Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES (FINAL) MONDAY, JULY 23, 2018 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; Adam McNeill, Secretary Susan Steer; Cheryl Grey; James Helicke; Brad Gallagher; Rebecca Kern, Alternate STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs Mark Schachner, Counsel to the Land Use Boards Tony Izzo, Assistant City Attorney; City of Saratoga Springs 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: #3044 DGD HOLDINGS, LLC RESIDENCE, Lot 7 Shaw Drive area variance to construct a new single family residence; seeking relief from the maximum principal building coverage in the Urban Residential-2 District. #3033 ADIRONDACK TRUST SIGNAGE, 315 Church Street, area variance for proposed signage; seeking relief from the maximum size for a freestanding sign, maximum number of wall signs, maximum height, size and logo placement on two directional signs, and to permit three logos on the kiosk in the Transect-5 District. #3039 BLACKLER RESIDENCE, 62 Van Dam, area variance to construct an addition to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard (each side), minimum total side yard setback and maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-3 District. #3040 BAIRD RESIDENCE, 79 Lake Avenue, area variance to construct an addition to an existing three-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum side yard (each side), minimum total side yard setback and maximum principal building coverage requirements for the addition; and minimum side (each side), minimum total side yard and minimum rear yard setback to parking in the Urban Residential-4 District. #3024 FAHY RESIDENCE, 166 Lincoln Avenue area variance to construct a new single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum average lot size width and minimum lot size requirement for a second single-family residence, to permit more than one principal building on a lot and minimum rear yard setback requirements in the Urban Residential-2 District. #3022 DEVALL SUBDIVISION, 59 Franklin Street, area variance associated with a two-lot subdivision; seeking relief from the minimum average lot width for the proposed lot and minimum side yard setback to parking in the Urban Residential-4 District. #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. OLD BUSINESS: 1. #3038 BONACIO CONDOMINIUMS, 77 Van Dam, modification of previously approved use and area variance for an existing mixed use (office and residential) building to all residential (25 total units) in the Urban Residential-3 District. This application was heard at the June 11 meeting and adjourned to a future meeting awaiting SEQRA determination. It’s been determined that site plan review is no longer required, with that the Planning Board is no longer an involved agency. The applicant has provided existing floor plans of the building, current rent roll and commercial rental history, parking usage counts and additional narrative. SEQRA: -Action appears to be a Type I action; the property is substantially contiguous to the West Side Historic District (across the street) – the property is a contributing property to that district. -The applicant submitted Part 1 of the Long EAF. -Coordinated review is required – the ZBA is the only involved agency. PARCEL HISTORY: -Former school district building. -Use Variance approved in 1976 for 6 apartments and 3 floors of office (12 offices). Relief granted from the parking requirement -29 spaces required for office and 12 parking spaces required for the residence totaling 41. -Use Variance approved 1981 -15 apartments and 2 floors of offices (8 offices). USE VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: -The request is a Use Variance Modification to convert the remaining 8 previously approved office spaces to apartments- total 23 residential units. -Request for 2 additional residential units-totaling 25 residential units. -All 25 proposed to be condominium units. -Maximum density for the 22,521 square foot property in UR-3 would be 3 residential units. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING/PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum parking requirement 25 residences 50 31 (29 +2 HC) 19 (38%) The application indicated the property across Lawrence Street is commonly owned and would be available for overflow situations. 91 Van Dam is a five-family residence requiring 10 parking spaces (12 total on-site). NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: -Saratoga County Planning Board referral required – response received. No significant County Wide or Inter Community Impact” with comments dated May 30, 2018. Applicant: Sonny Bonacio, Bonacio Construction & Tom Roohan, 519 Broadway LLC. Agent: Libby Coreno, Attorney; Kate Jarosh, Bonacio Construction Ms. Coreno stated at the last appearance before the Board there were several questions or comments. A visual of the site which is the old Saratoga Catholic Central High School Building was submitted. We also submitted a lot City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 2 of 18 configuration which indicates 77 Van Dam as well as 91 Van Dam, both currently under common ownership, and we expect it to remain that way. Aerial views were also provided noting a 1950s institutional city lot. Existing conditions were provided to the Board. Existing floor plans were reviewed with the Board noting there is no elevator in the building. These are all walk ups. Ms. Coreno stated it is the applicant’s position that we are only seeking to modify the previously granted use conditions of approval. Ms. Coreno reviewed the 4 part test for an Area Variance and modification. We are proposing the removal of the condition for 15 residential units only, allow for 10 additional units, and remove all commercial units. The supporting documentation proving the original hardship back to 1976 has been submitted. All those limitations that flow from these variances require modification of the variance. The Board at that time found it was not a good commercial project. The applicant has supplied the rental records of the property as well as the marketing of this property. The conversion of the interior of the property would be 12 one bedroom units and 13 two bedroom units would provide a 7% return and that is the financial portion. The pre-existing nonconforming commercial use will be removed. This is a higher conformance to neighborhood uses, which is residential now. The uniqueness of the property, long standing institutional building in the UR-3 District, and part of the city landscape, in a residential neighborhood. This building has been in existence in this neighborhood for decades and there is no change to the footprint. Not self created, the building was built prior to zoning. The parking variance dates back to 1976. The applicant is proposing a reduction in parking requirement due to the use. The relief is 9 and that would be 18%. Also the applicant supplied to the Board some usage data on how it is being used right now. On site there are 34 spaces, on street 7 spaces. From 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM the average usage is 11-14 spaces, which means there is about 64% additional capacity that is not being utilized at this time. That is 100% true for the on street spaces. There is enough capacity onsite. There is no other way to restripe this area which is why it has remained this way for decades. If the applicant keeps this at 25 for the one to two bedrooms it also reduces the vehicle demand. 1:1 is very common with a one bedroom condo unit. Even if this was not the case even with the condition of 34 spaces there are 9 additional spaces to be purchased by any tenant should they choose to have an additional space. That is 1/3 of the project that could have an overflow to an additional space. 7 spaces out in front for visitors or additional parking haven’t even been discussed. There are ample spaces available. 91 Van Dam across the street is available for overflow parking with 8 additional spaces. James Helicke stated he found the financial information submitted very persuasive. He also questioned commercial occupancy. Kate Jarosh, Bonacio Construction stated two units on the second floor and one unit on the first floor have been vacant for more than 6 months to a year. Sonny Bonacio stated we are not seeing a purchase of a commercial condominium in Saratoga as being a viable option. Susan Steer questioned the number of spaces available for overflow parking at 91 Van Dam. Information submitted shows 15 spaces with 10 required for the property and 5 spaces for overflow parking. The applicant is stating 8 units for overflow parking. Can the applicant provide documentation noting the spaces. Susan Barden, Senior Planner stated 91 Van Dam is a 5 family unit requiring 10 parking spaces, 15 spaces are available with a 5 space overflow. Ms. Coreno stated she physically counted the spaces and notes that there are two garage spaces available as well. This information was submitted. In any event we are unable to meet the 50 spaces required. The survey is incorrect and has been restriped since. Discussion ensued regarding the parking requirement and what is being proposed and how it is being mitigated. Cherie Grey questioned the going rate for commercial use in this area and are there any other incentives that could be offered to entice commercial clients. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 3 of 18 Mr. Bonacio provided information concerning the rental costs per square foot which is almost half of the rate in the other areas of the City due to the buildings configuration and limitations. Information was also provided regarding other mixed use buildings in the city and the struggle to fill the commercial spaces. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:37 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Sid Hellman, commercial tenant on the second floor of 77 Van Dam Street. I have been in this location since 2001 and occupy 3 office spaces. He does not want to move and prefers to stay in this location. He asked if he could expand his space and was denied. Parking has not been a problem. We prefer not have our businesses disrupted with a move if the variances are granted. NEIGHBOR INPUT: -Letter from Kevin and Diana O’Brien, 99 Lawrence Street, dated May 15, 2018. -Email from Ben McGuire, 97 Lawrence Street, received June 9, 2018. Bill Moore, Chairman, stated the public hearing will remain open. Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated one thing to consider is submission of a revised plan showing the 34 spaces, be provided. Relief is granted based on the survey and an updated survey should show the 34 spaces. Bill Moore, Chairman stated a resolution will be prepared and presented at the next ZBA Meeting scheduled for September 10, 2018. Also include in the plan the spaces reserved for overflow parking on 91 Van Dam. RECUSAL: Board Member Susan Steer recused from the following application. Board Member Cheryl Grey recused from the following application. Board Alternate Rebecca Kern assumed her position on the Board. 2. #2931 LAKE LOCAL, 550 Union Avenue, area variance for construction of eating and drinking establishment, marina and docks and tourist accommodations; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback for expanded board shop, minimum front yard setback for two inn buildings, maximum principal building coverage for the inn buildings combined, and minimum site to remain permeable in the Water Related Business and Rural Residential Districts. This application was heard at the June 25 meeting and adjourned to July 9. The public hearing was opened and remains open. Additional information was requested including elevation drawings and an updated site plan. Bill Moore, Chairman stated there has been some issues with the noticing of this application. The applicants will re- notice to the property recipients for the next ZBA meeting to be in compliance. SEQRA: -Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on June 7, 2018. -Planning Board accepted Lead Agency Status on December 14, 2017. -ZBA deferred Lead Agency Status proactively to the Planning Board on November 21, 2016. -Action appears to be a Type I action with involved agencies of ZBA, Planning Board, (special use and site plan) and DRC (architectural review). City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 4 of 18 PARCEL HISTORY: -Stipulation agreement between City and owners to address outstanding violations with timeframes for completion. -Notice of Violation issued by Zoning and Building Inspector on August 19, 2016. -Site of former Tropic Hut restaurant and a number of trailers. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback: WRB 40 ft. 8 ft. 32 ft. (80%) Expanded board shop Minimum front yard setback: 60 ft. 40.13 ft. 19.87 ft. (33%) RR Inn Building Minimum front yard setback : 60 ft. 40.94 ft. 19.06 ft. (32%) RR Inn Building Minimum front yard setback: RR Existing 60 ft. 8.06 ft. 51.94 ft. (87%) garage to be converted to Inn building Minimum side yard setback: RR Existing 30 ft. .73 ft. 29.27 ft. (98%) garage to be converted to Inn building Maximum principal building coverage: RR 15% 18.3% 3.3% (22%) Inn structures combined Minimum site to remain permeable: RR 80% 60.3% 19.7% (25%) Minimum side yard setback: RR to parking 30 ft. 1.44 ft 28.56 ft. (95%) Minimum side yard setback: WRB to parking 40 ft. 35.3 ft. 4.7 ft. (11.75%) Applicant: Mike Phinney, Principal Phinney Design Group & Partner of 550 LLC. John Haynes, partner 550 LLC. Agent: Matt Brobston, LA Group Mr. Phinney provided some background information and history of the Lake Local and the results of the fire on the property. Our application has been before the Board for over a year now and it is now more imperative to progress this project through the Boards financially. We have been working to clean up the site and are willing to work with the neighbors and address their concerns. Mr. Brobston, LA Group, reviewed information on what has been provided to the Board as well as provide the information that the Board requested. The Board requested we compare this project to a similar size restaurant. The one that is closest in size is the Longfellow’s Restaurant. They have approved plans for 360 seats in the restaurant with 44 employees and 110 parking spaces. This does not include the Longfellow’s Inn or parking for the Inn. The applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit for a 444 seat restaurant both on the interior and exterior, with 24 employees and 123 parking spaces. A 25 room Inn is proposed as well as a 10 room Bed and Breakfast. There is also on the site a Marina use and a Board Shop. Those are to be expanded slightly. Per the Board’s request a development schedule, as well as information on the architectural drawings and elevations were provided for all the buildings. Mr. Brobston provided the Board with a visual presentation and reviewed the existing survey, as well as the site, the sanitary pump station, all the variances requested as well as the stormwater management practices. A review of the site plan application was provided to the Board as well. The phasing schedule was reviewed as follows: The first phase will be the restaurant, bandstand and all the site amenities as well as the parking lot. We would like to have this completed and operational for the summer of 2019. The second phase is the 25 room Inn on the western portion of the site, which we hope to have operational in 2022. The final development will be the 10 room Bed and Breakfast located adjacent to the restaurant, which we hope to have operation in 2024. Mr. Phinney, Phinney Design Group. Mr. Phinney provided a 2 dimensional line drawing visual of the proposed project. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 5 of 18 and spoke regarding the architectural details, the topography of the site and the architectural design. Mr. Phinney also provided the Board with the types of materials that they are proposing as well as the project renderings. Mr. Phinney also spoke about what the applicant is proposing for sound mitigation. The floor plans were also reviewed with Board. Mr. Phinney reviewed the design of the Bed and Breakfast as well as the proposed cottages. Bill Moore, Chairman stated in referencing the survey the sewer pump station is included in your parcel. The County records indicated this was taken by imminent domain by the County for the access roads. This should be removed from your parcel. Mr. Brobston stated that did come to light today and our surveyor is adjusting his survey. This was his error. The 2800 square feet area will be removed. It should not affect any of the variances. Bill Moore, Chairman then questioned the tax map which does not show the applicant owning the strip of land for the ROW. This would require different variances. I would also like to see proof of ownership. Mr. Brobston stated he will reach out to the surveyor and provide this information to the Board. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman voiced his concern regarding Bill’s remarks. Archeological Review on the Rural Residential parcel indicates a Phase II study needs to be done. Mr. Brobston stated concerning the archeological review that area was identified as possibly needing a Phase II if it was to be disturbed. We have avoided that area of any disturbance and it will not be disturbed. This area has been reviewed by the State and have provided correspondence noting there is no additional review necessary if this area is to remain undisturbed. Mr. Phinney spoke concerning this area and have been in contact with SHPO as well. We are not disturbing this area. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman requested the plan which shows the archeological sensitive area. He also questioned moving the Inn to more of the WRBD and use the RR portion for parking. Mr. Brobston stated they are building into the hill with the Inn and this would not work for parking. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman made a suggestion for the Board to request an Advisory Opinion from the Planning Board. concerning the parking plan and the traffic. Mr. Brobston stated the applicant has received a Negative SEQRA Declaration by the Planning Board with the parking as proposed. Also correspondence has been received from Chazen Engineering that states the waiver being requested from the Planning Board is not a significant number. We have not been before the Planning Board for Site Plan or Special Use. The Board has also been provided with a traffic study which this Board has received as well. Mark Schachner, Counsel to the Land Use Board stated that the Planning Boards SEQRA Negative Declaration assuming the parking remains as it was when it was before the Planning Board for SEQRA review, means that the Planning Board has seen no adverse environmental impacts from the parking as proposed. You certainly have the right to seek the Advisory Opinion if you wish to do so. Brad Gallagher stated his biggest concern is the parking for this project. He is in favor of an Advisory Opinion from the Planning Board. James Helicke stated he did not attend the previous meeting concerning this project. He has reviewed the webcast and the materials and feels competent to vote on this application. Becky Kern, Alternate feels the ZBA should wait until the new requested materials regarding the tax maps are provided City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 6 of 18 to prevent the applicant from going to and from Boards, but she would like to have the Advisory Opinion from Planning. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if the Board is in favor of requesting an Advisory Opinion from the Planning Board. All ayes. Mark Schachner, Counsel to the Land Use Boards questioned if the Planning Board will be providing the ZBA with an Advisory Opinion on a parking variance request as finalized based on the new information. This is an excellent point. Mr. Brobston stated the applicant has spent numerous meetings with the Planning Board concerning parking, availability, location and spoke regarding their conclusions on the plan as presented. They have already addressed the parking issue. The Board has some questions concerning sound mitigation, and noise as well as additional buffering. Mr. Phinney provided information concerning what is being done to mitigate sound and noise along with vegetative buffers. They are open to suggestions for mitigation efforts. Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion in the matter of the Lake Local, 530 Union Avenue that the applicants re-notice the neighbors concerning this project prior to the September meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. James Helicke seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Rebecca Kerns, Alternate, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, opposed; Brad Gallagher, opposed; James Helicke, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, opposed. MOTION DENIED: 3-3 PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman was opened and remains open. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. MaryBeth Winn, stated she has sent many letters to the City. I am concerned about a massive project in a residential area. Excessive noise at the restaurant and lack of control of the level and hours of noise. Mary Skevington, 690 Crescent Avenue. We are concerned about safety on the water and the land and the density of the project. Noise is also an issue. Lack of information to the neighbors concerning this project. Should scale down the project. Annette Burns, HOA President, Interlaken. We have just been informed of this project. 125 single family homes and 250 residents comprise our group. We have been subjected to traffic with the traffic and regattas. Traffic is a concern as well as density issues. Visual issues as well. Eileen Venn, 5 Thames Way. My property looks out on the lake. The plans obstruct my view. I am concerned about safety and the size of the project. Stilsid Holman, 672 Crescent Avenue. Lake Local proposal is huge. Too much going on. It is not a responsible size for the site. Judy Stavo, Interlaken. Ditto to what everyone has said. Parking is an issue. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 7 of 18 Marjorie Sowa, Parking is the main subject. Patti Garrett, 537 Union Avenue. Ditto on everything. Traffic study was done in February, come back in July and August. Cars are speeding on the shoulder. This is very dangerous. Also, boat slips are at 130, Algonquin has 35 slips and the Sagamore has 63. In addition I would like to know the impact on the health of the lake. How will this impact the lake. George Santoni, 686 Crescent Avenue. I have lived here for 25 years. The last two years have been terrible, thanks to Lake Local. Noise issues, density issues, and traffic. Decrease the project it is too large. Jay Bernardo, neighbor to the east side across the lake. My only concern is the traffic and the boat traffic on the lake. Jim Miller, 674 Crescent Avenue. I have lived here for 30 years. Basically this project is going to change the character of the neighborhood and the lake. This project is too big. Craig Skevington, 690 Crescent Avenue. He reemphasized the safety concerns. 700 boats and launched close to the Local. Water channel is 575 feet wide at that point. Reduce the amount of parking. Safety issues. Susan Barden, Senior Planner stated the Board has received additional correspondence. -email from Karen Landau, received July 23, 2018. -email from Ben Mirling, received July 23, 2018. -text message from Pat Kane, received July 22, 2018. -Letter from Mary and Craig Skevington, dated July 18, 2018. -Letter from Mary Beth Winn, dated July 19, 2018. -Letter from Mary Beth Winn and George Santoni, dated July 13, 2018. -Letter from Tom Garrett, dated June 25, 2018. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. We will see the applicant at our next ZBA meeting scheduled for September 10, 2018. Susan Steer resumed her position on the Board. Cheryl Grey resumed her position on the Board. Rebecca Kern, Alternate exited the meeting. #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. This application was heard at the October 16, 2017 meeting and adjourned to future meeting awaiting Planning Board Advisory Opinion. The Planning Board issued an unfavorable advisory opinion on October 26. The applicant has submitted a revised application and plan and a response to comments by the Planning Board. The public hearing was re-noticed for July 23. SEQRA: -Action appears to be a Type I action, “any Unlisted action occurring wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous to any historic building, structure, facility, site or district or prehistoric site that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.” - A short EAF has been submitted. The applicant will need to provide a long EAF. -The ZBA initiated Coordinated Review and sought Lead Agency status on October 16, 2017. -The Planning Board is also an involved agency. The Planning Board deferred Lead Agency Status to the ZBA on City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 8 of 18  October 26, 2017. - The ZBA will need to complete Part 2 of the Long EAF. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED ORIGINAL PROPOSAL PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum average lot width: Parcel A (Lot 1) 100 feet 55.50 feet NA NA Minimum lot size: Parcel A 6,600 sq. ft. 4,125 sq. ft. 5,355 sq. ft. 1,245 (19%) Minimum total side yard: Existing house 12 feet 10 feet N/A N/A Maximum principal building coverage: Existing House 30% 31% N/A N/A Minimum lot size: Parcel B (Lot 2) 6,600 sq. ft. 4,125 sq. ft. 3,052 sq ft. 3,548 sq. ft. (54%) Minimum average lot width: Parcel B 60 ft. N/A 55 ft. 5 ft. (8%) Applicant: Michael Zimmerman Mr. Zimmerman stated they listened to the suggestions of the Board with regard to moving the subdivision line to create unequal parcels and we believe it solves a lot of the problems for the neighbors and other issues. The existing lot will become about 5,355 square feet. This lot sits at the corner of Grand Avenue there is about 1,000 feet of front and side that brings it closer to the 6,600 square feet visually. The newer lot would be smaller at 3,052 square feet which is still enough land to build a home which conforms to all of the legal setbacks, fits the character of the neighborhood and is still more than double the size of the property directly across the street. The new lot would have a 25 foot setback from the rear neighbors, as does the existing lot. Over 50% of the properties within three blocks of my home do not conform to the 6,600 square foot rule. There are 39 newly developed lots which are smaller than what we are proposing within three blocks of my home. The new sidewalks would be built as part of this. Traffic and parking are affected by this. A new curb would be further from the existing intersection, since it is a one way street it is approximately 250 feet from the intersection. Susan Steer stated she would like to refer this to the Planning Board for an Advisory Opinion on the new proposal. It was the consensus of the Board to refer this application to the Planning Board for an Advisory Opinion. Bill Moore, Chairman made a motion in the matter of the Zimmerman Subdivision, 139 Grand Avenue that the application be referred to the Planning Board for an Advisory Opinion. James Helicke seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSED: 7-0 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. Jenn Engelstein, 135 Grand Avenue. Did not receive any notification by mail. Bought their home in 2017 and had no idea that their neighbor could divide their lot. Property values will decrease. Privacy will be at a premium. NEIGHBOR INPUT: Email from Constance Contompasis, 5 Dublin Square Lane, received July 23. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 9 of 18 Email from Nancy Zucchino, received July 21. Email from Jennafer Engelstein and Mathew Digeser, received July 22. Email from Amejo Amyot, 67 Fifth Avenue, received July 22. Email from Dr. Denise Polit, 75 Clinton Street, received July 22. Email from Donna Hays, 5 Cottage Place, received July 22. Email from Maureen Curtin, 125 Grand Avenue received July 22. Email from C. Kyle Bentley, 7 Dublin Square Lane, received July 23, 2018. Email from Cecilia and Richard Lockwood, dba Textile Studio, 143 Grand Avenue, received July 23. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. The application will go to the Planning Board for an Advisory Opinion and then will return to the ZBA. 4. #3042 PIESNIKOWSKI RESIDENCE, 43 Ash Street, area variance to expand a parking area for an existing Multi-family; seeking relief from the minimum rear yard setback to parking in the Urban Residential -3 District. This application was heard at the July 9 meeting and adjourned to July 23, 2018. The public hearing was opened and remains open. 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 9:40 P.M. James Helicke presented the following resolution. #3042 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Michael Piesnikowski 43 Ash Street SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866 From the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 43 Ash Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, NY, being tax parcel number 165.74-2-14 on the Assessment Map of said City. The Applicant having applied for an area variance to expand the parking area to provide parking for an existing three-family residence and seeking relief as described below in the Urban Residential – 3 District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application on the 9th and 23rd days of July 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 Minimum rear yard setback: to parking 25 ft. 15 ft. 10 ft. (40%) 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 expanded parking area would provide the required number of parking spaces for the existing three-family residence (per use variance granted May 15, 2008) – of 6 total spaces. The Board notes that it does not appear to be feasible to construct the additional parking spaces in a compliant location on the property. As the City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 10 of 18  application states, “The only available area to adequately extend the driveway lies between the existing driveway and alley way (Ashton Ln.)”. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not produce an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to the nearby properties. The Board notes that providing the parking spaces required for the three-family residence on the property represents a positive change in the neighborhood by reducing resident and guest parking on nearby streets. 3. The requested relief from the rear yard setback for parking may be considered substantial at 40%, but the relief is only for one parking space to encroach into the setback area. The Board notes that the existing property is currently not in compliance with regard to the required number of parking spaces and will be with this relief granted. 4. The Applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood. The relief sought is to expand the existing parking area. 5. The request for relief may be considered a self-created hardship due to the applicant’s desire to provide off- street parking to the residents of this existing multi-family dwelling. However, self-creation is not necessarily fatal to the application. Cherie Grey seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSED: 7-0 5. #2940.1 STEIMLE TWO-FAMILY, 63 Ash Street, area variance for constructed changes to a previously approved area variance for construction of a garage with dwelling unit, seeking additional relief from the minimum total side yard setback and maximum principal building coverage (two structures combined) requirements in the Urban Residential -3 District. This application was heard at the July 9th meeting and adjourned to July 23, 2018. The public hearing was opened and remains open. Agent: Jesse Boucher, Kodiak Construction Mr. Boucher stated permeability calculation was requested from staff. Permeability is 26.15%. Mr. Boucher followed up with the surveyor regarding what that entails. It entails the driveway. 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 9:47 P.M. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 11 of 18 Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman presented the following resolution. #2940.1 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Jennifer and Scott Steimle 63 Ash St. Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 63 Ash Street in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 165.74-2-4 on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having requested a modification of a previously approved area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City which permitted the construction of an addition to create a garage attached to the principal residence by a vestibule, and the building of additional living space, for an existing two-family residence in the UR-3 district. This modification enlarges two areas of relief granted originally by the Board in its resolution approved January 23, 2017. Public notice has been duly given of a hearing on the current application, held on the 9th and 23rd days of July 2018. In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, I move that the following modifications of previously approved area variances for the following amounts of relief: DISTRICT TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DIMENSIONAL GRANTED REVISED REVISED RELIEF REQUIREMENT PREVIOUSLY REQUEST REQUESTED Maximum principal building coverage 30% 50.1% 52.3% 22.3% or 74.3% relief Minimum total side yard setback 12’ 8’ 7’ 5’ or 41.7% relief 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 applicants. The applicant notes that the current modification request is the result of a miscommunication between the engineer and the agent after the original relief was granted by the Board. The breezeway was then built, with an incremental encroachment over side setback lines and incremental lot coverage. The Board finds that rebuilding of the breezeway to go back to the original requested dimensions is not cost-beneficial. The applicant notes that an attempt to remove the eaves from the breezeway and thereby remove just the areas triggering this modification request would leave the breezeway vulnerable to weather. Per the applicants during the original ZBA variance on this property, it is not feasible to purchase land from the neighbors due to lack of availability or affordability. The Board notes that the lot is substandard, and any increase in the dimension of the additions that were made would require additional lot coverage relief. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The Board notes the relief currently being requested is from eaves on a breezeway, and finds that the impact is minor, given the small amount of incremental encroachment. 3. The Board notes the requested incremental variances are not substantial. The Board notes that the total, revised amount of relief is substantial for both lot coverage and side setback. However, as noted on the original resolution, the lot is undersized for the district, at 4,500 square feet and 30 feet wide; therefore both areas of relief are exacerbated by the lot’s limited size. As referenced in the original resolution, the substantiality is mitigated by the lot’s consistency with neighboring lots with similar sizes and densities of use. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 12 of 18 4. This variance will not have a significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. As per the applicant, permeability will be 26.15% with this proposed project. This would exceed district requirements of 25%. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created insofar as the applicant desires to construct the proposed addition, but this is not necessarily fatal to the application. Condition: The condition for no accessory structures to be permitted on the subject parcel was set in the original resolution, and remains in place. Cherie Grey seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, opposed; James Helicke, opposed. MOTION PASSED: 5-2 NEW BUSINESS: 6. #3047 STONE MIXED-USE, 68 Weibel Avenue, initiation of Coordinated SEQRA Review associated with Maintenance of existing improvements and uses on a mixed use property in the Transect-4 District. SEQRA: -Action appears to be an Unlisted Action. -Planning board (special use permit and site plan review) and DRC (architectural review) are involved agencies. -The Board could Coordinate Review and defer Lead Agency to the Planning Board. PARCEL HISTORY: -Stipulation and Order of Settlement dated May 17, 2018. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Frontage build-to: 12-18 ft. 161.2 ft. 143.2 ft. Frontage build-out 50% 0% 50% (100%) Minimum two-story: Two-story One-story (17,450 sq. ft. total) One-story (17,450 sq. ft. total) Agent: Jeff Anthony, Kiersten Cavallier, Studio A Adam McNeill, Secretary made a motion in the matter of the application of Stone Mixed Use, 68 Weibel Avenue that the Zoning Board of Appeals defers Lead Agency Status to the Planning Board. James Helicke seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 13 of 18 MOTION PASSED: 7-0 7. #3049 GLOGOWSKI, GARAGE, 96 Kaydeross Avenue West, area variance for construction for a detached Garage; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback for an accessory structure in the Urban Residential-2 District. SEQRA: -Action appears to be a Type II action, and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: -Area variance to construct a detached two car garage, approved July 28, 2004. The variance was never Acted upon and has expired. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback: 60 ft. 38 ft. 22 ft. (37%) Applicant: Thomas Glogowski Mr. Glogowski is seeking to construct a two car detached garage. The property is too close on the north border. The applicant has lived on the property for 14 years. The property is not quite 2 acres. The garage placement at this location is more aesthetically pleasing. In 2004 I did receive a variance for this purpose. At that time funding was not solid to complete the project. Now we are ready to complete the project and this requires the approval of the Board for a variance to complete this project. Cherie Grey questioned since the property is on a county road is the subject to County Planning Board referral and approval. Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated this project does not require County Planning Board approval for an accessory structure. Cherie Grey questioned if an alternative location on the property was considered as well as the second curb cut. Mr. Glogowski stated the property is bordered by roads, no land can be purchased. The topography of the land necessitates placement of the garage on the north side of the property which borders a rural road. Garages are common in this rural, lightly developed neighborhood. There will be a second curb cut. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 10:00 AM. 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 September 10, 2018. 3. #3048 MADEIROS SHED, 147 Lincoln Avenue, area variance to relocated an existing shed; seeking relief from The minimum side and rear yard setbacks for an accessory structure in the Urban Residential-2 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 14 of 18 PARCEL HISTORY: -Notice of violation, July 31, 2017. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATION: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum rear yard setback: 5 feet 1.6 feet 3.4 feet (68%) Minimum side yard setback: 5 feet 1.4 feet 3.6 feet (72%) Minimum principal to accessory building setback: 5 feet .8 feet 4.2 feet (84%) Susan Barden, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated the applicant’s legal ad was not published. It will be published in advance of the September 10, 2018 meeting. Applicant: Carol Madeiros Agent: John Canney, Attorney, Carter Conboy Mr. Canney stated the applicant is before the Board this evening for approval for the relocation of a shed on the property located at 147 Lincoln Avenue. A visual presentation of the property was provided to the Board. This property is surrounded by three city streets, one of which is Murphy Lane. The current shed is located on the side of the home closest to Murphy Lane. The proposed location is behind the home. Mr. Canney reviewed the conditions for an area variance. Due to the de minimus nature of the relief requested there will be no adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood. Susan Steer questioned if the applicant provide some comparables from the White Street side, Murphy Lane, just to get a sense of figures on either side of the property. Concern was voiced regarding new curb cut on Lincoln Avenue. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 10:14 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 September 10, 2018. NOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: -Removal and restoration of existing driveway from Murphy Lane. 4. #3053 COHEN GARAGE, 655 North Broadway, area variance to finish the second story of the existing detached Garage for recreation/movie room; seeking relief to permit finished/habitable space in an accessory structure in the Urban Residential-1 District. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action and therefore exempt from further SEQRA review. PARCEL HISTORY: -Area variance to permit the construction of finished and habitable space within an accessory structure, Approved with conditions March 9, 2015. City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 15 of 18 AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED To permit finished/habitable space in garage Not permitted Permitted 100% No representation for this application. It was the consensus of the Board to table this application until the next ZBA Meeting scheduled for September 10, 2018. 5. #3051 DALZELL PORCH, 16 Friar Tuck Way, area variance for construction of a front porch addition to an Existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum front 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 PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback: 30 feet 26.5 feet 3.5 feet (12%) Applicant: Sandy and Clark Dalzell The applicants have owned this home for three years and they do not have a front porch. The applicants are requested a variance so they may add a front porch to their home. Many homes on Friar Tuck Way have a front porch so this will be keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Discussion ensued among the Board concerning the mathematical calculations of the application. Susan Barden reviewed what was submitted and provided guidance to the Board concerning the calculations. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 10:26 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 September 10, 2018. 6. #3055 CRIPPEN RESIDENCE, 11 Van Rensselaer Street, area variance for additions to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the front yard (Marvin St.), minimum side yard and minimum total side yard setbacks, And maximum principal building coverage requirements in the Urban Residential-2 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: Marvin Dining room addition 10 feet 4.5 feet 5.5 feet (55%) City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 16 of 18 Minimum side yard setback: Carport addition 8 feet 5 feet 3 feet (37.5%) Minimum total side yard setback: 20 feet 16 feet 4 feet (20%) Maximum principal building coverage 30% 49% 19% Applicants: Peter and Debra Crippen Agent: Tom Frost Mr. Frost provided a visual presentation of the footprint of the property in question. The applicants are requesting the addition of a master bedroom suite on the first floor. A dining room addition is also proposed combining the existing living room and kitchen to basically one space on the north side. Also a carport addition is proposed. A small open deck is also proposed on the south side. The number of variances are required since the lot is substandard in size. The existing building coverage is 23.29% and the maximum coverage in this district is 30% principal and 10% accessory. The proposed side and front yard setbacks are quite typical of the properties in the immediate neighborhood. The proposed additions will fit architecturally with the existing structure. Adam McNeill, Secretary requested some comparables in the neighborhood citing lot coverages. This is a substandard size lot which also accounts for the size of the variances. Susan Steer stated the possibility of conditioning the resolution stating no additional accessory structures on the lot. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 10:40 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Debra Crippin, questioned the shed being removed. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman stated the shed can remain. Any additional accessory structures would require the applicant to reappear before the Board. Bill Moore, Chairman stated the public hearing will remain open. A resolution will be prepared and presented at the next ZBA meeting scheduled for September 10, 2018 APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman made a motion to accept the ZBA Meeting Minutes for May 21, 2018 as amended. Cherie Grey seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer abstained; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1 Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman made a motion to accept the ZBA Meeting Minutes for June 11, 2018 as amended. Cherie Grey seconded the motion. VOTE: City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 17 of 18 Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, abstained; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, in favor MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1 Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman made a motion to accept the ZBA Meeting Minutes for June 25, 2018 as amended. Cherie Grey seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Susan Steer, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Brad Gallagher, in favor; Cherie Grey, in favor; James Helicke, abstained MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 9-10-18 City of Saratoga Springs - Zoning Board of Appeals – July 23, 2018 - Page 18 of 18