Applicant seeking use variance to teach kids from garage studio; board urges alternatives

Jordan Becker, a Saratoga Springs resident, asked the Zoning Board of Appeals on July 14 to grant a use variance to operate an arts studio and teach occasional children’s summer classes in an existing detached garage at 225 Lake Avenue.

Board members and staff told Becker that city code staff have classified the proposed activity under the UDO definition for “arts and fitness studios” and that a use variance requires the applicant to meet four strict tests — including a showing of unique financial hardship — that are difficult to satisfy. City staff and several board members said Becker should work with planning and code staff to identify possible alternatives and provide written, documentable evidence if he wishes to pursue the variance.

The nut graf: The planning staff indicated the current classification (arts and fitness studio) is not permitted in that UR-1 district for the proposed level of activity; a use variance requires proof that the property cannot reasonably be adapted to any permitted use without undue hardship. Board members suggested that the applicant gather stronger documentary evidence about financial hardship, neighborhood uniqueness, and lack of feasible alternatives — or consider scaled-back, informal community classes that might not trigger a use variance.

Board members outlined the four legal criteria for a use variance and repeatedly noted that “self-created hardship” is a common reason such requests fail. City staff and board members said continuing to operate the space as a private workspace for Becker’s own ceramics and sculpture is allowed; the zoning issue arises when the space is opened to the public for classes. Becker said he had been contacted by neighbors asking for classes, that he charges only materials fees, and that he does not run the activity as a commercial business at scale.

Public comments supported Becker’s request. Neighbor Andy Williams and others urged the board and city staff to find a pathway for limited neighborhood classes, suggesting temporary permits or conditions to reduce perceived impacts. Board members responded that they would try to work with Becker and staff to find options that do not require a full use-variance record, but stressed that the current written application, as submitted, faces a high legal bar.

Ending: The board kept the public hearing open and asked Becker to meet with city staff to explore alternatives and to provide written documentation supporting any hardship or uniqueness claims. The ZBA scheduled follow-up on July 28 and told Becker to submit any additional materials to staff ahead of that meeting.