicant was before the Board for SEQRA Lead Agency determination. The frontage line shall be along the higher capacity street which is West Avenue. We have oriented the building so that the Washington Street elevation is to be the primary front of the building. This elevation would meet the build to requirement located 15'8" and build-out approximately 50% along the frontage. The proposed façade build-out is compatible with adjacent buildings and the general site context. Additionally compliant build-out along West Avenue would impede the proposed internal traffic circulation and parking. The new building maintains two curb cuts both full movement, one on West Avenue and one on Washington. The amount of parking spaces provided does exceed the minimum requirement for the use by 28% 47 parking spaces required – 60 proposed, if this project does proceed through the Boards a waiver of parking spaces will be sought. The introduction of the drive through should reduce the need for parking. The applicants are researching opportunities for green infrastructure to the extent that the site affords. Mr. Jones stated the Board must balance the benefit the applicant stands to receive against any burden to the health, safety and welfare that may be suffered by the community. The project is consistent with the intent of the Ordinance and the longstanding use in the area. The new building maintains two curb cuts both full movement one on West Avenue and one on Washington Street. Lighting will be sensitive to proximity of residential neighborhood. The requested variances are necessary because of the drive through use which is a necessary element of a pharmacy use. Mr. Jones than reviewed the interpretation regarding a minimum two-story requirement in the T-5. Does a floor that covers only a portion of the floor below it nevertheless constitutes a story within the Ordinance. The ordinance is vague. Discussion ensued among the Board regarding the two story requirement in the T-5 district. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 9:32 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the applicant should return before the Board on the 26th of January 2015 when a resolution will be prepared and presented. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 7 of 13 OLD BUSINESS: 5. #2782 BROWN & DAVIDSON ACCESSORY BUILDING, 10 Perry Street, area variance to finish the interior of a shed; seeking relief to permit finished/habitable space in an accessory building in the Urban Residential – 3 District. This application was heard at the September 8, 2014, meeting, the public hearing was opened and adjourned to September 22, 2014. The board asked the applicant to provide floor plans of the building. The application has been further adjourned at the request of the applicant. The public hearing remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak regarding this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:35 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Kathryn Davidson and Charles Brown 10 Perry St. Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the same premises, identified as Tax Parcel Section 165.82, Block 2, Lot 38.1, 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 creating habitable space in an accessory building in an UR-3 zoning district; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on September 8th, December 15th 2014, and January 12th 2015 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 Accessory structure (residential): Unfinished and uninhabitable Finished and habitable 100% Interior of constructed shed space space 1) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The applicant provided floor plans, and pictures of both the inside and outside of the currently existing house and accessory building. Based upon information from the applicant and a written statement from the applicant’s consultant received by the Board on November 12, 2014, the Board concludes the accessory building could not be attached to the existing principal building in a reasonable or financially feasible manner. The application states, “The back of home being broken up by four different roof lines, a number of angles and one outdoor City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 8 of 13  staircase.” The above referenced statement indicates, “….the rear of the building being constructed on a slab with no frost walls, and the final problem is adding an addition on the back, the building would have to be brought up to code compliance (i.e. light and ventilation, means of egress, hard wiring structure for smoke detectors).” 2) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The exterior of the recently constructed accessory building will not be changing due to the wish of the applicant to make the building habitable. The applicant has indicated he will be using the accessory building for private uses which include dance practice, office use and entertaining guests. The Board finds these uses consistent with normal residential uses of property. 3) The relief requested may be considered substantial; however, it may be somewhat mitigated because the requested variance for finishing the interior into habitable space will not affect the exterior of the building. Although the accessory building is heated and will contain plumbing including a ½ bath, the structure will lack bathing facilities and a full kitchen. 4) The applicant has demonstrated this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. No additional impermeable area is anticipated to be added to the property. 5) The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, is not necessarily fatal to the application. Condition: Accessory building may not contain a full bath nor a kitchen sink or range. Adam McNeill 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 6. #2791 FOX RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 72 Union Avenue, area variance for construction of two additional residential units to an existing multi-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum lot area requirement for the 15th unit and from the maximum principal building coverage requirement in the Urban Residential-4 District. This application was heard at the October 20, 2014 meeting. The board requested that the applicant provide floor plans of the building. This application was last heard at the December 15, 2014, meeting and adjourned to the January 12, 2014 meeting. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: - Action appears to be an unlisted action. An Unlisted Action occurring within a Historic District is elevated to a Type I action. - Planning Board site plan review and DRC historic review are involved agencies. - On October 20, 2014 the Board initiated Coordinated Review and deferred Lead Agency Status to the Planning Board. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 9 of 13  - The Planning Board issued a Negative Declaration on December 10, 2014. 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 9:50 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Tom Fox 72 Union Avenue Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the same premises, identified as Tax Parcel Section 165.76-1-15, Inside 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 lot area for a 15th living unit and maximum principal building coverage in a UR-4 zoning district in order to construct a two-unit apartment addition and an accessory indoor pool structure; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on October 20th and December 15th, 2014 and January 12th 2015 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 Lot Area: 15th unit 3000 sq feet 2160 sq feet 840 sq feet. (28%) Maximum Principal Building Coverage: 25% 29.2% 4.2% (16.8%) 1) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant The application and submitted supporting documentation states, “The Owner considered the option of going up, but was presented with a financial investment that was 25% more expensive than new construction due to the necessary reconstructive efforts of the existing structure. There would not be the positive cash flow required to support the construction of the apartment amenities proposed with the indoor pool building and gathering space.” The applicant’s representative noted that an extra unit was needed to afford the proposed amenities. The application goes on to state, “The addition cannot be constructed in any other location on the property without a variance since the variance is for area, not setback.” 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 states, “The use and aesthetic character of the addition are in line with the character of this property and the surrounding neighborhood. The Board notes that subject area contains a mix of single, multi-family, light commercial and educational uses. 3) The relief requested for both areas of may not be considered substantial since the applicant will be providing adequate off-street parking despite the expansion of the footprint of the principal building and the addition of an accessory structure. The relief is calculated for the 15th unit only thereby making the requested relief appear City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 10 of 13  somewhat substantial. The applicant is actually lacking 56 sq’ per unit which would appear to be much less substantial. 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. Conditioned on Planning Board and Design Review Commission Approvals Adam McNeill 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 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: 3. #2808 EMBASSY SUITES, area variance for two wall signs, seeking relief to permit more than one wall sign, to permit placement on a building elevation without street frontage, for placement above the first floor level of the building, to exceed the maximum size of signs, maximum height of lettering and to permit internally illuminated channel letters in the Transect-6 District. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated since only a portion of the application is being approved the public hearing will remain open. Skip Carlson presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF DCG Development 240 Clifton Corporate Parkway Clifton Park, New York From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 46 Congress Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York, being tax parcel 165-7-4 in the inside tax district, on the assessment map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance for two wall signs, seeking relief to permit more than one wall sign, to permit placement on a building elevation without street frontage, for placement above the first floor level of the building, to exceed the maximum size of signs, maximum height of lettering and to permit internally illuminated channel letters in the Transect-6 District. Public notice has been duly given of a hearing on said application on January 12, 2015. Upon review of the evidence and testimony submitted, the board hereby makes findings with respect to the “Embassy Suites” sign. These findings constitute only a part of the entire relief requested. The Board deliberately refrains from making findings with respect to the remaining portion of the application until the applicant has submitted the additional information required by the board as stated on the record at its January 12, 2015 meeting. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 11 of 13 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 variance for the following amounts of relief: Required: Proposed: Total relief requested: Installation of wall sign on elevation w/o street 0 1 1 (100%) frontage: East elevation Max. height letter: “Embassy Suites” 18” 24” 6” (33%) Request for wall sign to be internally illuminated channel lit letters where only back-lighted opaque letters are permitted (“halo lighted”). As per submitted plans of lesser dimensions, BE APPROVED for the following reasons: 1.) The board finds that the height of the letters is appropriate and proper given the speed of vehicular traffic on that side of the building and the distance of the passing traffic from the building façade. The placement of a sign on the parking lot elevation of the building (without street frontage) reasonably identifies the building. Because of proposed placement of the sign on the canopy it would be difficult to back light the sign; therefore, the internally illuminated letters are appropriate in this location. 2.) The applicant has stated that granting this variance will not cause an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood. The Board notes that other nearby signage exists comparable in size and construction to the signage proposed. 3.) The amount of relief is substantial; however, there is precedent in the community for commercial signage relief that is similar to the relief requested by the applicant. 4.) The applicant has stated that “there will be no adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or district.” The intensity f light generated by the internally lit sign will be considered by the DRC within their architectural review jurisdiction. 5.) The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Conditions/Notes: Saratoga County Planning Board issued a decision of “No Significant County Wide or Inter Community Impact” on January 9, 2015 DRC advisory opinion for the “E” sign required DRC architectural review required for all signs Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there is any further discussion. Adam McNeill, Secretary stated this building has been in the design and construction phase for years, yet they come to us for immediate relief due to time constraints for the opening of the building. I find this highly inappropriate. As a board member I am tired of applicants appearing before this Board requesting immediate action. We have seen this too many times in recent history. The sign package should be a part of the initial application. I do not believe that the applicant has justified the request for the size of the signage. I will not be supporting this application. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman stated he is concerned regarding the size of the signage. Very much conflicted. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 12 of 13 Gary Hasbrouck stated he believes the last minute requests for signage is intentional. Skip Carlson, stated poor planning by the applicant does not constitute an emergency for the Zoning Board. We are put in that position many times. Packets regarding signage should be a portion of the application process. James Helicke stated he agrees with all the Board members regarding the signage. He encourages speaking to the Planning Board in order presenting signs become part of the site plan. 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 January 26, 2015 meeting. MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 2/23/15 City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, January 12, 2015 - Page 13 of 13