Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MONDAY, APRIL 27, 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, Susan Steer, Adam McNeill, Secretary; Gary Hasbrouck; Skip Carlson; James Helicke; STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs Tony Izzo, Assistant City Attorney 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: #2817.1 ADELPHI HOTEL EXPANSION, 19-23 Washington Street, area variance to construct a banquet facility, additional hotel rooms and renovate the existing stone mansion; seeking relief from the minimum frontage build out Requirement in the Transect-6 District. #2824 KINGS TAVERN KITCHEN, 241 Union Avenue, use variance to expand the nonconforming bar/tavern use of the property to include food service; seeking relief to provide a kitchen within the existing building in the Urban Residential-3 District. #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 sq. ft. residential building; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage requirement in the UR-1 district. #2823 CELESTE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, 32 Fifth Avenue, area variance to raise roof of an existing garage and use as living space; seeking relief from the minimum rear and side yard setbacks and to permit finished/habitable space in an accessory structure. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2828 HOLOWACH TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE, 133 Washington Street, area variance for conversion of an existing single-family to a two-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum lot size and minimum mean lot width requirement for a two-family in the Urban Residential-3 District. SEQRA Action appears to be a Type II action, “Granting of an area variance(s) for a single-family, two-family or three-family residence”, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS:  REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum mean lot width: Two-family 80 feet 40 feet 40 feet (50%) Minimum lot size: Two-family 8,000 sq. ft. 3,860 sq. ft. 4,140 sq. ft. (52%) Agent: Matt Chauvin, Attorney Mr. Chauvin stated the applicants are seeking an area variance for this site. It appears that historically the house had two units, but had been converted to a single-family residence by 1995. The conversion was never completed. The property still has two kitchens, two entrances, two egresses, etc.; it is still in the physical form of a two family residence. It has been used as both a single family and a two family over the course of the years. The owner sold the property and through the title search the mortgage company was concerned whether the property was properly a two family or a single family. We asked for a determination from the City, a letter was sent stating this was a pre-existing non conforming single family residence and that the applicant would need to come forward for two area variances one for lot size and one for lot width. Two family residences are permitted within the district. The property is currently listed on the City’s tax rolls as a two family property and has been taxed at that specification through the entirety since the 1960’s. There is parking on site. Staff has requested parking space delineation for four spaces which is required. The applicant is happy to provide that. Permeable pavers will be used to maintain the green space requirements. Additional review by the applicant of parking calculations will be provided to the Board. Gary Hasbrouck questioned if the exterior of the property would be changed. Mr. Chauvin stated there is no intention to change the physical structure other than to comply with the necessary fire and safety codes. Internally there is no requirement. The necessary ingress and egress already exist. Discussion ensued regarding meeting the proposed parking requirement. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:14 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. The public hearing will remain open. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the applicant will provide additional documentation to the Board. This application will be on the agenda for the May 11, 2015 meeting. OLD BUSINESS: 2. #1634.1 BRUNSWICK B&B FRONT PORCH AND SIGN, 143 Union Avenue, area variance for proposed Construction of a front porch expansion and a new freestanding sign; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback and maximum size for a freestanding sign in a residential district in the Urban Residential-4 District. The application was heard at the April 13, 2015 meeting and adjourned to April 27, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 2 of 13 Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: - DRC Historic Review for façade alterations, approved November 6, 1997. - ZBA area variances for front porch and ramp, approved October 29, 1997. DISCLOSURE: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, stated he missed the prior meeting. He did review the webcast so he feels qualified to vote on any matters which have carried over since the last meeting. Adam McNeill, Secretary, stated he missed the prior meeting. He did review the webcast so he feels qualified to vote on any matters which have carried over since the last meeting. Applicant: Kirk Nichols, Owner Skip Carlson stated the applicant provided information regarding the size of lettering in signage versus the speed limit on the street. Discussion ensued regarding the proposed signage. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing was opened and 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 7:25 P.M. Skip Carlson presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF C. Kirk Nichols 143 Union Avenue Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 143 Union Avenue in the City of Saratoga Springs, NY, 12866 being tax parcel number 166.69-3-18 in the inside tax district on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance to construct front porch expansion and a new wall sign; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback and maximum size for a sign in a residential district requirement in the Urban Residential-4 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on April 13, 2015 and April 27, 2015. 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: City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 3 of 13  Type of Requirement District Dimensional Proposed Relief Requested Requirement Minimum Front Yard 25 feet 4 feet 21 feet (84%) Setback Maximum Area for a Sign in a Residential District 4 feet 12 feet 8 feet (200%) Maximum extension from building face 6 ins. 42 ins. 36 ins. (600%) To permit a wall sign where only freestanding signs are permitted for commercial uses in residential districts 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 to the Applicant. Regarding the 12 in. drip overhang the applicant has requested that results in a total relief requested of 21 feet from the minimum front yard setback, the applicant stated “the overhang is simply to keep the rain, snow and ice from dripping on the handicap ramp and causing a safety hazard”. The larger sign would increase visibility from a reasonable distance which would be a safety advantage to traffic on both Union and Nelson Avenue while keeping within the character of the neighborhood. 2. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the current sign is showing wear and tear and the new sign that is a carved, hand crafted sign will represent a significant upgrade. The new sign is in keeping with the character of a 130 year old house while keeping the neighborhood perspective that features the oldest thoroughbred race track in the country. The applicant also states that there are businesses in the neighborhood that have signs of the same size that the applicant is proposing. 3. The relief at 84% for the minimum front yard setback and 200% for the wall sign is substantial but is mitigated by the existing conditions. The additional variance is for six inches for the roof overhang and the existing sign is 3’ 7” x 3’ for a total of 11.1 sq. ft. or just an additional .9 square foot for the larger 4’ x 3’ sign. 4. The relief requested will not produce any adverse physical or environmental effect and the case could be made that it increases safety in the neighborhood. 5. The applicant’s desire to construct the addition and new sign is self-created. The self-created difficulty is not necessarily fatal to the application. Note: Saratoga County Planning Board issued a decision of No County Impact, dated Feb. 25, 2015 Condition: No additional freestanding sign permitted on the property Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 4 of 13  Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 3. #2825 CAULFIELD RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 718 North Broadway, area variance to construct an attached garage addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback in the Urban Residential-1 District. This application was heard at the April 13, 2015 meeting and adjourned to April 27, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and exempt from further SEQRA review. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing was opened and 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 7:35 P.M. Skip Carlson presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF SANDRA AND THOMAS CAULFIELD 718 NORTH BROADWAY SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 718 North Broadway in the City of Saratoga Springs, NY, 12866 being tax parcel number 165.36-2-1.1 in the inside tax district on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance to construct an attached garage addition to an existing single- family residence, seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-1 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on April 13, 2015 and April 27, 2015. 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: Type of Requirement District Dimensional Proposed Relief Requested Requirement City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 5 of 13 Minimum Front Yard 30 feet 16 feet 14 feet (47%) Setback: Second St. 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 to the Applicant. The applicant states that, “the proposed garage is placed logically at the end of the existing driveway…and other designs would encroach on usable yard/property space”. A detached garage would require the same 30’ front yard setback on Second Street and would also require a variance. 2. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. Detached garage structures may be more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. The proposed garage appears somewhat detached as it’s connected to the house by a proposed breezeway. The proposed placement of the garage, while requiring a variance, is hidden behind the existing house and would not be seen from North Broadway. 3. The request for relief may be considered substantial at 47%. The application states “the proposed staircase enclosure and detached garage are further away from the property lie than the existing house.” 4. The relief requested will not produce any adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood and the selection of material and architectural features is in scale with the surroundings. 5. The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Seconded by Gary Hasbrouck Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 4. #2826 CUSIK RESIDENCE, 89 Ash Street, area variance to construct a second-story addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-2 District. This application was heard at the April 13, 2015 meeting and adjourned to April 27, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 6 of 13 PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing was opened and remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:39 P.M. Susan Steer presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF ALAN AND PAULINE CUSICK 89 ASH STREET SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 89 Ash Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, NY, being tax parcel number 166.74-1-5 on the Assessment Map of said City. The Appellant having applied for an area variance to construct a second-story addition to an existing single- family residence, seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-2 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on April 13, 2015 and April 27, 2015. 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: Type of Requirement District Dimensional Proposed Relief Requested Requirement Minimum Side Yard 8 feet 2 feet 6 feet (75%) Setback 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 to the Applicant. The purpose of this addition is to increase the living space on the second floor of the existing residence. According to the Applicant, the “most economical solution” would be to build directly over the part of the residence that is one story and that this particular design requires the minimal number of variances. 2. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to the nearby properties. With the addition, the residence will be similar to the “mass and scale” of the residence next door and will not further encroach upon the adjoining properties. Since the addition will be constructed upon the single-story portion at the rear of the residence, there will be minimal visual impact on the view of the property when looking at it from Ash Street. Therefore, the residence will retain its current character and remain consistent with the character of the neighborhood. 3. The request for relief may be substantial at 75%, but this is due to the fact that the side yard setback is currently preexisting nonconforming. The construction of this addition upon the existing footprint will not increase the existing encroachment. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 7 of 13  4. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The access to the lot will remain unchanged, the proposed addition will not reduce the amount of open space on the property, and the minimum 25% permeability requirement will remain. 5. The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Adam McNeill, Secretary, 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; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 5. #2827 VON AHN RESIDENCE, 107 Fifth Avenue, area variance to construct a second story addition to an Existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback (both sides) and minimum Total side yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential-1 District. This application was heard at the April 13, 2015 meeting and adjourned to April 27, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing was opened and remains opened. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman, closed the public hearing at 7:44 P.M. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman presented the following resolution: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Richard and Joani von Ahn 107 Fifth Avenue Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 107 Fifth Ave. in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 166.14-4-41 in the Inside District, on the Assessment Map of said City. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 8 of 13 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-1 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 13th and 27th days of April 2015. 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 (WEST) 12’ 9.3’ 2.7’ OR 22.5% MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST) 12’ 6’ 6’ OR 50% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 30’ 15.3’ 14.7’ OR 49% 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 avoided these variances. Specifically, they included in their materials drawings of one such alternative, a second-story addition narrower than the one requested. They note while this alternative did not extend the existing side yard setback encroachments, it would not provide sufficient space or functionality. The board notes that the property has preexisting nonconformity with side setback requirements. This application does not call for any expansion beyond those existing setback encroachments. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The proposed additions are no wider than the existing house, and do not further crowd neighboring properties. 3. The Board finds these variances to be substantial on a percentage basis; however, as noted above the relief requests are continuations of pre-existing nonconformities, which mitigates the impact of their substantiality in this case. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district, as the footprint will only change slightly to the extent of the small front addition area; the lot as shown in the application materials will still well exceed permeability requirements at over 75%, where the minimum is 30% in the district. 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. James Helicke 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; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 9 of 13  6. #2929 JOLY RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 22 Schuyler Drive, area variance to construct a rear addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-1 District. This application was heard at the April 13, 2015 meeting and adjourned to April 27, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. 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 7:49 P.M. Susan Steer presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Richard and Joani von Ahn 107 Fifth Avenue Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 107 Fifth Ave. in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 166.14-4-41 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-1 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 13th and 27th days of April 2015. 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 (WEST) 12’ 9.3’ 2.7’ OR 22.5% MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST) 12’ 6’ 6’ OR 50% MINIMUM TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK 30’ 15.3’ 14.7’ OR 49% 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 avoided these variances. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 10 of 13  Specifically, they included in their materials drawings of one such alternative, a second-story addition narrower than the one requested. They note while this alternative did not extend the existing side yard setback encroachments, it would not provide sufficient space or functionality. The board notes that the property has preexisting nonconformity with side setback requirements. This application does not call for any expansion beyond those existing setback encroachments. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The proposed additions are no wider than the existing house, and do not further crowd neighboring properties. 3. The Board finds these variances to be substantial on a percentage basis; however, as noted above the relief requests are continuations of pre-existing nonconformities, which mitigates the impact of their substantiality in this case. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district, as the footprint will only change slightly to the extent of the small front addition area; the lot as shown in the application materials will still well exceed permeability requirements at over 75%, where the minimum is 30% in the district. 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. 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; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 #2774 COMPLEXIONS SIGN, 268 Broadway, area variance to install wall signs/banners; seeking relief from the maximum number of wall signs, maximum extension from the building and to permit banner signs in the Transect-6 District. This application was heard at the January 26, 2015 meeting and adjourned for further information. Additional information provided and forwarded to the Board by email. The public hearing was opened on January 16, 2015 and remains open. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: Application pending since June 9, 2014 for a wall sign, relief from maximum extension from the wall. DRC architectural review approval for conforming wall sign, July 17, 2014. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 11 of 13  REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum extension from wall .5 ft 2.5 ft. 2 ft. (400%) Number of wall signs 1 1 1 1 (100%) Applicant: Denise DuBois Ms. DuBois provided information on what type of signage will be placed and where the sign will be located. Discussion ensued regarding the type of signage proposed. It was the consensus of the Board that this type of signage is not allowed. It was suggested to the applicant to return before the Board. Susan Barden, Senior Planner stated this is regarding the following application from April 2014. #2761 RELLA-BIRNBY RESIDENCE, 63 Fifth Avenue, area variance for construction of an approximate 540 sq. ft. rear addition to the existing single-family residence, seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback and minimum total side yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential-1 District There were two sets of stairs to be constructed off the back addition. There were some changes done during construction. There is only one set of stairs coming off the rear addition to the side. We looked at setbacks for the addition but not to the stairs. So this set of stairs does not encroach into the side yard setback but the total of the two sides encroach by a foot. The board could make a motion for an amendment. James Helicke made a motion for an amendment to this application to 25.5 feet. Seconded by Gary Hasbrouck. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Bill Moore, Chairman, made a motion to approve the March 9, 2015 ZBA Meeting minutes with additions or corrections as submitted Adam McNeill seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion to approve the March 23, 2015, ZBA Meeting Minutes with additions or corrections as submitted. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 12 of 13 VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steel, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:23 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 6/8/15 City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – April 27, 2015 - Page 13 of 13