ZBA reopens hearing on Stewarts redevelopment; interpretation appeal over 250-foot fueling rule is central

A multi-year redevelopment proposal by Stewart's (Stewarts Shops) for property at Marion Avenue and Maple Dell came back before the Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals May 12, with the board reopening the public hearing to focus first on an interpretation appeal about a 250-foot fueling-station rule.

Libby Clark, counsel for Stewarts, reviewed a lengthy application history dating to 2021 and summarized multiple redesigns: Stewarts removed a previously proposed car wash, reduced rental/commercial space, placed larger areas under proposed conservation easement to buffer adjacent residences, and revised plan setbacks to respond to city comments. Clark said the redevelopment would reduce the number of underground storage tanks and move filled areas farther from Loughberry Lake compared with historic conditions and argued the design improves stormwater and site safety compared with the existing facility.

The key legal dispute now before the ZBA is an interpretation appeal of a UDO provision the transcript cites as a 250-foot rule (referred to in filings as section 6.63 or variants). Clark told the board three alternative legal positions: that the cited provision is facially ambiguous or impossible as written; that the fueling station is a preexisting nonconforming use; or, if neither of those apply, that the board should grant area-variance relief. "One of the appeals ... is the denial of a permitted fueling station based on plain language. It's our position ... this section fails for vagueness and impossibility and should not be enforced," Clark said.

City staff noted the technical complication that, after lot merges, the property line associated with the fueling station now abuts a residential district whereas historically a separate parcel had separated the fueling activity from homes. That technical change means staff does not automatically treat the site as grandfathered; the board will need to consider whether lot-line changes and mergers affect a preexisting nonconforming claim.

Members of the neighborhood and the Saratoga neighborhood association urged the ZBA to uphold the code-enforcement officer's earlier determination. A representative said the court confirmed the zoning officer's view at one stage and argued that allowing the redevelopment to proceed without application of the 250-foot rule would set an undesirable precedent. "If you set the precedent that this project that demolishes, expands over property lines, combines properties, doesn't have to abide by the zoning ordinance, think of the precedent that sets," a neighborhood representative told the board.

Board members and staff agreed the interpretation appeal should be resolved before moving to other area-variance determinations. The board reopened the public hearing for comment focused on the interpretation and indicated it will take additional time to review the legal materials and the record before issuing a decision; no final rulings were issued at the meeting.