Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES (FINAL) MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2015 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:02 P. M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman; Adam McNeill, Secretary; Gary Hasbrouck; James Helicke; Susan Steer ABSENT: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; Skip Carlson 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: #2852 STARLING RESIDENTIAL EXPANSION, 134 Crescent Street, area variance to construct second-story Expansions to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback requirement 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. #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. #2865 BOUGHTON GARAGE, 1 Alger Street, area variance to construct an attached garage with second-story master suite addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback (Alger), minimum total side yard setback and maximum principal building coverage requirement in the Urban Residential-3 District. Adjourned 12/14/15. #2856 MOORE HALL, 28 Union Avenue/35 White Street, area variance to convert the existing building to a 53 unit Apartment building; seeking relief from the minimum lot size and minimum parking requirement in the Urban Residential-4 District. Adjourned to 12/14/15. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2368 STEWART’S SHOPS ADDITION,87 West Avenue, area variance to construct a 789 sq. ft. addition to the existing store, seeking relief from the build to line, frontage build out and two story requirements in the Transect-5 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: -ZBA approval for freezer addition (61 sq. ft.) to an existing convenience store; relief from the build-to-line, Minimum frontage build out and minimum two story requirements approved July 27, 2015. -ZBA approval for new construction in 1994. -DRC architectural review approval in 1994. -ZBA approval for a sign in 1991. -Planning Board site plan review approvals in 1982, 1985, 1994. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED One story One story addition Minimum two-story Two story 3335 sq. ft. 789 sq. ft. One-story addition of 789 sq. ft. (100%) Build-to-line: West Ave. 0-12’ 95’ 99’ to addition 87’ Frontage build out West Ave. 70% 0% 0% 70% (100%) NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -Saratoga County Planning Board referral required. -City Planning Board site plan review required. -DRC architectural review required. Agent: Chuck Marshall, Steve Kinley, Real Estate Representatives – Stewart’s Mr. Marshall stated in July 2015 the Zoning Board of Appeals approved a 61 sq. ft. freezer addition to the store. The applicants are now proposing a 789 sq. ft. one story addition. The property is currently developed with no adjacent property available to develop. This 789 sq. ft. rear addition would continue noncompliance of the site. The proposed addition will not have any adverse physical and environmental impacts as the parcel is currently developed. The façade will also undergo a renovation with Hardy Board siding. At this time the Cudney’s door will be moved to the west. This addition to the store will allow the moving of the core of the store away from the door. This is all about the interior flow of the store. Susan Steer questioned the applicant’s agent if the freezer addition requested in July was ever constructed. Mr. Marshall stated that the freezer addition was not completed. The Woodlawn Avenue store was recently retrofitted and redone and met with great success that they decided to implement those changes in this store. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 2 of 11 Susan Steer also questioned the neighbors concern which was brought to light in July as well concerning the store patrons parking in his lot. Mr. Marshall stated they have been in conversation with Mr. Casey and have exchanged some terms but no permanent arrangement has been made at this time. We have signage but we cannot control the public. We will extend the fencing in this area. James Helicke asked whether the applicant explored alternatives to bring the project into greater conformity with the build-to and build-out requirements. The agent for the applicant stated in his view the zoning requirements did not take into consideration the needs of a gas station. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:17 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. John Casey, owner of the West Hill Shopping plaza. I have no objection to what they are proposing to do. We are in conversation regarding several issues. Bill Moore, Chairman stated we will keep the public hearing open. We have asked for no additional information. We will prepare and present a resolution at the next Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on December 14, 2015. 2. #2869 KENISON GARAGE, 49 Piping Rock Circle, area variance to finish the interior of an existing garage; seeking relief to permit habitable space within a residential accessory structure 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: -To finish and complete the 2nd floor area over a detached garage for workshop area including ½ bath. -Relief to exceed the use of an “accessory structure (residential)” defined as “An unfinished and uninhabitable space in a detached structure”. Agent: Tonya Yasenchak, Engineering America Ms. Yasenchak stated the applicants constructed a three car garage for their vehicles in 2014. The Certificate of Occupany issued stated the garage is not to be used for habitable space without a zoning variance. They would like to finish the space with ½ bath for use as a hobby space. Whether the garage attic is finished or not, the space under the roof does exist. The workshop use does not increase density; it just allows the homeowners to make good practical use of the space. Attaching the existing garage to the house would limit the access to the back yard. Constructing a workshop in the basement of the home is not practical because the only access is through the house and the basement has limited headroom. The proposed use does not increase the residential density of the neighborhood, the garage exists and is residential in nature and appearance. The new space is intended for use by the homeowners only. There will be no objectionable noises or odors associated from the workshop. Only interior construction is proposed. Board members asked about how the workshop would be used. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 3 of 11 The agent for the applicant stated that it was primarily for the applicant’s hobby, which involved cars for shows, and the activity was not commercial in nature. There will be no objectionable noises or odors associated with the workshop. 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. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Bruce and Jami Kenison 49 Piping Rock Circle Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the same premises, identified as Tax Parcel Section 179.8-1-30, Outside 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 a UR-1 zoning district; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on December 7, 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): Interior Unfinished and Finished and habitable 100% of Garage uninhabitable space space 1) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The application states, “Attaching the garage to the existing house limits access to the rear yard.” Attaching the garage to the house would create a different variance for the principal structure. The application also states, “The existing house, built in 1968, has limited headroom in the basement which would restrict a functional workshop.” Another option of adding onto the house for a non-commercial workshop was “not practical from a spatial and economic perspective.” 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 garage is located over 100’ from any residence on adjacent lots. …..does not increase the residential density of the neighborhood. The new space is intended for the homeowners only. The property at 1.97 acres is almost double in size of other lots in the neighborhood.” City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 4 of 11  3) The relief requested may be considered substantial. 100% relief is substantial but will be somewhat mitigated by conditions placed on that variance. No addition to the garage is planned and no additional variances are required for the existing garage. 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 project. The application states, “There will be no noises or odors associated from a workshop. A new septic field will be installed according to NYS Codes to attenuate the effluent from the ½ bath. 5) The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, is not necessarily fatal to the application. Condition: Accessory building may not contain kitchen facilities, bathing facilities or overnight stays. Susan Steer seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; James Helicke, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 5-0 OLD BUSINESS: 3. #2866 D’ORAZIO ADDITION, 5 Foxhill Drive, area variance to construct a residential 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 November 23, 2015 meeting and adjourned to December 7, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. The applicant submitted a detailed site plan and a floor plan of the existing house. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. Applicant: Mr. Marino D’Orazio Mr. D’Orazio reiterated that they are requesting a first floor family room addition to the right of the home. The relief from the minimum side yard setback may be considered substantial at 67%. The proposed addition is 18’ x 20’. The applicant states that the house and addition would be well within 20% of square footage allowance for the property lot size. They need the family room on the first floor on the side of the house, no other location is possible. My neighbor does not have any windows on the side of his home where the addition will be placed. Mr. D’Orazio stated the applicants are requesting this addition to add more space to their home. Bill Moore, Chairman questioned the dimensions of the proposed family room and their accuracy. He requested a survey of the property. Mr. D’Orazio stated they have not had a re-survey of the property at this time. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 5 of 11 James Helicke questioned the landscape plan for the area. 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 7:48 P.M. James Helicke presented the following resolution. DRAFT MOTION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF MARINO AND MARY SUE D’ORAZIO 5 FOXHALL DRIVE SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 5 Foxhall Drive in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York, being tax parcel number 166.14-3-7.21 in the Inside Tax District, on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance for construction of a residential addition to an existing single-family residence, seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Urban Residential – 1 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on November 23 and December 7, 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: Required: Proposed: Total relief requested: Minimum side yard setback: 12 feet 4 feet 8 feet (67%) 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 feasible means. The applicant has stated that additional, first floor, living space is required. The location of the proposed family room is limited by the presence of a deck and swimming pool behind the home and pool equipment on the side. The applicant has stated that other locations for the proposed addition would not provide appropriate access to the new family room and a smaller addition would not provide the living space that is required. 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 proposed “addition will not change [the] basic configuration or curb appeal of home.” 3.) At 67 percent, the variance may be considered substantial; however, the application indicates that the house and addition meet other requirements for this zoning district and the proposed home with addition would remain “well within 20% of square footage allowance for property lot size.” 4.) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The home with addition will meet district permeability requirements. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 6 of 11 5.) The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, opposed; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; James Helicke, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 4-1 3. #2867 PEROXYCHEM SIGN, 24 Freedom Way, area variance to construct two freestanding signs; seeking Relief from the maximum one freestanding sign per parcel requirement in the Industrial-General District. This application was heard at the November 23, 2015, meeting and adjourned to December 7, 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. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -Saratoga County referral required. Bill Moore, Chairman stated no additional information was requested from the applicant. 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 7:53 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. Motion in the Appeal of PeroxyChem LLC 24 Freedom Way Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 24 Freedom Way in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York 12866, being tax parcel 177.1-62.1 in the outside tax district on the assessment map of said City. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 7 of 11  The appellant having applied for an area variance to construct two freestanding signs; seeking relief from the maximum one freestanding sign per parcel requirement in the Industrial-General District. Public notice having been duly given of a hearing on November 23, 2015 and December 7, 2015. In consideration of the balance between the benefit to the applicant and the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, I move that the following variance for the following amount of relief: Maximum Number of Required: Proposed: Total Relief Requested: One Freestanding Signs Per One Two Sign (100%) Parcel As per submitted plans or lesser dimensions, BE APPROVED for the following reasons: 1.) The applicant has demonstrated that the benefits cannot be achieved by other means feasible. The application indicates that a wall sign on the building would not be visible from the road stating “the view will be partially blocked by railcars on the side track.” 2.) The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties. The freestanding signs are slightly smaller in area at 19.5 square feet that the maximum permitted size of 24 square feet. The freestanding signs, at 5 feet are not as tall as the 12 feet permitted in the district. The signage is very similar to signage that currently exists in this Industrial-General District. 3.) The relief from the maximum number of signs could be considered substantial at 100%. The application states that the two freestanding signs would not look cluttered on the five acre lot. 4.) The relief requested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties. The additional sign is in keeping with ensuring traffic safety in limiting the chance of large delivery trucks missing the entrance and having to back up or turn around at the end of Duplainville Road possible leading to a dangerous situation. The internally backlit sign will help locate the applicant and will not be an adverse change to the neighborhood. 5.) The request for relief is considered self-created. The self-created difficulty is not necessarily fatal to the application. Susan Steer seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; James Helicke, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 5-0 4. #2582.3 DEMASI AND DUNN SINGLE FAMILY, 27 Garside Road, area variance to demolish existing structure And construct a new single-family residence, seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback, minimum total Side yard setback and maximum principal building require4ments in the Green Acres PUD. This application was heard at the November 23, 2015 meeting and adjourned to December 7, 2015. The public hearing was opened and remains open. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 8 of 11 SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: -Original approval was granted on November 22, 2010. -Area variance extension granted March 19, 2012. The application was not further extended and expired November 24, 2013. 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 7:57 P.M. Gary Hasbrouck presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF James DeMasi and Judy Dunn 27 Garside Road, Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 from the Building Inspector’s determination for the same premises, identified as Tax Parcel Section 180.17-1-28, Outside District of the City of Saratoga Springs, New York. WHEREAS, the appellant has applied for AREA VARIANCES for relief from the current City Zoning Ordinance for Minimum side yard setback, Minimum total side yard setback, and Maximum principal building coverage in the Green Acres PUD zoning district in order demolish an existing structure and construct a new single family residence; and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on November 23rd and December 7, 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: Proposed: Total relief requested: Maximum principal building coverage: 15% 15.5% .5% (3%) Minimum side yard setback: 10 ft. 4 ft. 6 ft. (60%) Minimum total side yard setback: 20 ft. 14 ft. 6 ft. (30%) 1) The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The application states, “Attempts at various designs failed due to the narrow and unusual lot dimensions.” It should be noted, the current application remains virtually unchanged from the previously approved variance granted on November 22, 2010 with the exception of an additional .5% maximum principal building coverage request for City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 9 of 11  relief. The applicant also switched the garage configuration. The application states, “The garage is now a front- load….” as described in Appendix E of the Green Acres PUD Area and Bulk Schedule Exceptions. 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, “Every effort has been made to assure that the profile & roof line will be attractive & keeping with the lake aesthetic.” The original approval states, “The new house will be in compliance on the front and rear and is located so that it will not produce an undesirable change for the adjoining neighbors”. 3) The relief requested for side yard setback and total side yard setback is substantial. However, the house to be constructed is in the widest area of the lot. The request for maximum principal building coverage is not 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. Sanitary Sewer to be provided by Saratoga County Sewer District as per letter dated November 9, 2010. 5) The difficulty may be considered self-created. This, however, 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; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; James Helicke, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 5-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion to approve the October 19, 2015 and October 26, 2015 meeting minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; James Helicke, in favor; MOTION PASSES: 5-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:06 P.M. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 10 of 11  Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 1/11/16 City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – December 7, 2015 - Page 11 of 11