[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-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",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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",6553816,"mediaKeyId","5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45","parentId",5065555,"title","Owner seeks in‑law apartment at 35 Ash St.; ZBA requests comparables and overlay maps","audioSeconds",98,"startMs",4270000,"endMs",4368000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45&start=4270&end=4368","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45/thumbnail_4270000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6553816/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Owner-seeks-inlaw-apartment-at-35-Ash-St-ZBA-requests-comparables-and-overlay-maps","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553816-e0d21196d2dd89e2b01c0a6c1d1ce851/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436727&Signature=Okr5nnS2jZeZdvSv91iim3WO79Z0VSix7uQLKKNVquuP2~dU2-pxYh3vUCMIL4vHHWoYfPSKYFLXSBqbYWlIareWXSJSiJY8QD6JQ~tE7JxtaK4J5GUWG-UNICYP4BPdW0R-tKOMQ8Sg3BG4HPfUe0QvqGRgG9slthxYz0XNLRxz0KTPsBYCcQdsCGn9fjfraPDyvsd4kVRqiaV4t~i6jBla191NxYtdebUYDEeHBdzIVN~8ifMg4lnLt1pyFg9CkkXrd4lWv0lkQOdV1vSYA-K1vmc~jMgtMRa0yeBJ6Rqtut~sNuNYlvBsMH8EL55Kxq1N4xUavgKiGns3wsvJKg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Saratoga","date","2025-06-23T00:00:00Z","article","Patrick Hedderman, owner and builder, told the Zoning Board of Appeals on June 23 that he intends to build a house at 35 Ash St. with a basement in‑law apartment sharing a stairwell with the primary unit. Because the lot is undersized for two-family use in the UR-3 district, the owner sought relief from minimum lot-size and lot-width requirements.

\"I am looking to build an in law apartment in the basement,\" Hedderman said, adding that the house is designed to \"look like a single family home\" with a common stairwell and a single set of utility meters. He said the design team worked to ensure the building blends with the neighborhood and does not exceed other dimensional standards.

Board members acknowledged that when the lot was subdivided it was granted an area variance for a single-family house and that the current request differs from that original intent. Members asked Hedderman to gather comparables within roughly a one–block (bikeable) radius to show how the proposed two-family configuration compares with preexisting nonconforming lots, and to provide overlay maps (property-assessment parcel outlines on aerial imagery) that illustrate lot size and building footprints.

Board member Chris (Christopher LaPointe) and others raised parking and congestion concerns linked to potential multiple tenants; Hedderman noted he is providing parking but the board asked for visualization on how vehicles will maneuver in the alley and near the garage. The public hearing remains open; the applicant was asked to submit the requested comps and visuals before the next scheduled meeting.

Why this matters: Converting a small, subdivided lot to a formal two-family dwelling raises questions about neighborhood scale and infrastructure (notably parking and alley access). The board asked for context comparables to determine whether the request is consistent with the surrounding UR-3 district.

Next steps: Applicant to provide parcel overlays, comparable examples and additional documentation before the next ZBA meeting; the public hearing remained open.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Saratoga - ZBA - Jun 23, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The owner of 35 Ash St. asked the ZBA for relief to allow a two‑family configuration (an in‑law basement apartment) on a lot smaller than required; the board left the hearing open and asked the applicant for comparable properties and mapping to clarify neighborhood context and parking implications.","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},6553821,"ZBA hears modest sunroom request at 3 Second St.; board asks for comparable lot coverage data",45,3177000,3222000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45&start=3177&end=3222","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45/thumbnail_3177000.jpg","/articles/6553821/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/ZBA-hears-modest-sunroom-request-at-3-Second-St-board-asks-for-comparable-lot-coverage-data","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553821-574c40ae0300fd4220b465255732c8a2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436727&Signature=gFOREop2sdWy-TEtyOND5F3uLrpNDkhAKMNZj~TZ-Uz7NMX4zD4ganD8c1gLg1qrgjgnFSQ6DKmgStOEeiP6F~axC3a97pRMRNNdL3xBdVWwD9CQO8wVwIw-RcU4580JevwpXNniBygjMBWVkLpk9cVbzA6cyeAQ7AVMGtnfUXzYWvlUsee~29Raeb3z5IwMyfcJIgHsk-rsL6U0KqjSHFCD3RjNqo1iEGjnKkpKFLyKI56Y4Y6x9vnxumAfuGKvP91iGz~TEQ~8kJpCb8DQIZ7hBVDgjxfRT~lpYMv~WsfIinY6N1SFGiTAIx1Di4~uFr8pIt8lEj8TTOktefE1Cg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A modest request for a small sunroom addition at 3 Second St. drew brief discussion at the June 23 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as the board asked for additional comparable lot-coverage data before ruling.

Architect Sue Davis of SD Atelier Architecture presented the application on behalf of owner Joyce Boulier. Davis said the project proposes an approximately 11-by-11-foot sunroom at the rear of the house to provide year‑round use. \"What we're proposing is a very modest addition to the back,\" Davis said, describing the proposed footprint and noting the lot is substandard in size compared with current UDO requirements.

Board members focused on how much the addition would increase combined lot coverage once eaves and overhangs are included. Amanda Dema asked whether the addition could be placed flush with the existing structure to minimize coverage change. Davis said the proposed projection is roughly 1 foot 4 inches beyond the main massing to achieve usable interior space and to respect the building's proportions.

The board left the public hearing open and asked the applicant to provide more comparable properties (similar lot sizes and coverage percentages) and, if possible, to reduce footprint before returning. No formal vote was taken.

Why this matters: The lot is undersized for current code, so small additions can push combined coverage past UDO thresholds and require ZBA findings. The board’s request for comparables is intended to weigh neighborhood context in its variance analysis.

Next steps: Applicant to submit additional comparable lot-coverage documentation before the board considers the application at a future meeting.","An applicant requested a small 11-by-11-foot sunroom addition at 3 Second St.; the board left the public hearing open and asked the applicant to provide additional comparable lot-coverage figures and consider whether the addition could be reduced or enclosed within existing porch footprint.",{"_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},6553826,"Applicant says connecting garage will ‘improve’ rear setback at 134 Crescent St.; public hearing left open",77,318000,395000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45&start=318&end=395","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45/thumbnail_318000.jpg","/articles/6553826/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Applicant-says-connecting-garage-will-improve-rear-setback-at-134-Crescent-St-public-hearing-left-open","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553826-c90a7952d08867a190da5b3c2b94853d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436727&Signature=F74YXBgTMokgqMx0GuL5P8xTwDMIyZmLpucWzEcV8xJQ6EQd4zGW5ysGgRuP20YivBw37VTyzYbyoxFu~pKgPoe6flpVrmTFTScTFprJzQvtJjEciAyVqHUpVjR0ZuNVYa9UwiIDff9DOGGFtGq5T14PZErcRDMkHdmvDc1JSG67tg-SEr1NeaU2LoB2CRcNDgJdfIHTWVrXXM2IweCVIhVqGlEi1H0FiwrSVYdc7Wb-E3pxXDf629gEYogpGqp5wYEeKy1l9lh2pe~eI1qGeXwbj9a9muSvZ3GJUO4O-~3Pw-yO5~ntTcGlRfrCY071M5K~vVscGuWmQMYWUykneA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At its June 23 meeting the Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals opened public comment and took testimony on an application at 134 Crescent St. that would connect an existing detached garage to the primary single-family residence and retain living space above the garage.

Jeff Anthony of Studio A (landscape architecture and engineering) and architect Andy Lisonbee of HAA Architecture explained the project. According to Anthony, the current rear-yard setback measures approximately 18.4 feet because exterior stairs encroach at the back of the building. \"By removing the stairs from the back of the building, it will increase the setback from the rear yard to 23.4 feet. So we're actually improving the situation from the rear yard and making it a little bit better,\" Anthony said.

The proposal would physically connect the garage to the house to satisfy UR-2 zoning requirements for an attached accessory structure. Anthony also told the board that electrical and gas were planned to be removed from the accessory space, while a sink would remain. Board members asked clarifying questions about existing kitchen elements and plan revisions in the packet.

The board opened the public hearing and left it open to accept further materials and comment. No final zoning decision was made; the applicant was told the file would continue to be considered at the next meeting.

Why this matters: The project proposes to change the status of a detached accessory structure into a connected portion of the primary dwelling while retaining living space above it; the board will evaluate whether that conversion complies with UR-2 zoning restrictions on accessory dwelling facilities.

Next steps: The public hearing remains open; the applicant may provide revised plans and city staff will continue review.","Applicants told the ZBA connecting an existing detached garage to the main house will remove exterior stairs and increase the rear-yard setback from approximately 18.4 feet to 23.4 feet; the board opened public hearing and left it open for additional submittals.",{"_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},6553831,"Neighbors split as zoning board sends 65 Fila Street proposal to Design Review Board for advisory opinion",2393,683000,3076000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45&start=683&end=3076","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45/thumbnail_683000.jpg","/articles/6553831/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Neighbors-split-as-zoning-board-sends-65-Fila-Street-proposal-to-Design-Review-Board-for-advisory-opinion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553831-bb4bfdea1eecf9027f03fe9808fae80e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436727&Signature=M-k9ynxkxwxAoQUKRWlZW65TfZy8GrNrgirrJ~OEUkkjQc3QxFWPedcEPoclv5yqJG~riYlwwYI0R9KW-Iti-MHmVL0-i~53wTMnH9zCvQOlHtgPAsGbhvWP0z4U6JIdsKDcYESCIr0GQfJYsUWD3WZ0b-971rDise2O-5DJKpNYthIDsnCjjU1mzyyDneqb2b5IIxHNX1AovIHpopIs~3Ri-QNZPdFAk3qGkEninF88OkhrUyB8I65-eI9NQIf-WYK5G6WkZRtUXg2xmKxmFf6AA0iokQO6Pw93wXzENRNHK08B~kbox4Bn4tnmHWyxTRWdV3ontrfhgSNmk-zI6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals voted June 23 to request an advisory opinion from the city's Design Review Board (DRB) on a proposal to add a garage/carriage-house and an addition at 65 Fila St., a property owned by the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation.

The request for advisory review follows a lengthy public hearing that included both objections and support from neighbors and preservation advocates over the proposal's size, massing, lot coverage and stormwater impacts.

Matt Herr, principal of Frost Herr Architects, presented the project on behalf of the Preservation Foundation and a potential buyer. He described the work as necessary to make the restored shell into a functional residence and said the addition's massing responds to neighborhood patterns. \"This difficulty is absolutely self created,\" Herr said, explaining the owner’s decision to add living space and a garage. He also described the addition as the most compact solution to add a third bedroom while respecting the historic fabric.

Neighbors opposed the scale. Andy Williams, a longtime Lafayette Street homeowner, said he and five adjoining neighbors had signed a letter asking the board to deny the lot-coverage variance as proposed. \"We don't wanna stand in the way, but we do have some objections,\" Williams said, adding concerns about lot coverage, stormwater runoff and the effect on neighborhood character.

Samantha Bosshardt, representing the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation (the property owner), said the foundation invested \"hundreds of thousands of dollars\" to stabilize the structure and will record a preservation covenant that requires foundation approval of future exterior changes. \"We have reviewed their plans ... and as we view it, [the proposal] is an acceptable height, mass, and scale,\" Bosshardt said.

Board members pressed for specific comparables and stormwater measures. Board member Amanda Dema raised permeability and encouraged the applicant to consider permeable paving or stormwater best practices. The board voted to send the proposal to the DRB for an advisory opinion focused on footprint, massing and neighborhood fit; the motion passed by voice vote.

Why this matters: The property was purchased and stabilized by the Preservation Foundation after decades of neglect; the foundation has added a preservation covenant to limit incompatible alterations, but neighbors remain concerned about bulk, drainage and tree impacts. A DRB advisory opinion will guide the board and the applicant before potential return for formal variance action.

Next steps: The DRB advisory review is intended to clarify whether the addition's scale is consistent with design guidelines; the ZBA asked the applicant to return with DRB feedback and more precise comparative lot-coverage figures.","After extensive public comment about scale, lot coverage and stormwater, the Zoning Board voted to seek a DRB advisory opinion on a proposed carriage-house addition and garage at 65 Fila St.; supporters cited historic precedent and the property's preservation covenant.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6553836,"Zoning board extends variance for 126 West Ave. mixed-use project 18 months",0,3578000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45&start=3578&end=3578","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065555-0086c1b7ddb330e746e90fde77d62d45/thumbnail_3578000.jpg","/articles/6553836/Saratoga-Springs-City/Saratoga-County/New-York/Zoning-board-extends-variance-for-126-West-Ave-mixed-use-project-18-months","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553836-7dda3c9248c107cc3485fd77baaed007/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436727&Signature=i6aR-qbu~pg9zdsqmoHgHyrhPYWU~z6olvalb6ZI3ttCX7BVHOn39TI0hvvlD9Lh7XXnGI~QeuptOgseWXmP6kQq8fm5fgEJg1-NDgPOHNUGclH7PY-lWMWpacPzXx4PNOb-nPJQccxrkjX~QiSSB6Pmkv~t57h9owsSwsPITCjh9VTik8-o~eqej12K-DTPWPutQ20TaIBlFJe0IlhytvvdM6xvPtcrArsWa9OZxnnY0335cqd2b8fxCLh-HZAPce5Bi-nXHlqTIMn8NDOSyFAyhCW9pvn7xmNoFLFetEgy~-kOU9rm4UQiiuA1CjeyeHtpcSKByTDxfahwzeu50Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals on June 23 approved an 18-month extension of previously granted area variances for a mixed-use project at 126 West Ave.

The extension authorizes the variance for the construction of a mixed-use development (four townhomes and an office with an apartment above) to remain effective until Dec. 23, 2026, unless a building permit is issued and construction begins or the board approves a further extension.

Joe Hens, an engineer with Ingles & Associates, told the board the project plan has not changed and the applicant seeks more time to complete value engineering and finalize architectural details. \"My name is Joe Hens. I'm with Ingles and Associates. We're the engineer for this project. We're seeking an 18 month extension for the previously granted variances for the January project,\" he said.

Susan (staff member) read the board's resolution and noted the variance was originally granted July 25, 2022, and had been extended once before. The board explicitly tied the extension to the property identified as Tax Parcel 165.72-1-22.1 and to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) standards that govern issuance and expiration of area variances.

The motion to extend the variance passed on a voice vote with board members recorded in favor: Christopher LaPointe, Otis Maxwell, Amanda Dema and Gage Simpson. The board noted this will be the second and, per the motion language, the final extension under the current resolution wording.

Why this matters: Extending the variance preserves the applicant's entitlement to build the mixed-use development while design and permitting work proceed; it also sets an explicit new expiration date so the board or applicant must return if construction does not begin by that date.

The planning staff will reflect the extension in the property file and building-permit tracking. The board's resolution sets the new expiry at Dec. 23, 2026, consistent with the 18-month extension from the last expiration date of July 25, 2025.

Votes at a glance: The board approved the extension by voice vote; four board members were recorded in favor. No members were recorded as opposed or abstaining.","The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals approved an 18-month extension of previously granted area variances for a mixed-use development at 126 West Ave., setting the new expiration for Dec. 23, 2026, unless construction begins or further extension is granted.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Owner seeks in‑law apartment at 35 Ash St.; ZBA requests comparables and overlay maps

ZBA hears modest sunroom request at 3 Second St.; board asks for comparable lot coverage data

Applicant says connecting garage will ‘improve’ rear setback at 134 Crescent St.; public hearing left open

Neighbors split as zoning board sends 65 Fila Street proposal to Design Review Board for advisory opinion

Zoning board extends variance for 126 West Ave. mixed-use project 18 months