Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MONDAY, JULY 13, 2015 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:01 P. M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; Gary Hasbrouck, Skip Carlson ABSENT: Adam McNeill, Secretary; James Helicke; Susan Steer STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs arrived at 7:05 P.M. Tony Izzo, Deputy 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: #2842 STEWART’S SHOPS FREEZER ADDITION, 87 West Avenue, area variance for a freezer addition to an existing Convenience store; seeking relief from the build-to-line, minimum frontage build-out and minimum two-story requirement within the Transect-5 District. #2843 McCLELLAN REO, LLC, 70 Lake Avenue, use variance modification from previously granted real estate office to office and medical office in the Urban Residential-2 District. #2833 KIRBY BURNT HILLS REALTY, LLC NEW MULTI-FAMILIES, 6-14 Kirby Road, area variance to demolish five existing four-unit residences, and construct two (2) twenty-seven (27) unit buildings; seeking relief from the minimum lot size per dwelling unit, maximum principal building coverage and minimum parking requirements in the Urban Residential-2 District. #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. #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. #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. #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 requirement in the Transect-4 District. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2791.1 FOX RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 72 Union Avenue, an area variance for an addition to an existing multi-family residence and installation of parking; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage and from the minimum setback to parking in the Urban Residential-4 District. 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. AREA VARIANCE GRANTED ON JANUARY 12, 2015 REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum lot area 15” unit 3,000 sq. ft 2,160 sq. ft. 840 sq. ft. (28%) Maximum principal building coverage 25% 29.2% 4.2% (16.8%) AREA VARIANCE MODIFICATION: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum principal building coverage 25% 32.17% Additional 2.97% total 7.17% (28.68%) Minimum front yard setback to parking 25 feet 5 feet 20 feet (80%) Agent: Jesse Boucher, Kodiak Construction Mr. Boucher reviewed his original proposal which was two separate structures. The pool building out front wasn’t appropriate for the Union Avenue Historic District. We have modified the plan, reducing the size of each space the pool, gathering space and the apartments. In doing this we have minimized the requested primary structure lot coverage to 32.17%. Our efforts with the DRC ensure compliance with the City’s architectural standards and the Planning Boards negative declaration on SEQRA. The applicant is amenable to a condition of approval to reduce further allowable accessory structures to ensure that overall build-out remains below the combined 40% for principal and accessory structures. We are here this evening for a variance for parking to maintain the quantity of parking proposed which is 23 parking spaces, showing a 5 foot setback from North Alley and a 5 foot setback from Clark Street for that parking. The pavement does exist in this area, it is not striped. The permeability of the site will be 47% exceeding the minimum 15% in this area. Gary Hasbrouck discussed parking, parking location, relief required and permeability. Skip Carlson questioned the 47% permeability. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman read into the record Susan Steers comments since she is absent this evening. She expressed concern with the amount of paving on the site. Also she cited concerns regarding the parking area being so close to the property line, as well as if 22 spots are required, perhaps the applicant should consider only the minimum 22 not 23 as proposed. Can this be reconfigured to accommodate this request? Mr. Boucher stated currently on the site there is approximately 12,900 square feet of paved surface on the property. When this project is completed there will be 8,900 square feet of pavement on the property. So, this project will actually decrease the paved portion of the property. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:19 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 2 of 8 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 scheduled for July 27, 2015. 2. #2844 SBDT VENTURES, LLC SINGLE-FAMILY, 60 Franklin Street, area variance for a lot line adjustment and to construct a new single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum mean lot width requirement for the lot and minimum front yard setback, minimum side yard (both sides) setback, minimum total side yard setback, minimum rear yard setback and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-4 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be Unlisted – applicant has submitted a short EAF. PARCEL HISTORY: Lot line adjustment approved administratively by the Planning Board Chair. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum average lot width 100 ft. 55.4 feet 44.6 feet (44.6%) Maximum principal building coverage 25% 31% 6 ft. (24%) Minimum front yard setback 25 feet 14.8 ft. 10.2 ft. (40.8%) Minimum side yard setback 20 ft. 2.9 ft. 17.1 ft. (85.5%) Minimum side yard setback 20 ft. 12.4 ft. 7.6 ft. (38%) Minimum total side yard setback 45 ft. 15.3 ft. 29.7 ft. (66%) Agent: Michael Toohey, Attorney; Tony Bonacio, SBDT Ventures; Owner Applicant: Sandy Lewis Mr. Toohey stated the owner of the property is Joseph Boff. Mr. Boff owns 60 and 66 Franklin Street. We have submitted to the Board a written confirmation that the applicant can represent Mr. Boff with regard to this application. The purpose of this application is to allow the construction of a single family home on the property known as 60 Franklin Street. The house is going to be built for Tom and Sandy Lewis. Sandy Lewis is here this evening. Tom L. Lewis is a member of the City Planning Board and has recused himself from any activity having to do with this project. He feels this is appropriate. This has been disclosed to the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Toohey reviewed and circulated the pertinent portion of the Zoning Code 5.5.b which states “minimum lot size and minimum average lot width requirements, for non conforming lots, shall not apply to any lawfully recorded lot which was under different ownership from the adjoining lot on July 6, 1961.” Part C states the owner of any lot in a residential district, which this is, a UR-4 zone, that does not conform to the district minimum lot size, minimum lot average requirements, may erect a single family home, a residence or accessory building if the lot legally existed on or before January 19, 1970. We have submitted Sanbourn maps which show the two lots in question, 60 and 66. One is 50 feet in width and the other is 66 feet in width. The question is whether or not these lots were in separate ownership on the two dates that were mentioned. Copies of the deed showing who the adjacent property owners were at the times in question. This was submitted for the record. The lot in question here was not in common ownership on either of the two dates mentioned. The lots on the two sides were residential. Principal permitted uses were reviewed for the UR-4 zone which include a single family and two family residence. Mr. Toohey provided a neighborhood review for the Board listing current features and uses. 21 lots in this area which are more residential than commercial. The lot is preexisting nonconforming with City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 3 of 8 regard to the minimum mean lot width requirement. A lot line adjustment resulted in the lot being 319.16 sq. ft. larger and 5 feet wider along the frontage. A majority of the lots in the neighborhood are approximately 50 ft. wide. The relief from the minimum side yard setbacks are substantial, but as the application states a house requiring 45 ft. side yard setbacks cannot be built on a 55 ft. wide lot. The front yard setbacks of 14.8 are comparable to existing homes in the neighborhood. The applicant is willing to condition an approval that would limit any future accessory structure to a maximum 9% of the lot or 684 sq. feet. There was no additional property to purchase. This is consistent with the neighborhood. The driveway is on the north side of the property to keep away from the landscaping, grass, etc. DRC Historic Review is required. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further questions or comments from the Board. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman questioned the width of the home being in context with the neighborhood. Tony Bonacio, Bonacio construction explained the width of the home and explained the proportionality. The property does have grading issues in the rear of the property necessitating the placement of the home as presented. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:57 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 July 27, 2015. 3. #2845 NAHILL FRONT PROCH, 121 Circular Street, area variance for a front porch addition to an existing multi-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback (Circular St.), minimum front yard setback (Caroline St.) and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-3 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum principal building 30% 43.9% 45.7% Additional 1.8% Total 15.7% coverage (52%) Maximum front yard setback- 10 feet 7.4 feet 7.4 feet 2.6 feet (75%) Circular Minimum front yard setback – 10 feet 0 ft.(to 1.1 feet 8.9 feet (96%) Caroline house) Applicant: Roberta Nahill, owner; Gary Decker, friend Mr. Decker stated we are looking for an area variance to build/restore the front porch to its original Gothic Revival character and style, as provided in the 1910 photograph. (Copy provided to the Board for their review). The front porch addition would not extend further than the existing residence along either frontage. All nearby properties have full front porches. The 124 sq. ft. front porch addition would not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects to the neighborhood. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman questioned the applicant concerning other feasible means to achieve the benefit. Also the amount of permeability which exists. 25% is required. Requested calculation from the applicant. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 4 of 8 The applicant provided information regarding maintaining the symmetry of the windows and to make it functional, it must be constructed as such. The amount of permeability will be submitted to staff. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:13 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 July 27, 2015. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DRC Historic Review is required. 4. #2846 SEFCIK RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, 222 East Avenue, area variance to construct an addition to an Existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum total side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential-1 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUIRED Minimum total side yard setback 30 feet 3.3 feet 27.1 feet 2.9 feet (9.66%) Maximum principal building coverage 20% 25% 28.3% 8.3% (41.5%) Agent: Jesse Boucher, Kodiak Construction Mr. Boucher provided updated corrected information to the Board concerning the application. The proposed project is a two story addition to the rear of the property. The first floor increases living space, family room and kitchen. The second floor will be a master bedroom suite as well as an additional children’s bedroom. Mr. Boucher stated consideration was given to reduce the overall size of the principal building to more than 28%. The combined principal building coverage is 20% and maximum accessory building coverage is 8%. This would amount to an approximate 20 sq. ft reduction in size. In consideration of submission of floor plans, the width and length are at their least practical size for providing the necessary living space and associated furniture placement and traffic patterns. The style of the two story addition is in character with the existing structure and the neighboring properties, resulting in no detriment to nearby properties. With all construction on the rear of the structure, no change will occur in the character of the neighborhood. All materials will be to match what is currently existing. Discussion ensued regarding the amount of relief requested, and conditioning no accessory structure on the resolution. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further questions or comments from the Board. None heard. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 5 of 8 PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:21 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 July 27, 2015. 8:22 P.M. The Board Recessed. 8:26 P.M. The Board Reconvened. OLD BUSINESS: 1. #2841 HOMBURGER TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION, 3 East Broadway, area variance to create two single-family residential lots; seeking relief from the minimum mean lot width and minimum lot size requirements for one of the proposed lots in the Urban Residential-2 District. PARCEL HISTORY: -Favorable advisory opinion issued by the Planning Board on June 24, 2015. -City Council consideration of proposed zoning map amendment from UR-6 to UR-2 granted June 3, 2003. - Planning Board advisory opinion to the City Council of proposed map amendment, favorable April 30, 2003. SEQRA: Action appears to be unlisted. Applicant has submitted a short EAF, which was reviewed by the Board. No large or Important areas of concern were noted. The Board reviewed Part II of the SEQRA Short form. No large or important areas or concern were noted. Keith Kaplan made a motion for a SEQRA Negative Declaration. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 4-0 PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:27 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 6 of 8  #2841 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF KENDRA HOMBURGER 3 EAST BROADWAY SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 From the Building Inspector’s determination for the same premises, identified as tax parcel number 178.52-3-4.1 outside district of the City of Saratoga Springs, NY. Whereas, the appellant having applied for an area variance for relief from the current City Zoning Ordinance from minimum mean lot width and minimum lot size requirements for a 2 lot subdivision in an Urban Residential – 2 zoning district; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on June 8, June 22, and July 13, 2015. Whereas, in consideration of the balance between the 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 amount of relief or lesser dimensions, be approved: Required: Proposed: Total relief requested: Minimum lot size – lot 1B: 6,600 sq. ft. 6,400 sq. ft. 200 sq. ft. (3%) Minimum mean lot width – lot 1B: 60 ft. 58 ft. 2 ft. (3%) 1.) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The application states, “Attempting to purchase land from any of the adjoining lots would result in creating a non-conforming lot.” 2.) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The neighborhood is characterized by single family properties with similar lot widths. 3.) The relief requested is not substantial. The application states, “The variance is not substantial and would create a lot that fits in the neighborhood…” The Board finds the requested variances to be de minimal in nature. 4.) The applicant has demonstrated this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The applicant is not proposing to exceed building coverage nor permeability requirements. 5.) The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, is not necessarily fatal to the application. Notes: Planning Board issued favorable advisory opinion letter dated June 30, 2015 Planning Board subdivision approval required. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 7 of 8 VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor MOTION PASSES 4-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman made a motion to approve the June 22, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting minutes as submitted with additions or corrections as noted. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 4-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 9/14/15 City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 13, 2015 - Page 8 of 8