The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals on Sept. 15 voted 7-0 to grant an area variance allowing Mark and Lisa Larkin to enclose an existing rear porch and cover steps at 17 Tommy Luther Drive, reducing the rear-yard setback from the required 30 feet to 15.3 feet.

The applicants sought relief of 14.7 feet (49% of the required setback) to permit a screened porch that would encompass existing steps and extend slightly beyond the current patio area. The board read a draft resolution that found the applicants had tried alternative designs and concluded the variance would not be detrimental to neighbors; the motion as read approved the requested relief “as per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions.”

Why it matters: The approval allows the homeowners to screen an outdoor living area they said is currently unusable in summer because of mosquitoes. The board noted visibility from public streets would be minimal and said nearby neighbors had expressed support.

Board discussion and findings: During public testimony, Mark and Lisa Larkin described the project as enclosing an existing covered porch and the steps that descend to a patio surrounded by woods. They said the new screened porch will mostly cover existing impermeable area with a minor bump-out of about 3 feet onto lawn. Board members asked about change to impermeable surface and whether similar encroachments exist nearby; the applicants replied that patios exist in the neighborhood but they could not confirm setback lines for other properties.

The board’s draft resolution applied the standard five-factor area-variance balancing test and concluded: (1) the benefit cannot be achieved by other feasible means given the existing porch and patio layout; (2) granting the variance will not create an undesirable change to neighborhood character because the addition will be largely out of public view and one adjacent neighbor expressed approval; (3) although the variance may be considered substantial, that is mitigated by the site conditions; (4) the variance will not cause significant adverse physical or environmental effects and permeability will meet district requirements; (5) the difficulty is self-created but not fatal to the application. The roll call was recorded as “in favor” by all voting members and the motion passed 7-0.

Next steps: With board approval recorded at the Sept. 15 hearing, the applicants may proceed with the building permit process in accordance with the approved plans and any conditions documented in the board’s resolution.