Design Review Board

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES (FINAL) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2023 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Tamie Ehinger, Chair, called the joint meeting of the Design Review Board and Planning Board to order at 6:05 P.M. PRESENT: Tamie Ehinger, Chair; Rob DuBoff, Vice Chair; Chris Bennett, Ellen Sheehan, Tad Roemer, Jeff Gritsavage, Leslie DiCarlo ABSENT: Karen Cavotta (Alternate) STAFF: Amanda Tucker, Senior Planner, City of Saratoga Springs, Beige Berryman, AICP, Susan Barden, Senior Planner Planning Board. Members of the Planning Board: Mark Pingel, Chuck Marshall, Bill McTygue, Patty Morrison A. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: JOINT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD and PLANNING BOARD MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, November 15, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. 1. 20230919 3376 S Broadway Treehouse, Brewing Special Use Permit. Consideration of SEQRA review and joint Planning Board and Design Review Board discussion regarding a Special Use Permit and Architectural Review of a new eating and drinking establishment with micro-production of alcohol and outdoor dining within the Gateway Rural Commercial District. Tamie Ehinger, Chair reminded the DRB and PB members that the applicant, Tree House Brewing Company is in front of them specifically for consideration of SEQRA review. The intent of the meeting is to provide feedback to the applicant from both Board’s perspective. Presenters: John Cannie, Snyder, Kiley, Toohey, Corbett & Cox representing Tree House Brewing Company. Sarah Maggi Morin, Chief Growth Officer for Tree House Brewing. Sarah said they are a direct to consumer on-premises brewery (the only place you can get Tree House) founded and based in Massachusetts, where they have several locations across the state (Charlton, Deerfield, Sandwich-Cape Cod, Tewksbury, Munson). Sarah said they also have a farm with heirloom apples in Woodstock, CT. Sarah said they are honored to have the opportunity to come to Saratoga Springs. John Cannie & Stan Kubinski, Architect, Steve Wilson, Civil Engineer & Matt Mrva, Landscape Architect presented the project. John said the current owner of the property at 3376 Broadway is MCJACK, LLC. The applicant is THBC NY, LLC. Is under contract to purchase the property, about 10.5 acres in the Gateway Rural District (was Murphy’s Driving Range & Golf Course). All structures have been removed leaving an empty field, except for some trees on the northern, southern, and eastern borders. They are looking to construct the following:  Micro production of alcohol facility (allowed use)   Eating and drinking establishment of greater than 40 seats (allowed use). Will need site plan review for architectural (DRB) and a special use permit for outdoor dining.  The primary structure will house most operations – brewing components, kitchen, indoor dining & small retail shop, and off premises distribution.  Three additional structures – patron usage – outdoor dining-covered spaces.  Campus like setting. John said a big portion of the business will be direct to consumers for off-site consumption. John said the entire project will be UDO compliant – sufficient off-street parking, no variances, on-site circulation with two curb cuts onto Route 9. John state some highlights of the project:  Brand recognition – largest direct to consumer on premises brewery in the country.  Make Saratoga Springs in New York a destination for craft beer.  Expected economic impact to the region $30-$40 million range. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan:  Specialty Mixed Use – park, campus like setting, landscape and architectural design elements that complement Spa State Park. Focus on outdoor elements and park like feel.  Create 60+ jobs for this location and 35 ancillary jobs.  Improve streetscape on Route 9 – infill between Homewood Suites and Saratoga Honda. Will add sidewalks connecting all three businesses.  Tourist based use. Additional Studies conducted/underway:  Traffic Study initiated – report expected by November 30 Planning Board meeting.  Initial reports with SHPBO – archeological has been signed off on.  Endangered species – biologist confirmed blue Karner butterfly are in area but not on this location.  Have contacted DPW for water hookup and sewer.  SWPPP to be provided. Matt Mrva showed slides of the landscape design and site plan. The white building is the Tree House Brewery structure. There is covered outdoor seating and two separate pavilions – one covered, one pergola style roof. Circulation from Route 9 is one way to enter, around the building and exit. The grab and go area fronts Route 9 in a covered porte-cochère with 40 parking spaces. As you continue to drive around the building there is additional parking for those who are going to stay. They have employee parking at the top of the site and a loading area for trucks. Matt said there is a large recreation area with paths buffered with vegetation that would screen views to the parking and provide drainage for the site. There will be seating platforms, benches, picnic tables, swings – areas for people to gather. The main entrance is at the back of the building. A landscaped pathway from the parking lot leads between the two pavilions to the main entrance for the indoor dining. For drainage and stormwater, they are proposing vegetative swales along the buffers and a retention area towards the rear of the property. Stan Kubinski, Bergmeyer said he appreciated the prescriptive guidelines provided by the city. Stan said they have worked on all the Tree House campuses. He said they were inspired by the Spa Park and the arts scene in Saratoga. They’re looking at this project as the gateway to the Adirondacks. Stan showed slides and talked about the floor plan.  Second floor – open mezzanine (8,000 sq. ft.)  30,000 sq. ft. across two floors (22,000 sq. ft. 1st floor).  Comply with all descriptive diagrams. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 2 of 11   Showed rendering from Route 9 coming away from the city. The building design takes something from Saratoga – porches all the way around the building, simple gable form – barn buildings.  Showed rendering of the entry canopy for the off-site consumption pick up area.  A monument sign proposed coming up Route 9.  Connections to walking and biking paths.  Pedestrian paths, bike racks.  Funnel all guests to the rear of the building for entry. Tamie Ehinger, Chair said the project is very exciting and the board is looking forward to helping the applicant walk through the process and move the application forward. Tamie explained the standards that will need to be met. She said the DRB looks at mass and scale – height, proportion, roof lines, contextual appropriateness, street orientation, main entrances, fenestration, placement of windows and doors, visual interest, materials, lighting, and signage. Tamie said because this is a unique district there are other standards that apply such as the campus setting requirement. Tamie explained that the Planning Board’s purview would include parking, stormwater management, etc. Tamie said it looks like the applicant is incorporating a lot of natural materials – wood, roofing and they would be appropriate materials. Tamie said street orientation is important and she’s not sure that the positioning of the structure is the best use on the lot. Ellen Sheehan is concerned with the visibility of the parking lot as you head north into the city. Specifically, the grab and go area. Tad Roemer said there’s a lot to like! Has similar concerns about the orientation of the site plan. He said he would like to see the Route 9 facing architecture have some of the same elements you see facing east and facing the garden. Tad asked if he could see images of some of the other locations. John Cannie showed a 2-minute reel of the other locations. Tad said what the applicant is proposing is not incompatible with what Saratoga is looking for. Tad noted that he would not want to see any cars backing up onto Route 9, so that should be carefully thought out. Jeff Gritsavage noted the following:  Concerned about mass transit – bus limos, beer bus, etc. Would want to be on that as a trolley stop. Doesn’t see where a bus could come in and drop off.  Want people to be able to walk and bike to the location not just drive. Need bike/pedestrian connection.  There’s a lot of impervious surfaces – too much parking.  The context is interesting because across the street is a tree nursery. The southeast corner abuts old growth forest (Hemlock Woods), which there is very little of left in upstate New York. Suggested that instead of parking in the southeast corner they could work the greenery toward that area.  Tree House has a lot of Boston influence which is very fitting with Saratoga Springs which does also – Gideon Putnam was from Boston and Founded Saratoga.  Suggested a boulevard median rather than two separate entrances. Rob DuBoff said it was a very nice presentation. Rob has some concerns: City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 3 of 11  1. Materials – want buildings built that are still going to look that good 100 years from today. Matt said they have standing seam on the agrarian type buildings and wood wherever there’s a cut. They are trying to keep the materials as pure as possible. 2. Planning board issue but a concern of Rob’s is people drinking, leaving, and pulling out onto Route 9. 3. Concerned about the main entrance being at the back of the building. Also, the walk from the parking lot to get into the building could be a problem in the wintertime. Rob said what has been presented so far is perfectly appropriate for this area. Chris Bennett agreed with the other board members. He also has concerns about materials and how they will weather. Chris feels the porte-cochère is too large in relation to the building itself – the massing overwhelms the beautiful structure. Chris suggested they soften up the parking area with plantings, etc. Leslie DiCarlo – said the presentation was wonderful. She agreed with others that the view of the parking can be mitigated with more landscaping. Leslie is also struggling with the retail in the front of the building. She said the back entrance is beautiful and she would love to see that driving past. Mark Pingel, Co-chair for Planning Board said he would go last and asked for comments from the remaining planning board members present. Chuck Marshall asked if the circulation around the perimeter was both ways. John Cannie replied that it is one way. Chuck asked the anticipated build time. Matt said they plan to open in 2024. Chuck asked if they considered a pedestrian crosswalk at the State Park as there is currently no pedestrian crossing on the southbound side. Chuck suggested a sidewalk connection from the from the front into the retail space to get people into the building. Maybe move the bike rack closer to the main portion of the structure and get it away from the cars and bring everyone closer to the building. Chuck said he doesn’t support two driveways, but one exit does satisfy the request. Bill McTygue asked if they planned to bottle beer for off off-site sale. Matt said they would be bottling at this location and sold for off-site and on-site consumption. Tree House beer is only sold at Tree House establishments. Each location is a brewery. Sarah said their beer to go product sales exceed their on-premises business. They are a craft distillery and sell non-alcohol products like seltzers, energy drinks and coffees as well. Bill said he would like to see adequate lighting out front and along So. Broadway. Moving traffic in and out in a safe manner is also a concern of Bill’s. Patty Morrison echoed all that has been previously said. She said this is a great opportunity for the gateway and a wonderful campus like setting across from the State Park. Patty said she embraces the project and thanked the applicant for selecting Saratoga Springs. Patty said she would like to see less parking on So. Broadway. She noted that the speed limit is 40 MPH in that area not 60 as previously mentioned. She said her biggest concern is the landscaping and parking on the front – maybe add trees. Matt said they will be planting additional trees, but they didn’t add them to the rendering because they didn’t want to hide the structure. Chuck Marshall asked that they consider moving the southern driveway further to the south to eliminate the “U-turn” and move people in off the main road more quickly. Matt said if there’s flexibility on the curb cuts it allows many more possibilities. Mark Pingel summarized:  Parking in the front is not what they want to see from Route 9.  Traffic will be a serious issue. Safety will have to be analyzed.  Connectivity to sidewalks – facilitate alternative ways of getting there. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 4 of 11   Wetlands – in the back corner, will have to watch for the 100’ buffer. John said they will provide a slide when they return.  The new guidelines in the UDO raise the standard for parking. Chris Bennett suggested that the applicant talk with the Land Use Board – complete streets to get some input on connectivity. Tamie Ehinger, DRB Chair said there were two objectives for the meeting – to provide feedback and input from both Boards, and to establish the SEQRA Lead Agency status. Tamie said typically with a project of this size the DRB would defer Lead Agency status to the Planning Board. There were no comments from the audience. Tamie Ehinger, Chair made a motion that the Design Review Board defer Lead Agency status to the Planning Board should they seek it. The motion was seconded by Rob DuBoff. There being no further discussion, the motion was carried unanimously. Vote 7-0. B. POSSIBLE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: NOTE: The intent of a consent agenda is to identify any application that is “approvable” without need for further evaluation or discussion. If anyone wishes to further discuss any proposed consent agenda item, then that item would be pulled from the “consent agenda” and dealt with individually. 1. #20230806, Bank of America Signage, 27 Division St. Architectural review of new monument sign within the Urban Core / T-6 District. Tamie Ehinger, Chair, asked if anyone on the Board had any questions, comments or concerns on the consent agenda item. None heard. Tamie Ehinger, Chair, asked if there were any questions or comments from the audience regarding these applications. None heard. Tamie Ehinger, Chair, made a motion to approve the following application: 1. The Bank of America signage at 27 Division St. The motion was seconded by Ellen Sheehan. Being no further discussion, this application was approved as submitted. All in favor. Vote 7-0. C. DRB APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION: 1. #20230165 – 184 Church exterior modifications. Architectural Review of exterior modifications including but not limited to new porches with stairs and railings within the Office Medical Business District. Tamie Ehinger, Chair asked if anyone in the audience was there to represent the applicant. The applicant wasn’t present, but it was decided that there could be discussion on the project. Jeff Gritsavage lives within 100 ft. of the project and recused himself from the meeting. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 5 of 11 Tamie Ehinger, Chair reminded the board that the applicant had been given partial approval. The outstanding matter was a determination on the historical value of four windows that need replacing or repair. Tamie displayed a letter from Rob DuBoff who volunteered his time to look at the windows and evaluate the situation. Rob determined that the window on the south side had very limited historic value (1930 to 1950) and that it wouldn’t be detrimental to the property if that window were to be replaced with something like what exists in the structure. Three older windows on the west façade:  One was mostly destroyed – 6/6 – nothing left of the sash and can’t be replaced. This window will be in-filled where a shower will be located. Rob suggested the infill be something like shutters (wood not vinyl).  The remaining two windows are 1/1 with pulleys (sash cords are missing). It was agreed with the applicant and contractor that the two windows could be restored, sash cords re- applied and painted. They function fine. Rob DuBoff made a motion to approve the application with the following conditions: Window #4 shall be replaced, Window #1 will be removed and infilled with wood shutters on the exterior, Windows #2 and #3 will be restored. The motion was seconded by Leslie DiCarlo. There being no further discussion, the motion was carried unanimously. Vote 6-0 2. #20230786 – YMCA Senior Center Signage 290 West Ave. Advisory opinion to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the installation of a sign above the first floor at 290 West Avenue that requires an area variance. Tamie Ehinger said the Zoning Board of Appeals has asked the DRB for an advisory opinion on a sign requiring an area variance. Adam Wakulenko, Adirondack Sign, Lois Celeste- Saratoga Senior Center. Adam clarified that this is not the YMCA it is strictly the Saratoga Senior Center. Lois said it’s a new construction project that was built on the back of the YMCA building. Adam said they are looking to do the naming rights of the building by putting the Stewart’s Dake Family on the sign. Adam said as you go around the building there is lettering up on that façade. Adam said the sign is not for marketing purposes, it’s for identification. Tamie Ehinger, Chair said that she does not feel that is an appropriate location for the sign. Tamie said she understands the need to recognize the company that’s making the donation but feels there’s a more creative way to accomplish that. The location at the top of the building is incredibly inappropriate. Tamie said that signage should be secondary to the Saratoga Senior Center signage and not at that location. That area is an architectural feature of the building that was not meant to have signage placed on it. Chris Bennett suggested they put the wording all together – The Stewart’s Saratoga Senior Center. Rob DuBoff agreed that the location is inappropriate and that it should be lettered together as Chris suggested. Leslie DiCarlo agreed that the sign is inappropriate and misleading. Tamie Ehinger, Chair asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment and there was none. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 6 of 11 Tamie Ehinger, Chair in consideration of the request for an advisory opinion by the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the Saratoga Senior Center located at 290 West Avenue, the Design Review Board would like to provide the following feedback: 1. Consensus that the location of the signage as presented is inappropriate based on form and height, 2. It’s been suggested that the applicant consider consolidating the verbiage on the lower sign with Stewart’s secondary to the Senior Center and therefore issues an unfavorable opinion as presented this evening. The motion was seconded by Chris Bennett. Vote: 7-0 against. 3. #20230843 – Dunkin Donuts Exterior Modifications and Signage, 207 S. Broadway. Architectural Review of Exterior modifications and signage replacement to an existing commercial structure within the Neighborhood Center / T-5 District. Presenters: Stephanie Bitter, Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart & Rhodes & Tom Burke, Owner/Operator Dunkin. Stephanie said they are looking to give the current Dunkin building a facelift and are asking the DRB to review the following:  Painting the exterior a dark grey and incorporate an orange color over the existing materials.  Change signage from Dunkin Donuts to just Dunkin (same location).  Make the lighting relative to the signage code compliant.  Modifications to the menu board at the drive through. Stephanie showed slides of how the new colors would be incorporated on the existing building and how the signage would be replaced both on the building and the current monument sign. The enter and exit signs will be modified but no change in the size. The canopy for height restriction would also be modified. Tamie Ehinger, Chair suggested that the board look at each sign individually:  Front sign being reduced from Dunkin Donuts to Dunkin. The sign is currently internally lit, but they want to make it code compliant. Tamie suggested halo lit or backlit – Stephanie said whatever is acceptable to the board they will do. No objections from the board.  Enter & Exit – replacement in-kind. No objections from the board.  Monument Sign – getting a facelift. Rob DuBoff noted that this sign is also internally lit and should be changed to gooseneck.  Menu Board – location is the same, replacing the stack menu board with a canopy board with digital plates on the front (similar to McDonald’s). Jeff Gritsavage said the main sign on the building and the monument sign would both look classy with goosenecks. Tamie Ehinger asked the board their thoughts on the change in colors. The slide shows the grey color in the panels and the columns will remain cream colored. Tamie said she doesn’t feel the colors are inappropriate for the neighborhood. Tamie Ehinger, Chair, asked if anyone on the Board had any questions, comments or concerns on the consent agenda item. None heard. Tamie Ehinger, Chair, asked if there were any questions or comments from the audience regarding these applications. None heard. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 7 of 11 A motion was made by Tad Roemer to approve with the following conditions: 1. The front sign shall be halo lit, 2. The monument sign to be externally lit. The motion was seconded by Ellen Sheehan. Motion carried. Vote 7-0. 4. #20230439 – 233 Lake Ave., Verizon utility antenna. Architectural Review of new wireless telecommunication facility on an existing structure in the Urban Residential – 1 (UR-1) District. Tamie Ehinger, Chair said the applicant has been in front of the DRB a few times and has made some modifications and done a balloon float showing different visual points of the antenna. Amanda Tucker, Planner said the Planning Board has asked that the DRB look at low profile screening along the northern edge of the building to screen the apparatus and antenna from the northern neighbors. Dave Brennan, Law Firm of Young, Sommer presented for the applicant, Verizon Wireless. Also present was Nate Keenan, Airosmith Development. Dave said they were asked by the DRB and PB to fly a balloon off the penthouse where the antenna will be located to show if there was any visibility. There was also a lower balloon placed that represented the radio equipment. Dave said they took 32 photos from the surrounding neighborhoods. The antenna was visible from the following locations:  Immediately adjacent to the building looking from Lake Ave. to the west.  In the back of St. Clement’s Church.  House on Excelsior Ave. – one acre lot, house sits back, and the balloon was visible. This vantage point was the main concern of one of the Planning Board members and what they would like the DRB to consider for screening.  Slide 32 from East Side Rec. – 1200 ft. and 1600 ft. away. Dave said they received a Negative Declaration under SEQRA from the Planning Board and a Special Use Permit with the recommendation about the screening from the house on Excelsior Ave. (visual behind large deciduous tree). Dave said one recommendation from the Planning Board was a 4 ft. high PVC fence along the edge of the roof line to obscure the view from Excelsior. Dave said he didn’t debate the suggestion with planning, but in his opinion, it doesn’t need screening along the roofline and may look worse. Tamie Ehringer, Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to comment and there was none. Tamie Ehringer agreed that screening in this case might just exacerbate the visibility of the location. Tamie said she does not find the location of the antenna inappropriate. Jeff Gritsavage asked if they need to make the tower available to their competitors. Dave said yes if it’s a true tower – vertical steel. Most communities have a requirement for co-location opportunities. This is a rooftop co-location with antennas. If another applicant came to the landlord and wanted to locate an antenna, Verizon does not have exclusivity. In theory there’s enough room for another carrier. Leslie DiCarlo made a motion to approve the Verizon application as submitted. The motion was seconded by Ellen Sheehan. Motion carried. All in favor. Vote 7-0. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 8 of 11  5. #20230392 – 78 Church New Multi-Use Development. Architectural Review of a new five-story multi-use structure within the Neighborhood Center/T-5 District. Tamie Ehinger, Chair said that 78 Church Street was before the DRB earlier this year where the applicant’s height bonus and demolition were approved and SEQRA was completed. This is the first time the applicant is back before the DRB since approval of the height bonus. Libby Clark, Esq. represented the applicant, as well as George Olsen, Architect and Tony Bonacio, Bonacio Construction. Libby noted that the site plan and architectural review application are pending in front of the city at this time. Libby said the final proposed drawings are before the DRB to determine significance of demolition and full architectural review. The project will then go to the planning board for final approval – SEQRA review pursuant to their site plan review. Libby said any modifications by the DRB need to be considered before the application goes to the planning board. Libby displayed a picture of the submitted site plan. The first floor of the building is predominantly the entryway and parking. There is also a lobby, commerce base, community room and civic space. George Olsen talked about displayed slides of the proposed building – his first design under the new UDO. George said the building is 61 ft. high, long, and wide and capped at 4 stories. The first-floor plan shows a recessed area for civic space, community space (conference table) as part of the bonus process, a small retail space, lobby, and parking. They are proposing seven apartment units on the second floor and 6 units on the third and fourth floors with step backs and terraces on the fifth floor. George said the fifth-floor steps back (15 to 16 ft) all the way around the building, everyone has a terrace and there are sections of green roof that will be used for stormwater. The building materials consist of brick, fiber cement board, limestone blocks (grey/blue) and exposed steel on the balconies (9’ step back). George displayed aerial views of the building. Tamie Ehinger said she felt the material choices were very appropriate and well done. She said she appreciates their wanting to include some verticality keeping the building from looking squatty. Tamie said she doesn’t feel the balconies are appropriate because they add to the horizontalness of the building, and they create a very suburban feel. Tamie said she’s concerned with how large the balconies are and what residents use them for. George noted that the railings on the front of the building will be glass. George said they removed the brick on the corners of the building to bring attention to the center brick pillars to help make the building look taller. George added that the units are condos with a HOA so there will be restrictions about what can be placed on the balconies. Ellen Sheehan asked to look at the colored rendering on Church St. looking west. On the second floor where the limestone meets the balcony is it flush or is it overhanging? George said the balcony overhangs it a bit. You have the brick, a reveal to the limestone, and then the limestone is set back behind the balcony. Ellen said she was confused about what was happening in the civic space. George said it’s still in the development stages. They haven’t been to the planning board yet other than for the initial height bonus. The LA Group will be going back to planning. George said there will be a fence of sorts because the civic space will be built on private property. Ellen said she agrees with the Preservation Foundations comment that the center glass on the ground floor reads like a door instead of a window. George said it is pure glazing, there’s no trim around it. It’s meant to be very transparent and not look like storefront or entrance doors. Ellen said she thought it would be more successful if it was made to look like a window, with a base. She thinks it’s confusing and looks like an entrance. Ellen asked where they planned to put the sign for the retail. George said they’re not to that point yet, the retail may come in off the lobby. George added that one of the reasons they didn’t connect everything at the lower level was so City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 9 of 11 they could reinforce the columns coming into the ground. Ellen said for the people walking down the street, it’s not visually clear what’s going on. Ellen agreed with Tamie about people putting different things on the balcony. It could get cluttered looking. Tad Roemer asked George if he liked the design – seems like the architect didn’t get to do what they wanted to do. George said he does it. It reads well. Tad said the building is carved back giving it an awkward appearance. There’s a lot of balconies, it’s close to the ground, gateway to the city and owners do what they want on their balcony. Tad said he won’t support that many balconies at a gateway location. He said the façade is 60% balconies. Tad asked the height of the floors. George said the bottom floor is 12’ 6” and the other floors are 11’ 6”. Tad said the floors all look the same height; the building doesn’t have a strong base. George said one of the reasons they carried the large columns to the ground was to make the building look taller. George said the bulk of the building is condos and that’s what it’s being marketed for. There’s very little retail. Tad said he doesn’t think the required civic space is a good idea. George said it’s not a well-defined requirement. Tad said the small, covered area just seems like a bad idea. Libby noted that spirit and intent makes a lot of sense but not necessarily on these smaller sites. Libby said she’s seen a fee in lieu of in other urban areas – to be able to pool money for these difficult sites so the city could choose larger beautification projects that have very meaningful impact. Libby said they also have the community space inside the building. Amanda Tucker, Planner said the applicant is using the community space as part of their requirement for the height bonus. The civic space is a requirement of development in the downtown area which is a City Council decision. Tad said the entry ways and retail get lost. Jeff Gritsavage said the steel columns just dive right into the sidewalk – he thinks they need pedestals or some sort of base at the bottom of the columns. He said the de-icing salts will eat away at the steel. Jeff noted the fourth story facia is brick hanging like a curtain. He suggested maybe a steel lintel to carry the brick. Leslie DiCarlo said she likes the overall design, and she thinks it’s appropriate for this location. She agrees that the base of the building looks weak. Leslie said she realizes the first floor is not fully developed but right now it just doesn’t make sense. She said even if the center glass were to be made a window, the entrances and the retail entrances don’t make sense. George said they can rework that. Rob DuBoff said he won’t support fiber cement board as a building material, it’s not appropriate as far as longevity goes. Rob asked what the applicant proposes for windows. George said they will be storefront in the front and around the back will be aluminum clad. George said they are double hung ganged windows on the western façade. All the windows are operable. Rob asked if the community space had to go in the front of the building. George said that was the only place that there was availability. Rob said for the record that it’s a ridiculous requirement. Libby said the parcel is in two zones. The smaller parcel is in the zone that requires the civic space, and the UR-4 is the larger piece behind, so they are restricted by the zone change on the site. Rob said what’s good for the community in the “community space” is retail. Otherwise, it’ll end up being used for storage. Rob said he’s fine with the height of the building. Rob said he’s concerned about the appropriateness of the steel I beams for the balcony structures. Rob gave Railroad Place as an example with more decorative balconies in the metalwork. George said they are tubed steel. They can look at doing that. Rob said there’s a long history of balconies fronting the road in Saratoga, so he doesn’t question the appropriateness of them. Jeff Gritsavage commented that they could open up the I beam that goes all the way across by putting in web stiffeners where the columns are. City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 10 of 11 Chris Bennett said the first floor is just very confusing. Beyond the first floor it looks great! He said he’s not too hung up on what people are doing with their balconies. It’s a vibrant community and people live there. Chris said they did a nice job with the brick and the building is successful. He said he would like to see them use something other than cement board. George said the first floor is the least thought out. Tamie Ehinger, Chair opened the floor for public comment. Samantha Bosshart, Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation said that overall, the Foundation doesn’t have significant concerns with the design or the height of the building except for the first floor. Samantha said they would welcome a change to the non-purposeful civic spaces when the city has beautiful civic spaces and no resources to maintain them. Samantha said she would welcome a payment in lieu of these spaces. There were no further comments from the audience. George suggested making the second-floor railings opaquer and visually raising the first floor up. Tad Roemer asked how they would drain the balconies. George said the balconies have a paver system – the bottom part of the “W” section with a flat panel, a roof section, and a pedestal. Tad clarified that they’re building up to the lot line on the east. Tad asked about the windows on that side. George said there’s one row of windows on the east side. George said on the east elevation their neighbors can build right up to their property line. George said they have a deluge sprinkler system over those windows. Tamie Ehinger asked Amanda to pull up the Washington on Google maps. Tamie noted that the Washington also has four stories with large balconies and it seems to work. The directional expression is better and the rhythm and placement of everything falls into place. She said the form seems off in what is being presented for 78 Church. Tad said the indoor living space on the Washington is darker and the balcony is like a room with no windows. Tamie Ehinger, Chair said that the consensus is that the first floor needs to be re-worked from scratch, in terms of user flow, use of main entrances, and to address the weak base. Amanda Tucker will share the comments made tonight with the Planning Board. UPCOMING MEETINGS: Caravan Wednesday, November 29th at 4:00 p.m. DRB Meeting December 6, 2023 MOTION TO ADJOURN: The motion to Adjourn was made by Rob DuBoff and seconded by Ellen Sheehan. ALL IN FAVOR There being no further business to discuss the meeting was adjourned at 9:21 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Donna Gizzi, Recording Secretary APPROVED 1/10/2024 City of Saratoga Springs – Design Review Board Minutes – November 15, 2023 - Page 11 of 11