Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES (FINAL) MONDAY, MARCH 5, 2018 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; Adam McNeill, Secretary; Susan Steer, Cheryl Grey, James Helicke, Brad Gallagher ABSENT: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman 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: #2932 DEVALL CARRIAGE HOUSE, 59 Franklin Street, area variance for construction of a three-car carriage house with a second story dwelling unit; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback (Cherry St.) and minimum side yard setback. #2953 STATION PARK MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, Washington Street and Station Lane, area variance for a proposed multi-use development containing a 110 room hotel, 88 senior housing units, 41 assisted living units, 90 townhouses, and 28,060 square feet of retail; seeking relief from the frontage build to and build out, minimum two story and maximum building height requirements in the Transect-5 District. #3001 ZIMMERMAN SUBDIVISION, 139 Grand Avenue, area variance with a two-lot residential subdivision; seeking relief from the minimum average lot width and minimum lot size (lot 1) and minimum lot area (lot 2) and minimum side yard setback or existing residence on proposed lot1 in the Urban Residential-3 District. #2817.1 ADELPHI HOTEL EXPANSION, 19-23 Washington Street, deferral of Lead Agency status to the Planning Board associated with construction of a hotel and spa; seeking relief from the frontage build-to and build-out requirements in the Transect-6 District. #2991 CARUSO GARAGE, 565 Grand Avenue, area variance to maintain an existing residential garage; seeking relief from the minimum side yard setback requirement in the Rural Residential District. #2989 PEPPERS CORNER MARKET, 173 Lake Avenue, area variance to demolish the existing structure and construct a new 1,960 sq. ft. market for two retail tenants and two wall signs; seeking relief from the minimum parking requirement and to permit two wall signs in the Urban Residential-3 District. #2931 LAKE LOCAL, 550 Union Avenue, consideration for Coordinated SEQRA Review for expansion and  construction of eating and drinking establishment, marina and docks and tourist accommodations in the Water Related Business and Rural Residential Districts. #2992 NORTHBURG CAMPGROUND, 62 Muldowney Road, initiation of Coordinated SEQRA Review associated with a use variance for a campground; seeking relief from the permitted uses in a Rural Residential District. #3017 ADIRONDACK TRUST SIGNAGE, 473 Broadway, area variance for two wall signs, seeking relief from the minimum height for logo and lettering and placement above the first floor level of the building requirements in the Transect-6 District. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #3021 DORSEY MIXED USE ADDITION, 15 Ballston Avenue, area variance to construct additions to an existing mixed-use (service and residential) building; seeking relief from the minimum frontage build out requirements in the Transect-5 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be an Unlisted Action. Planning Board special use permit and site plan review required. DRC architectural review is required. PARCEL HISTORY: -Use Variance to permit a two-story building with two-car attached garage with two residential units and a beauty parlor granted October 21, 2987. -DRC approval for freestanding sign. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum frontage build-out: 70% 25.9% 44.1% (63%) NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -Planning Board special use permit and site plan review is required. -DRC Architectural Review is required. DISCLOSURES: Cherie Grey stated she saw Mr. Dorsey while visiting the property site. There was no discussion concerning this application. Bill Moore, Chairman stated he has known Mr. Dorsey for many years this will in no way effect my vote on this application. Applicant: Jim Dorsey Agent: Bob Flansburg, Dreamscapes Unlimited City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 2 of 18 Mr. Flansburg provided a visual presentation of the proposed plan. There is an existing building on the site in the middle of the property and it is a two story colonial type structure currently housing three units. One commercial space on the first floor facing Ballston Avenue, and there is a 3 bedroom unit and a 2 bedroom unit. This site has unusual geometry. Parking is to the left and the mission is to maintain the building, so there will be no demolition. The applicant is looking to make better use of the property. We would like to add an additional 1200 square feet of commercial space, bringing the building to the front of Ballston Avenue. This is a T-5 zone and make use of the existing driveway and parking area. It can be expanded as needed for additional parking. We are proposing to add 2 residential units with garage parking on the north side. Two residential units and a first floor commercial space on the south addition facing Ballston Avenue. Over the last year we have explored other alternatives how to make use of the site while still encompassing the existing building. Attaching the structures was an option. There is currently an existing handicap ramp and parking lot at the juncture of the new southern addition and the existing building. Trying to make the best use of the property while architecturally adding the additions to make it look like one structure. This will give the property a more contemporary look. A new roof is proposed. We met with City Staff, Bradley Birge, Planning and Susan Barden and they would like us to have a presence and entrance off the sidewalk on Ballston Avenue. Currently all entrances to the building are from the side. We have updated the existing building and placed the additions on either side. We currently are before the Board requesting a variance for frontage build out. Adam McNeill, Secretary questioned any alternatives to the plan. Mr. Dorsey stated the granting of the variance will allow for the property to move closer to the desired T-5 frontage build- out than what currently exists. The placement of these additions will result in greater compliance with the T-5 requirements. Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion in the matter of the Dorsey Mixed Use Addition, 15 Ballston Avenue that the ZBA defers lead agency status to the Planning Board for SEQRA should they choose to seek it. Adam McNeill, Secretary seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:13 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. CORRESPODENCE RECEIVED BY THE BOARD: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated the following correspondence was received this date: -email received from DeWitt Jenks, 11 Ballston Avenue, Saratoga Springs, NY. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. A resolution will be prepared and presented at the next ZBA Meeting scheduled for March 19, 2018. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 3 of 18 2. #3019 CHRISTIANO RESIDENCE, 4 Benton Drive area variance to construct additions to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front and side yard setbacks and maximum principal building coverage requirements 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 PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback: 30 ft. 19 ft. 11 ft. (37%) Minimum side yard setback: 12 ft. 7.33 ft. 4.67 ft. (39%) Maximum principal building coverage 20% 21.92% 1.92% (10%) Applicant: Bill Christiano Agent: Alex Schmidt for Mike Perry Architect Mr. Christiano stated what they are proposing is a 12 foot addition onto the back of the garage. It will be in line with the current wall of the garage, so it will be not be any closer to the property line. It will be approximately 12 feet out and 13 feet wide. What we are proposing with the existing sunroom is to maintain that current footprint and turn that into a more formal living room area. We are also proposing a front entranceway which will be 5 feet out and 6 feet wide. This will encroach an additional 4 feet into the setback but will improve the front of the existing home. This is similar to other homes in the area. We are increasing the lot coverage by 1.95%. Cherie Grey questioned what the building coverage will be following the proposed construction. Mr. Schmidt stated 20%. Discussion ensued concerning the proposed variances. DISCLOSURE: James Helicke stated he is friends with the former owners of this property. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:21 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 ZBA meeting scheduled for March 19, 2018. 3. #3020 JPSMCS, LLC RESIDENCE, 155 Union Avenue, area variance to construct a new single-family residence seeking relief from the minimum side yard (each) and minimum total side yard setback for the main house and minimum side yard, minimum total side yard and minimum rear yard setback requirements for the carriage house in the Urban Residential-1 District. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 4 of 18 SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: -Area variance to accommodate a lot line adjustment between two lots; relief granted from the minimum mean lot width requirement for each of the two lots and from the minimum total side yard setback for each of the two lots and from the minimum total side yard setback for each of the two existing principal structures on proposed lot 1 on March 19, 2012. -Interpretation appeal and area variance to site future development on proposed lot 2; relief requested from the minimum front yard and total side yard setback; interpretation appeal denied April 16, 2012. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum principal building coverage: combined 25% 31.35% 6.35 ft. (25%) Minimum side yard setback: front house 20 ft. 8.5 ft. 11.5 ft. (57%) Minimum side yard setback: front house 20 ft. 16.5ft 3.5 ft. (17%) Minimum total side yard setback: front house 45 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. (44%) Minimum side yard setback: rear house 20 ft. 5.5 ft. 14.5ft. (72%) Minimum rear yard setback: rear house 25 ft. 5.5 ft. 19.5 ft. (78%) Minimum average lot width: rear house 100 ft. 74 ft. 26 ft. (26%) Applicant: Scott Callendar, Scott MacIntyre, JPSMSC DISCLOSURE: Bill Moore, Chairman stated he knows Scott MacIntyre. He has no financial interest in this application. There is no need for recusal, simply disclosure. Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated if the Board would look at the application page 6 some of the zoning variances requested on the map, are different than the dimensions shown on the map of the lot layout or building layout. We would typically look at the lot layout. Those are the correct dimensions. Mr. Callendar stated the variances and relief which are being sought are not substantial because they are congruent to the character of the surroundings properties. This will allow the proposed house and garage to conform with the surrounding properties thereby creating a seamless streetscape. Brad Gallagher questioned the siting of the home on the site. The house is not centered on the property. It is off to the right. Mr. Callendar stated there is a jog to the property. The home can be shifted on the site somewhat. Brad Gallagher stated the homes on either side of this property seem to be more centered on the property. With regard to the garage carriage house in the rear. Was there any consideration moving that further into the property. Are there any considerations for further accessory structures. Mr. Callendar stated we placed it where we felt we could leave some room in the yard for entertaining. There are no current plans for the addition of a pool at this time. This home will be put up for sale, however, and the new owners may wish to have a pool. However they will need to appear before this Board for further relief. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 5 of 18 Cheryl Grey questioned if the applicant could provide the Board with neighborhood comparables. Discussion ensued concerning the variances and amount of relief requested. Adam McNeill, Secretary questioned the siting of the home on the property site. He is concerned regarding the eastern side yard setback. The neighbors submitted a letter expressing concern regarding the side yard setback. Perhaps it could be moved to the west a little. Mr. Callendar stated we can shift the proposed home over. Susan Steer stated perhaps the applicant can move the home to the west. James Helicke questioned the applicant to provide the Board with a floor plan. Also, if the requested information could be provided to staff as soon as possible would be helpful. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:48 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Jesse & Melissa Smith, 165 Union Avenue. We are concerned regarding the side yard setback. We are happy to have a nice home next to us. We purchased our home knowing the 20 ft setback requirements existed in this district. Happy to see the Board is concerned as well. Concerned with privacy and loss of light. Also, the value of our home as well. Bill Watkins owns the property on the west with his daughter. We purchased this property in 1998. These were 50 x 150 foot lots. He would like to accommodate Jesse and Melissa Smith. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. A resolution will be prepared and presented at the March 19, 2018 meeting. NOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman recused from the following application. Adam McNeill, Secretary assumed the duties of the chair. 4. #2957 MANEY MULTI-FAMILY, 18 Cherry Street and 38 Marvin Alley, area variance for construction of eight residential units in three townhouse buildings and associated site work; seeking relief from the minimum average lot width, minimum front yard setback (Cherry and Marvin), minimum side yard setback, minimum total side yard setback, and maximum principal building coverage requirements; and minimum setbacks to parking in the Urban Residential-4 District. SEQRA: -Action appears to be Unlisted – Part 1 of the short form submitted -Required approvals from the Planning Board – site plan review. -ZBA initiated Coordinate SEQRA Review and deferred Lead Agency to the Planning Board on April 10, 2017. -Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on February 1, 2018. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 6 of 18 AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback Townhouse 1 (Cherry) 25 ft. 2 ft. 23 ft (92%) Minimum side yard Townhouse 1 20 ft. 11.42 ft. 8.58 ft. (43%) Minimum total side yard setback: Townhouse 1 45 ft. 41.42 ft. Minimum front yard setback: Townhouse 2 (Marvin) 25 ft. 8 ft. 17 ft. (68%) Minimum front yard setback Townhouse 3 (Marvin) 25 ft. 8.33 ft. 16.67 ft. (67%) Minimum side yard setback: Townhouse 2 20 ft. 11.67 ft. 8.33 ft. (42%) Minimum side yard setback: Townhouse 3 20 ft. 8.33 ft. 11.67ft. (58%) Maximum principal building coverage: combined 25% 29% 4% (16%) Minimum side yard setback to parking: Three spaces 20 ft. 2 ft. 18 ft. (90%) Minimum average lot width: Townhouse 2 100 ft. 72.27 ft. 27.73 ft. (28%) Minimum average lot width: Townhouse 3 100 ft. 74.57 ft. 25.43ft. (25%) Applicant: Anthony Maney Agent: Jon Lapper, Attorney; Jeff Anthony, Project Landscape Architect Mr. Lapper stated the applicant has spent 11 months before the Planning Board, Design Review Commission and the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation. This project has dramatically changed from when it was first presented. We would like to present the project to you noting that the front yard setback requests are similar to the existing structures at 16 Cherry Street and at the corner of Cherry Street and Marvin Alley. Mr. Lapper provided a visual presentation of the original proposed plan, versus what is now proposed. The project has changed since it was last seen by the Board for SEQRA classification and coordination. Significantly, the number of units has been reduced from 14 to 8, the maximum density for the combined lots is 9. The building heights have also been reduced in height from four and five stories to three story and in mass from two buildings to three. The eight townhouses in three buildings are three stories tall with rooftop lofts and garden terraces and will be in character with the adjacent structures. The proposed townhouses are similar in size, height, and bulk with the recently approved City Square development across Cherry Street from the project site. The applicant provided a cherry picker on the site for a simulation of the height of the project. The Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation and the DRC were in agreement that the project would not be out of character for the neighborhood. A favorable advisory opinion was issued by the DRC to the Planning Board with regard to potential impacts on the Franklin Square Historic District. Mr. Anthony provided a review of the architecture of the project. A visual presentation was provided to the Board. We will be rebuilding the sewer line which goes through the project right now. Water to the site will come from Cherry Street. Stormwater management will be managed on the site with state of the art green practices. The streetscapes on Cherry Street and Marvin Alley will be reconstructed with new curbs, sidewalks, street trees and lighting. Susan Steer complimented the applicant on the revised project. She offered her appreciation for the applicant working with the City and the various boards on this project. The application has changed but every variance has been explained regarding the need for relief. A question is the setback requirement for the parking space. Mr. Lapper stated a part of the request for relief is the configuration of the frontage. This was done to obtain spaces parallel and adjacent to the building. Mr. Anthony spoke regarding the absence of a planting plan which has not been completed at this time, noting the fencing proposed similar to that of Congress Park. Susan Steer also questioned the additional traffic on Marvin Alley. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 7 of 18 Mr. Lapper spoke regarding the traffic on the alley and the parking on the alley. Discussion ensued among the Board concerning the traffic and the proposed fencing for the project. PUBLIC HEARING: Adam McNeill, Secretary, Acting Chair opened the public hearing at 8:23 P.M. Adam McNeill, Secretary, Acting Chair asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Adam McNeill, Secretary, Acting Chair stated the public hearing will remain open. A resolution will be prepared and presented at the next ZBA Meeting scheduled for March 19, 2018. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: -Planning Board site plan review is required. -Saratoga County referral required – response “No Significant Countywide or Intercommunity Impact” issued on September 21, 2017. NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT: -Letter submitted from Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation dated January 17, 2018, October 31, 2017; December 6, September 26, July 20 and April 10, 2017. Bill Moore, Chairman, resumed his position of Chairman on the Board. Adam McNeill, Acting Chair, resumed his position of Secretary on the Board. OLD BUSINESS: DISCLOSURES: Bill Moore, Chairman stated he did view the previous ZBA meeting on the webcast. He is familiar with all the applications and feels confident to vote this evening. Susan Steer stated she did view the previous ZBA meeting on the webcast. She is familiar with all the applications and feels confident to vote this evening. Brad Gallagher stated he did view the previous ZBA meeting on the webcast. He is familiar with all the applications and feels confident to vote this evening. 5. #3018 CONGRESS PLAZA SIGN, 68 Congress Street, area variance to construct a new freestanding sign; seeking relief from the maximum size requirement in the Transect-6 District. This application was heard at the February 12, 2018 meeting and adjourned to March 5, 2018. The public hearing was opened and remains open. The Board asked for examples of a smaller sign and a photo simulation of the sign. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 8 of 18 PARCEL HISTORY: -Area variance for Embassy Suites including relief for a second freestanding sign where only one is permitted per parcel. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum size freestanding sign: 12 sq. ft. 50 sq. ft. 38 sq. ft. (317%) Agent: Tom Wheeler, AJ Sign Company Mr. Wheeler stated the requested photographic information was provided to the Board, providing size differentiation of the sign. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: -DRC Architectural Review required. NEIGHBOR INPUT: -Email from Ken Heaning, the UPS Store, dated February 12. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing has been 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 8:28 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman presented the following resolution. #3018 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF DCG Development 68 Congress Street SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 68 Congress Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, NY, being tax parcel number 165.-7-1.11 on the Assessment Map of said City. The Applicant having applied for an area variance to construct a new freestanding sign and seeking relief as described below in the Transect-6 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on the 12 th day of February and the 5th day of March 2018. 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 REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum size freestanding sign: 12 sq. ft. 50 sq. ft. 38 sq. ft. (317%) City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 9 of 18 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 did provide visuals of a smaller sign, but concluded that, “Tenant spaces too small…motorists will have to take focus off the road for too long to read”. The applicant is proposing a monument-style sign as opposed to the existing pole sign. Reducing the height of the sign to a pedestrian-scale sign is an improvement to what exists. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to the nearby properties. The proposed sign is the same size as the existing sign and is necessary to provide for the 13 tenants within the plaza. The Design Review Commission will consider appropriate lighting of the sign and landscaping around the sign. 3. The request for relief from the maximum size of the sign is substantial, but only one freestanding sign is permitted per parcel and the sign needs to identify 13 tenants within the plaza. As the application states, “The variance is not substantial, we are requesting additional square footage to be able to have enough space for all of the tenants to be listed”. It is noted that the Embassy Suites was permitted a second freestanding sign. 4. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The proposed sign will be replacing a similarly sized sign in the same location as what exists. The proposed sign will be lowered and pedestrian-scaled. 5. The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship due to the applicant’s desire to construct a new freestanding sign, but this not necessarily fatal to the application. Note: DRC Architectural Review required Cherie Grey seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 6. #3014 BEYER RESIDENCE, 201 West Circular Street, area variance to construct a detached garage and pool; seeking relief from the maximum accessory building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-2 District. This application was heard at the February 12, 2018 meeting and adjourned to March 5, 2018. The public hearing was opened and remains open. No additional information was requested. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 10 of 18 SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: -Two lot residential subdivision approved. -Area variance associated with a two-lot subdivision, relief from the minimum lot size requirement for one of the lots, granted May 9, 2016. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum accessory building coverage: 10% 14.5% 4.5% (45%) Minimum side yard setback to pool: 8 ft. 3 ft. 5 ft. (62%) Agent: Corrina Martino, Martino Engineering Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated the applicant has provided revised plans due to some reconfiguration of the pool. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there were any further questions or comments from the Board. Cherie Grey stated she is not comfortable with the 3 feet from the lot line to the pool. I think it is too close. I would have like to have seen the pool be reduced in size somewhat. Susan Steer spoke regarding the applicants initial request for subdivision of the property and the fact that he wanted the lots to be conforming and that he wouldn’t be requesting any further variances. That was part of the rationale in subdividing. Now, he wants the variance for the pool, which I agree with Cherie I think 3 feet to the side of the property is too close. I know that the house is set at the other end and that does help the situation. Nevertheless you have not made the case as to why the house could not have been moved over. Ms. Martino stated she was not involved with the initial application. The pool was an afterthought on the part of the applicant. The home is situated where it needs to be since it is a prefabricated home. We did look at other alternatives with the garage. Reducing the size of the garage is really not an option since the applicant drives a full size truck. The pool was placed in the best place possible for the configuration of the lot and use of the pool. A fence will be installed on the property line with or without a pool. The pool is this size to assure safety in diving. The applicant has small grandchildren and it is a safety concern. Ms. Martino noted the similarity of other parcels in the area. This is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Bill Moore, Chairman stated he also feels 3 ft to the property line is too close. The garage variances are fine. James Helicke stated he will not be supporting this application. He is fine with the garage but not the pool. Susan Steer stated she is also fine with the garage but not the placement of the pool 3 feet from the property line. Discussion ensued among the Board concerning the location of the pool. It was the consensus of the applicant and the Board to table the application and go back and submit a revised application after discussion with 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. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 11 of 18 None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open until the applicant returns before the Board. 7. #3013 FLAHERTY RESIDENCE, 100 Fifth Avenue, area variance to construct a new single-family residence; Seeking relief from the minimum rear yard setback and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-1 District. This application was heard at the February 5, 2018 meeting and adjourned to February 12, 2018. The public hearing was opened and remains open. Additional information was submitted as requested by the Board. This application was heard at the February 12, 2018 meeting and adjourned to March 5, 2018. Additional information was provided by the applicant that reduced the principal building coverage. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. Agent: Mike Toohey, Attorney; Michael Tuck, Balzer Tuck Architecture SEQRA: -Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum principal building coverage 20% 30.5% 10.5% (52%) Minimum rear yard setback 30 ft. 24.5 ft. 5.5 ft. (18%) Applicant: Mary Flaherty Mr. Toohey stated the Board was kind enough to allow additional proof and modification to the plan. The house is 4% smaller than originally proposed. A visual chart was provided taking some 24 houses on the south side of 5th Avenue. Mr. Toohey spoke regarding neighborhood comparables and noted that the proposed home the Flaherty’s are proposing is right in the middle of this group of comparables both in total coverage and the size of the home. The variances are not substantial in that they are either based on the historic size of the lot or are consistent with a substantial portion of the neighborhood and the neighboring home and parcel immediately to the east. The original design of the home has been reduced to be consistent with the lot coverage of other properties in the neighborhood. The revised plan shows the area has been reduced 145 square feet or 1.29%. The former principal building coverage of 31.83% or 3,580 square feet has been reduced to 30.54% or 3,435 square feet. The rear yard setback will have no effect on the New York State Racing property to the south. The proposed home has a smaller percentage of lot coverage and total lot coverage than the lot and home immediately to the east of the parcel. The site to remain permeable would be 40.88% which exceeds the minimum 30% in the district. Discussion ensued among the Board concerning the relief requested and conditioning of the resolution. 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. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 12 of 18 Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:04 P.M. Brad Gallagher presented the following resolution. #3013 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Mary Beth Flaherty 9 Saddlebrook Drive SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 100 Fifth Avenue in the City of Saratoga Springs, NY, being tax parcel number 166.14-1-24 on the Assessment Map of said City. The Applicant having applied for an area variance to construct a new single-family residence as described below in the Urban Residential – 1 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on the 5 th and 12th days of February and the 5th day of March 2018. In consideration of the balance between the benefit to the Applicants with detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, the Board moves that the following variance for the following amount of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED REQUIREMENT Maximum principal building 10.5% coverage, 52% coverage: 20% 30.5% relief Minimum rear yard setback: 30 feet 24.5 feet 5.5 feet (18%) 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. As the application states, “The original design of the home has been reduced to be consistent with the lot coverage of other properties in the neighborhood”. The Board notes that the design was further reduced 145 sq. ft. to lessen the variance requested from the principal building coverage. The chosen design of the home includes generous overhangs that account for 700 sq. ft. and contribute 6.22% to the principal building coverage. Without the overhangs, the principal building coverage would be 24.28% and under the maximum total lot coverage. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to the nearby properties. The applicant provided an assessment of the principal building coverage’s and total lot coverage’s for 24 properties on the south side of Fifth Avenue. Of these 24 properties, many have higher principal building coverage’s than the subject property. The Board notes that the front and rear setbacks align with neighboring properties and are consistent with neighborhood character and existing pattern of development. 3. The request for relief for principal building coverage is considered substantial at 30.5% (52% relief). This is somewhat mitigated by the desired home design incorporating substantial overhangs that account for 6.22% of the requested coverage. The Board notes that the resulting total lot coverage of 33.2% is only 5.2% over the maximum total (principal 20% and accessory 8%) of 28%. The Board in condition below shall restrict the property to no future accessory structures. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 13 of 18  The Board further notes that the lot is preexisting nonconforming to the minimum lot requirements – the existing lot is 11,249 sq. ft. while the minimum district requirement is 12,500 sq. ft., which lessens the coverage area. 4. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. As the application indicates, the site to remain permeable would be 40.88% which exceeds the minimum of 30% in the district. The Board notes that the extension of the sidewalk at this location is a positive improvement and desirable amenity in the neighborhood. 5. The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship due to the applicant’s desire to construct this house. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Conditions: No future accessory structures. Construction of sidewalk along the frontage of Fifth Avenue as depicted in the conceptual landscape plan. Proposed height of structure as depicted on elevation drawings and not to exceed a maximum 30 feet from finished grade. Cherie Grey seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there is any further discussion. Discussion ensued among the Board concerning conditioning of resolutions. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 8. #3007 BOLDER VENTURES SUBDIVISION, 116 High Rock Avenue, area variance for a proposed two lot subdivision; seeking relief from the minimum average lot width requirement for each of the lots and minimum front yard, side yard and total side yard setbacks and maximum principal building coverage requirements for each of the residences in the Urban Residential-5 District. This application was heard at the January 22, 2018 meeting and adjourned to a future meeting. The public hearing was opened and remains open. SEQRA: -Action was classified as Unlisted. A full EAF was submitted. -Planning Board is the only involved agency. -The ZBA initiated Coordinated SEQRA Review and deferred Lead Agency status to the Planning Board on January 22, 2018. -The Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on February 15, 2018. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 14 of 18 AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum average lot width: Lot 1 100 ft. 47.97 ft. 50.53 ft (50%) Minimum front yard setback: Lot 1 25 ft. 4.7 ft. 20.3 ft (81%) Minimum side yard setback: Lot 1 20 ft. 0 ft. 20 ft. (100%) Minimum total side yard setback: Lot 1 45 ft. 20.9 ft. 24.1 ft. (54%) Maximum principal building coverage: Lot 1 25% 29.6% 4.6% (18%) Minimum average lot width: Lot 2 100 ft. 50.63 ft. 49.37 ft. (49%) Minimum front yard setback: Lot 2 25 ft. 4.9 ft. 20.1 ft. (80%) Minimum side yard setback: Lot 2 20 ft. 0 ft. 20 ft. (100%) Minimum total side yard setback: Lot 2 45 ft. 23.9ft. 21.1 ft. (47%) Maximum principal building coverage: Lot 2 25% 27.1% 2.1% (8%) Applicant: MaryLou Pickney, Owner Agent: Tonya Yasenchak, Engineering America; Dave Gadomski, DSG Remodeling & Construction, LLC Ms. Yasenchak stated at our last appearance before the Board you referred us to the Planning Board for an Advisory Opinion. The Planning Board has also been designated as Lead Agency for SEQRA. That was accomplished at the last Planning Board Meeting. We did receive a SEQRA Negative Declaration on February 15, 2018. The Planning Board determined there are no significant environmental impacts. There was significant discussion with the Board regarding the subdivision. They did issue a Negative Advisory Opinion. Ms. Yasenchak provided some history of the property. It was constructed in 1898 so by the fact of its age its historic. It is not located in a Design Review District; it is not located in a historic design review district. It is also not on a registry. The Board had some issues with this being historic in that possibly of it was subdivided it would change the historic character of the house. This property is located in a UR- 5 Zoning District. It is a bit of an anomaly, as to what is located in that neighborhood. There is a home almost exactly the same as this right next door. Across the street, there are apartments. Around the corner, although in a different zone there are town homes which were built. Now what we are asking for regarding the width variances is a 50 ft width and a 47 ft width. Properties in this area are all 50 feet. The town homes around the corner are on 27 foot width sites. The majority of the homes in this area are multi-family except for one or two single family residences. When we appeared before the Board for a simple subdivision of a home which was built that way in 1898, the structure shows us that was originally a two family and is an exact mirror image. We feel there is no significant change to the neighborhood in what we are proposing. All we are doing is subdividing so there can be two separate owners. Different options were entertained and the easiest thing is to subdivide the property making the lot line right down the middle. Ms. Yasenchak read information from the zoning code that answers the question the Planning Board had regarding future demolition and two homes both on non conforming lots. Discussion ensued concerning the reasoning for the Planning Boards Negative Advisory Opinion concerning subdividing this property. They do not wish to create two substandard lots. It was the consensus of the Board to reach out to the attorney for the Land Use Boards for clarification and possible conditioning of the resolution. 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. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 15 of 18 Bill Moore, Chairman stated it was the consensus of the Board and the applicant to table the application for two weeks awaiting information from the Land Use Board attorney NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -Per 9.4.6 City Planning Board Advisory Opinion Required – Unfavorable advisory opinion issued February 15. -Planning Board subdivision review and approval required. 9. #3006 BOUCHER SUBDIVISION, 2 Glenmore Avenue, area variance for a proposed six-lot residential subdivision; seeking relief from the minimum lot size requirement for two of the lots in the Urban Residential-2 District. This application was heard at the December 18, 2017 meeting and adjourned to a future meeting. The public hearing was opened and remains open. Additional information dated December 18, 2017 was provided by the applicant. Additional information dated February 22, 2018 provided by the applicant. No additional information was provided. SEQRA: -Action was classified an Unlisted. A full EAF was submitted. -Planning Board is the only other involved agency. -The ZBA initiated Coordinated SEQRA Review and deferred Lead Agency Status to the Planning Board on December 18, 2017. -Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA declaration on February 15, 2018. Applicant: Jessie Boucher 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 9:45 P.M. Susan Steer presented the following resolution. #3006 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Jesse Boucher/2 Glenmore Avenue LLC 2 Glenmore Avenue Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 2 Glenmore Avenue in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.18-3-1 on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant has applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City to provide for a six-lot subdivision of a parcel in an Urban Residential – 2 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 18th day of December 2017 and the 5th day of March 2018. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 16 of 18 In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicants with detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, I move that the following area variances for the following amounts of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum Lot size, Lot 4 6600 sq ft. 6,243 sq.ft. 357 sq. ft. or 5.4% Minimum Lot size, Lot 5 6600 sq. ft. 6,243 sq. ft. 357 sq. ft. or 5.4% 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. As the application states, “There is no additional land to purchase along the three roads and the neighbor due east of the parcel is using his land, unable to sell additional land for the expansion of the parcel”. While the applicant could subdivide the parcel into five conforming lots, the requested relief is not substantial. 2. The applicants have demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. As the application states, “The neighborhood is currently serving all single-family residences, so the proposed use and layout of the six houses is consistent with the neighborhood plan, completing the plan as it extends from West Avenue to Glenmore Avenue”. The applicant provided supplemental information that shows the surrounding neighborhood context and identified many lots to the west are comparable in size to the lots proposed; therefore, the Board finds the lots are consistent with nearby properties and neighborhood context. 3. The Board finds that the two lot size variances are not substantial on a percentage basis at 5.4% each. As the applicant states application states “The overall site has 38,886 sf out of a required 39,600 sf for 6-lots, providing 98.2% of the required land for the proposed project”. 4. These variances will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. As the application states, “The impact of the new residences is further reduced by the split between three street fronts, two residences facing Grand Avenue, two residences facing Glenmore Avenue, and two residences facing West Circular Street”. The supplemental narrative also indicates that stormwater management, landscaping plan, curbing and sidewalks are all to be considered by the Planning Board during subdivision review. The Board notes favorable Planning Board advisory opinion issued February 15, 2018. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicants desire to subdivide the parcel into six parcels instead of five, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Note: Planning Board Subdivision Approval required. Adam McNeill, Secretary seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 17 of 18 VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: James Helicke made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 8, 2018 and January 22, 2018 ZBA Meeting minutes as amended. Adam McNeill, Secretary seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 9:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 4-23-18 City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – March 5, 2018 - Page 18 of 18