Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Zoning board unanimously approves large front‑setback variance for Helms addition on Lake Avenue

Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals · June 22, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals on June 22 approved an area variance allowing a 27.9‑foot front‑setback relief (46.5%) for a two‑story addition at 632 Lake Ave; the board cited the house’s preexisting nonconforming siting and found minimal neighborhood impact.

The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously June 22 to grant an area variance allowing a two‑story addition at 632 Lake Ave that would sit 32.1 feet from the front property line, providing 27.9 feet of relief from the 60‑foot requirement.

Tim Helms, who said his family’s house was built in the early 1950s and “falls within that 60 feet of setback anyway,” told the board the addition would add three bedrooms, a bathroom and modest living space to accommodate a growing family. “The entire structure of the existing house falls within that 60 feet of setback anyway,” Helms said during his presentation.

The board’s motion, read into the record, finds the property preexisting and nonconforming, notes the addition will be in the rear and largely invisible from the road, and records the applicants’ statement that the addition would increase lot coverage by less than 1 percent. The board cited these factors in concluding the benefit to the applicant outweighs detriment to the community.

A roll call recorded the vote as unanimous; the chair announced the motion passed 6–0. No written objections from nearby property owners were presented at the hearing.

Why it matters: The property’s long-standing preexisting nonconforming siting — the house already sits inside the code’s front setback — was central to the board’s finding that the addition would not alter neighborhood character or create material harm. The board also instructed the applicant to record necessary plans and proceed with required permits.

What’s next: The approved variance and the board’s resolution will be recorded; the applicant may proceed with building‑permit applications and must comply with the plans submitted to the board and any conditions listed in the resolution.