Applicants cite cancer risk and constant truck noise in request for 12-foot fence on Clinton Street

The Saratoga Springs Zoning Board of Appeals on July 13 heard hours of testimony over a variance request that would allow a 12-foot fence and wall at 75 Clinton Street, a corner lot where the property’s backyard faces Van Damme Street, an artery applicants say functions as an illegal truck route.

Attorney Justin Grassi, representing the applicants, said the relief is meant to mitigate health and safety harms tied to heavy truck traffic at the intersection. He introduced Dr. Christopher Mason, medical director at the CR Wood Cancer Center, who warned board members that fine particulate pollution and noise exposures near truck corridors are linked to serious health outcomes. “There is a direct association with cancers and diesel fumes,” Mason told the board, and he described PM2.5 and noise exposures that, he said, harm children’s lung development and are associated with cardiac and neurodevelopmental problems.

Homeowners Jennifer Clifton and Nick Fazioli said the fence was built out of necessity after repeated safety and health incidents at the site. Clifton described family concerns and local monitoring they conducted, saying their independent EPA-style monitors recorded particulate levels she described as concerning. “An entire car went all the way through our fence, and that entire car was in our yard,” Clifton said, stressing that the barrier was installed to protect her family. Fazioli told the board the property experiences truck queuing, idling and use of engine compression brakes (“Jake brakes”) and that the site’s traffic patterns are unique on Van Damme.

Several neighbors spoke in support, saying the city and state have not enforced existing truck restrictions. Resident Jennifer Leidig said she walked the neighborhood and had seen the impacts firsthand and voiced support for relief. Other speakers urged restraint: Patty Morrison said she sympathized but opposed granting a large, after-the-fact variance and warned of precedent risks and whether required building permits or DRB review had been completed. “We don’t change the law for one issue,” Morrison said, urging the board to preserve code integrity.

Attorney Grassi and the applicants offered visual-mitigation options—immediate faux ivy and a commitment to grow living screening over time—and letters of neighbor support for the proposed ivy treatment. The applicants said they had submitted an engineering traffic study that estimated about 731 heavy vehicles in average daily traffic on Van Damme and cited agency correspondence describing historic and structural impacts to older buildings.

Board members pressed applicants on alternatives and scope. Several asked whether large rows of trees or different landscaping could be an effective substitute; applicants and the expert said trees would require much larger buffers or would be less reliable than a purpose-built sound-transmission wall with vegetative screening. Members also asked whether the fence should be reviewed by the city’s Design Review Board because the property sits in a historic-review district; applicants were advised to seek DRB input on materials and visual treatment.

Rather than grant or deny the variance that night, the board moved to request an advisory opinion from the Design Review Board about the visual/ivy treatment and whether the proposed wall fits historic-district expectations; the motion was seconded. The chair called for a vote and recorded an inconclusive roll-call result, stating, “So 5 to 5 to nothing, for advisory opinion.” The public hearing remains open and the board directed applicants to pursue an advisory review with the DRB and return to the ZBA with those findings at a future meeting.

What’s next: The applicants were asked to obtain any DRB advisory opinion and return with the DRB’s reaction and any additional mitigation details; the ZBA left the public hearing open and identified upcoming meeting dates (possible follow-ups July 27 or August 10).