[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6455117,"mediaKeyId","5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec","parentId",5855860,"title","Owners of 112 Fifth Avenue seek variances for new home; board urges design edits and pervious surfaces","audioSeconds",785,"startMs",2968000,"endMs",3753000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec&start=2968&end=3753","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec/thumbnail_2968000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6455117/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Owners-of-112-Fifth-Avenue-seek-variances-for-new-home-board-urges-design-edits-and-pervious-surfaces","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455117-d99573051222bd107fd23673fe53c278/orig.mp4?Expires=1771176489&Signature=D-5tlKPK-4H0q2V5nocLJZsc-FDiMmjNsuq54t7uKaMGXt8Dq2Idqd1UmpiWGn4RfcxZIDUqWc9NmCkFiUeQzkrEg3ARymOT3ERgRDwRHvcfeynroX~LGrs-eUeiW4qf43WVWfaykDxG9lYDaIhU8F2SaXc~lUNtzkFDJJ8Xcoluh0sn9zu0JojZoyWO5EAvQGRD3gekpehaimE0ALD7EvZV5CHdKEYehuEO3tDpON2RJzCZWKUJWT-mUb9psbI~NIesPric33zprT7sGuEpn6wo9lXifk37K4tAgCsTPhiXKhEQO2NO72LKx-LXG8hYpr2zH7CEb-HQ9SNzAH2dsA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Saratoga","date","2025-09-29T00:00:00Z","article","Saratoga Springs, N.Y. — Developers representing Mario and Don Martinez presented a conceptual plan Sept. 29 for a new single-family house at 112 Fifth Avenue. The Zoning Board of Appeals did not vote; members asked the applicant to examine alternatives that could reduce multiple variances and left the public hearing open to Oct. 27.

Why it matters: The proposal targets an undersized UR-1 lot and requests coverage and setback relief that would change the built footprint relative to the block. Board members focused on whether design choices (a large bump-out and a horseshoe driveway) could be altered to reduce the most significant variances.

Key requested relief and design rationale: Staff summarized the application as requesting principal/combined coverage of about 42% (limit 28%), a rear-yard setback of 19 feet (requirement 30 feet), total side setbacks proposed at 23 feet (requirement 30 feet), and a maximum impervious percentage near 59.9% (limit 50%). The applicants said the design provides a first-floor primary suite, laundry and a two-car garage for aging-in-place needs; the lot is approximately 10,000 sq. ft. in a district where 12,500 sq. ft. is typical for the zoning unit.

Board guidance to applicant: Members urged the applicant to prioritize the following revisions and data:
- Reduce or narrow the west-side bump-out to cut building coverage and side-setback impacts; board members estimated even a few feet shaved could reduce multiple relief requests.
- Rethink the horseshoe/curved driveway; converting it to a standard driveway could remove or reduce driveway-percentage and impervious-surface variances.
- Use permeable pavers and an engineered crushed-stone base to claim impervious-surface credit; the applicant reported that pervious paver strategies could substantially reduce impervious calculations.
- Provide comparables for building footprint and impervious surface for nearby lots (board requested house-widths and building-footprint data rather than only percentage comparisons).

Public process: The board reviewed aerial comparables and site overlays provided by the applicant and asked staff and the applicant to compute impervious percentages both with and without the horseshoe driveway. The public hearing remains open. The ZBA scheduled further consideration for Oct. 27.

Next steps: Applicant to submit revised plans and quantitative impervious calculations (including pervious-paver scenarios) and comparables for building footprint; board to re-evaluate at the next meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Saratoga - ZBA","oneSentenceSummary","Saratoga Springs, N.Y. — Developers representing Mario and Don Martinez presented a conceptual plan Sept. 29 for a new single-family house at 112 Fifth Avenue.","taxTitle","Saratoga Springs City, Saratoga County, New York","taxId",7807,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6455122,"Developer seeks multiple area variances for new house at 131 Middle Avenue; board requests comparables and plan refinements",378,514000,892000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec&start=514&end=892","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec/thumbnail_514000.jpg","/articles/6455122/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Developer-seeks-multiple-area-variances-for-new-house-at-131-Middle-Avenue-board-requests-comparables-and-plan-refinements","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455122-10c654312ef724ba8fc76360bd4e78d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771176489&Signature=DEuWzwPEDA1H7VQ~7Qjg7qw91Jv4owhbK1JZwOoHGVgpld0Z~8kyfFUM4BBIDZnIm6aBvppP5xZXTaELYoQT9I5dxHEOHzTUCnSt-Bgx-9A939jOKdSWVquijm0A9hADsfR4vCH2D8REkgfqS00~q0pvEfbUB~~hB7Q0tvYB91n5VceOt1BUACo9Iie5sBTwiTpdR8-LxhrAq0TprGl13ql4WhhwIJ-lM2qfwaSw1~fbq96XH-AE9dCoPqWJdnhNUC9HQAIuq3Q9oqOiE7RKNZlYWyctzLUCxbRF5OLnC~kNzv3qEmG-tHCWJnBByEfYLTOq3j8Ys7MwJf678-ojyw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Saratoga Springs, N.Y. — Jesse Boucher of Kodiak Construction presented plans Sept. 29 for a new single-family house at 131 Middle Avenue and asked the Zoning Board of Appeals for multiple area variances. The board did not vote; members requested additional documentation and design alternatives and left the public hearing open to Oct. 27.

Why it matters: The proposal seeks relief across coverage and setback standards in the UR-2 district on a preexisting, undersized lot. The board’s requests (comparables, planning-board approval documentation and a reduced building footprint if feasible) reflect typical data the ZBA uses to weigh neighborhood character and substantiality of relief.

What the applicant asked for and why: Boucher said the homeowners, Kim and Mike Southern, own the parcel and that the plan evolved after a 2017 subdivision and planning-board contingencies. The current design places primary living on the first floor for aging-in-place needs and includes a detached garage shifted to improve streetscape. The application requests area variances summarized by staff during the hearing: total combined coverage proposed 49% (limit 40%); rear-yard setback proposed 20.8 feet (requirement 25 feet); total side setback proposed 10.2 feet (requirement 12 feet); accessory side setback proposed 4 feet (requirement 5 feet); accessory rear setback proposed 4 feet (requirement 5 feet). The application also proposes a driveway width consistent with two-car parking and included driveway comparables in the packet.

Board questions and requested follow-up: Board members asked for:
- A copy of the Planning Board approval for the revised plan (applicant said the Planning Board approved a modified front elevation and garage location but recommended presenting to ZBA),
- Neighborhood comparables on lot coverage, building mass/size and driveway width (staff and members asked for house-size comparisons pulled from county records),
- Exploration of whether the house can be reduced in footprint to lessen requested relief, and whether HVAC condensers and a generator can be relocated to the rear to meet accessory setbacks and reduce coverage.

Public comment: Mark Dillon, the owner of 129 Middle Avenue adjacent to the site, told the board he initially opposed the proposal because of lot size but said he would accept the project if mechanical units were moved to avoid encroaching on his property line. The public hearing remains open.

Next steps: The applicant will submit the requested comparables, planning-board approval documentation and any revised plans to demonstrate alternatives (smaller footprint, relocated mechanicals or permeable surfacing). The ZBA will review the additional materials at its next meeting on Oct. 27.","Kodiak Construction presented a new-build plan for 131 Middle Avenue that received Planning Board input; the ZBA asked the applicant to supply neighborhood comparables, a copy of the Planning Board approval, and to explore shrinking the house or relocating mechanicals to reduce requested variances. Public hearing remains open for Oct. 27.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6455127,"Zoning board approves three area-variance requests; votes unanimous",240,1641000,1881000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec&start=1641&end=1881","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec/thumbnail_1641000.jpg","/articles/6455127/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Zoning-board-approves-three-area-variance-requests-votes-unanimous","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455127-7d529cb26c3b2a39096d3158de416340/orig.mp4?Expires=1771176489&Signature=TtmruHsPL~sBusTDbSFpRRZ4CWrj7p-3h8kL9FpM8OTIB1Rl9OlJen-p3qJ8OrFSQwsnC27N4EivSKAK3fJl5-hXGCka0MMBJLziCaQpK3jYztnPzDXWfA8F6lCWY8PxxPJOy0Z83hBDPqKe5dqcOl3qv0ilsMWmdb0yoE4jF2B7gqt8q7o-jQ7PYP~MX0c9VXQ~B4TuS6feJzjcHGX9vxSq0gVlMK6brwY8p92tbzxAfYhESeqLUnT-s3i0XLCswbUZzZcJVAucPT61UzZgkYa9EsT6WRFw3W3Zs6qozfS25lDrQD9IGTqBTAOq6vvY8uz3WoIcmc76fOFzcqe8oQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Saratoga Springs, N.Y. — The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals on Sept. 29 approved three area variances for separate residential projects, voting unanimously 7-0 on each application.

The approvals covered: an addition at 17 Walnut Street (appeal of Pavlov Barry), a modification and reapproval of a previously granted variance for a new garage/second dwelling at 169 Union Avenue (Thomas R. Grossman), and an expansion at 14 Ritchie Place (Mary P. Dooley). The board read formal draft motions into the record and moved each resolution to approval with the stated findings required under the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).

Why it matters: Each motion documents the board’s balancing test under the UDO — whether the applicant can achieve the requested benefit by feasible alternatives, whether the variance would alter neighborhood character, substantiality of the request, environmental/permeability impacts, and the self-created nature of the difficulty. The written motions cite specific lot and parcel identifiers and quantify the relief granted.

Details of the approvals

17 Walnut Street (Pavlov Barry). The board approved an area variance to construct an addition that required relief from total side setback requirements (requested relief: about 8.5 feet, roughly 42.5% of the requirement). The draft motion notes the applicant purchased additional land historically shown as “Cedar Alley” to mitigate dimensional needs, found the addition would not alter the streetscape visibility, and concluded permeability/district requirements would be met. Vote: 7-0 (Christopher LaPointe, Jonah Cohen, Shaffer Gaston, Otis Maxwell, Amanda Demma, Bridal Daly, Gage Simpson).

169 Union Avenue (Thomas R. Grossman). The board reapproved and modified variances for a garage/carriage-house project in the Urban Residential 4 district. Relief included reduced lot width, higher principal coverage (requested 46.5%), increased driveway percentage (proposed 40%), and a reduced rear setback to Morton Alley (proposed 5 feet). Motion findings cite the preexisting nonconforming lot width, neighborhood context near the Racing Museum and commercial uses, and DRB-driven design changes that move the structure closer to the alley to maintain historic alignment. The board noted the submitted plans show restoration of a former paved area back to grass. Vote: 7-0.

14 Ritchie Place (Mary P. Dooley). The board approved variances to allow reconstruction and modest expansion within an existing footprint in the UR-1 district, including relief from minimum side and rear setbacks (rear setback relief ~16.2 feet). The motion finds the house is smaller than neighboring structures, that permeability requirements will be met, and that the variances are mitigated by existing conditions even if self-created. Vote: 7-0.

Board procedure and record: For each approved matter the board read a written draft resolution into the record, discussed findings such as substantiality and neighborhood character, and recorded roll-call “in favor” votes from all seven members present. Public hearings for each matter had been held, and the motions reference public notice and tax parcel identifiers.

What the approvals do not do: The motions approve area variances as described in the motions and the submitted plans; subsequent building permit approvals will be subject to plan compliance, possible additional conditions noted in the record (for example, plan notes that former pavement will return to green in the 169 Union submission), and any department-level permitting requirements.","At its Sept. 29 meeting, the Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals granted area variances for projects at 17 Walnut Street, 169 Union Avenue and 14 Ritchie Place, each by unanimous 7-0 votes. The board issued written findings tied to the city UDO and noted mitigation and neighborhood context for each approval.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6455112,"Homeowner seeks variance for HVAC compressors at 19 Aurora Avenue; board asks for neighborhood comps, continues hearing",220,72000,292000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec&start=72&end=292","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5855860-c695feab6782c2824732a79aee1044ec/thumbnail_72000.jpg","/articles/6455112/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Homeowner-seeks-variance-for-HVAC-compressors-at-19-Aurora-Avenue-board-asks-for-neighborhood-comps-continues-hearing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455112-3df34d24cb04b3381c0d1b90d1face5b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771176489&Signature=KDbULTKUHqbJenCZ-KPWl4-tWEfY4TXITSgH-JHRkhAJVJdtyroNWgde6hikFWAWWfUMCPz2tk3Qucx4Rbju6KOSY8Eomb1NDQUPXQ3IaoPWTracsnMVsXSTnESxHt2bkFI-RGVaAECGLR8H8ppp-RW5eWQ2Pnh2K1Q3lCSUBlji7~HQulCFKIn6zLifAtRVpukufw4pPWsAA0F2r7Q2LEwNmd5uL-FUJ4fRc66NRHClKJUex-7ZytOZ0kYgVdQVwIvfgxGQ0VstBbJNjpAPFr4x3sVg3x6TTcvqSeAnNmOUbuNFQbKGiEZ6jekZeB1N7PsfSl~4gTPmLGVBsaxf9Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Saratoga Springs, N.Y. — Jim Hamilton appeared before the Zoning Board of Appeals on Sept. 29 seeking an area variance for HVAC condenser placement at his single-family home at 19 Aurora Avenue. The condensers are mounted within the required five-foot accessory side-yard setback; the applicant requested relief to 3.2 feet (relief of 1.8 feet, approximately 36%). The board did not vote and directed the applicant to submit neighborhood comparables and photos; the matter was continued to Oct. 27.

Why it matters: Side-yard accessory setbacks are intended to maintain separation between mechanical equipment and property lines; variance outcomes can set a precedent for the neighborhood if multiple properties exhibit similar installations.

What the applicant said: Jim Hamilton told the board he and his wife built the home about four years ago and moved in three years ago. An inspector raised several issues last year; Hamilton said he resolved all but the condenser placement, and that neighboring property owners had been notified. He reported he spoke with his next-door neighbor and the neighbor raised no objection.

Board guidance and requested evidence: Board members asked Hamilton to provide two or three comparables (photos and measurements) showing condenser placements in the Oak Ridge development to establish whether similar installations exist in the neighborhood and to strengthen the practical difficulty argument. The board noted the applicant is on a corner lot with limited placement options and that if comp properties also have condensers within setbacks, those examples would be useful to the record. Hamilton said he could provide photos for the Oct. 27 meeting and that he may not attend in person if unavailable; staff confirmed posted evidence could be submitted to planning staff for the record.

Next steps: Applicant to submit comparables and photographs to the Planning Department for upload to the case file before Oct. 27. The public hearing remains open.","Owner Jim Hamilton requested relief for HVAC compressor placement at 19 Aurora Avenue where two condensers sit within the five-foot side-yard accessory setback. The ZBA asked Hamilton to provide comparables and photos showing neighborhood installation patterns and continued consideration to Oct. 27.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Owners of 112 Fifth Avenue seek variances for new home; board urges design edits and pervious surfaces

Developer seeks multiple area variances for new house at 131 Middle Avenue; board requests comparables and plan refinements

Zoning board approves three area-variance requests; votes unanimous

Homeowner seeks variance for HVAC compressors at 19 Aurora Avenue; board asks for neighborhood comps, continues hearing