Planning Board

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES WEDNESDAY , OCTOBER 28, 2009 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM PRESENT: Clifford Van Wagner, Chair; Jamin Totino, Vice-Chair; Amy Durland; Michael Perkins; Laura Rappaport; Philip Klein; Dan Gaba Mary Ann Macica (arrived 7:13), Bill Moore Patrick Kane, Steven Rowland, Richard Martin, John Ballo, Mark Hogan, Tami Ehinger ABSENT: Carol Ann Maguire, Janine Stuchin, Keith Kaplan, Gary Hasbrouck, Robert West STAFF: Bradley Birge, Administrator; Jaclyn Hakes, Principal Planner; Susan Barden, Senior Planner; Tony Izzo, Assistant City Attorney CALL TO ORDER Chair Clifford Van Wagner called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING Clifford Van Wagner said the proceedings of this meeting are being taped for the benefit of the secretary. Because the minutes are not a verbatim record of the proceedings, the minutes are not a word-for-word transcript of the recording. REPORT ON ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS BY THE CHAIR 07.044 54 Phila Street Mixed Use Building. Request for administrative action for Site Plan to relocate street trees and street lighting to balance the streetscape. Approved October 19, 2009. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR Clifford Van Wagner announced the upcoming Planning Board meeting/Agenda Workshop schedule (Please note different schedule due to November holidays.)  Monday, November 9, 2009 – Agenda Workshop  Tuesday, November 10, 2009 – Planning Board meeting  Monday, November 23, 2009 – Agenda Workshop  Tuesday, November 24, 2009 – Planning Board meeting  Monday, December 7, 2009 – Agenda Workshop  Wednesday, December 9, 2009, Planning Board meeting (last one of the year) PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Clifford Van Wagner gave this opportunity to allow citizens to address planning issues not on the scheduled agenda. Hearing none. AGENDA ITEMS A. Joint meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals and Design Review Commission  09.011 McDonald’s Rebuild, 197 South Broadway This is a SEQR Coordinated Review for redevelopment of an existing restaurant in a Transect-5 District. DISCLOSURE: Dan Gaba disclosed that the applicant’s engineer is a client of his. He will not receive any payment from him and after further reflection he can be objective and his participation should not be prohibited from this. Clifford Van Wagner indicated that Mark Schachner, attorney for the Planning Board, has concurred with that finding. Clifford Van Wagner said the goal of the joint meeting for the three land use boards is to outline the purview of the three boards and to give the applicant and his agents all the necessary information to hopefully move forward. He said there is not a majority of the Zoning Board here, so no votes will be taken by the Zoning Board. BACKGROUND: Clifford Van Wagner reviewed the background on this application. In October of 2007, there was a Sketch Discussion with the Planning Board; there was a Sketch Discussion again on April 23, 2008, there was another Sketch Discussion on December 10, 2008. The application was submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Planning Board and the Design Review Commission. Coordinated Review was initiated by the Zoning Board on March 9, 2009. The Zoning Board of Appeals deferred Lead Agency on March 9, 2009. The Design Review Commission deferred Lead Agency on March 18, 2009. The Planning Board accepted Lead Agency status on March 23, 2009. There were a couple of meetings with the Chairs of the three land use boards and Bradley Birge. Each of the chairs articulated the issues that their boards deal with. The applicant met with the Design Review Commission to discuss mass and scale, and most recently the applicant met with Jaclyn Hakes, Bradley Birge and Susan Barden on October 6, 2009. The Zoning Board will have issues with area relief, the Design Review Commission will do the Architectural Review and the Planning Board will review the Special Use Permit and the Site Plan. He said the coordinated review must be completed by the Planning Board, the SEQR Long Form has been submitted. If a SEQR Negative Declaration is made, the applicant then goes to the Zoning Board of Appeals. If relief is granted by the Zoning Board, then the applicant returns to the Planning Board and asks for a Special Use Permit. If the Special Use Permit is granted, then the applicant seeks site approval from the Planning Board and Architectural Review from the Design Review Commission. Cliff said his request tonight is to address this application in 50 minutes, because there is a significant regular Planning Board agenda. He asked the applicants to not look back, but to move forward on a proactive basis. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 2 of 21 Clifford Van Wagner said the Zoning code issues are the build-to line (0 to 12 feet), the percentage build-out (70%), building height (2-story minimum), height of logo lettering (maximum of 18 inches), and placement of the signs. Patrick Kane said the DRC will review, signage, colors, materials and mass and scale. The DRC looks at what it looks like as it relates to its neighbors and the zone, the architectural elements, and it will make recommendations regarding materials, colors and mass and scale. Clifford Van Wagner said from the Planning Board’s side, what is dictated by code is the second story, internal traffic circulation/drive-through, alley traffic, parking, green space, pedestrian circulation, accommodations for bicycles, storm water management, streetscape, fencing, build- out, height of the fence, dumpster location, and deliveries. Appearing before the Board were Clark Brink, owner/applicant, Chris Boyea with Bohler Engineering, and Susan Davis, architect. In the audience was Francis Esian, representing McDonald’s. Clark Brink began by thanking everyone for coming out tonight. He reiterated what he was quoted as saying in today’s newspaper article, which was to restate his personal appreciation and respect for the volunteers working for the best interest of the city’s development projects. He said they are here to get a better perspective and alignment between the three boards for the potential rebuild of the McDonald’s on South Broadway. He said they have met with Planning staff and the boards, they have listened and responded. They are asking for discussion and a firm direction to move forward with the plans. (Mary Anne Macica arrived at 7:13 PM.) Chris Boyea indicated that the goal tonight is to nail down the orientation of the building, the scope and size of the building, and the travel pass of the revised site plan. He said if they could walk away today with a general consensus on the layout, they can then move forward and invest more money in more detailed plans that include drainage, lighting, landscaping, etc. He said they have reviewed several concepts and have had many comments from staff, board members and neighbors. Chris presented the proposed site plan. This plan shows the building with the front on the street, so the main entrance and the side entrance are accessible to South Broadway and parking. With this design, the traffic for the drive-through flows in the same direction as the alley. The drive-through is a very big part of the business, so there will be a pre-pay window and a pick-up window, with enough room to stack many cars. Today there are 3 curb-cuts, the new plan reduces that to 2. Pedestrian safety is improved because customers will not have to cross the drive-through to get into the building, and there is a longer throat for traffic driving in and backing out into the parking lot. Regarding build-out, they will be asking for a zoning variance. To address that, the building will be extended visually by adding a trellis/patio and a fence that goes along the frontage to help anchor the street frontage. The parking lot can be hidden with landscaping. The patio on the side has been made smaller and is right next to the building, which is helpful to the neighbors. The menu boards will be further away from the St. Francis Motel. He said this plan addresses the most concerns heard to date. The variances needed will the occupiable second floor, the frontage build-out, and signage. The signage will be required to have a successful project, because this is a custom one-of-a kind McDonald’s. Clifford Van Wagner asked Chris Boyea if the parking lot next to the Dunkin Donuts, which was cited as a place for people to congregate, has been incorporated back into the site after it was removed. Chris said the parking lot is necessary for business, but it has been reduced in scale. It is no longer secluded with a second entrance. Cliff asked if there would be anything to separate the Dunking Donuts from the parking lot. Chris said they would be happy to install a City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 3 of 21 fence there. Jamin Totino asked the distance of the whole property, and between the corners. Chris said the frontage on South Broadway is about 250 feet, the building is 50 plus or minus feet wide, the trellis is about 20 to 25 feet wide, and the fence could be as long as the Board sees fit. Sue Davis presented a model of the proposed building, which incorporates images of Saratoga as opposed to the standard prototypical arch. The tower element signifies entry, and there is a building up progression that occurs to accommodate the intent of the T-5 District, which is to be pedestrian friendly. The roof elements signify some entry to the building. She said she agrees it is not an occupied two-story building, however, the scale represents two stories. She said she met with Bradley Birge and as a result, some modifications were incorporated from the plan to the model. She said some comments raised in that meeting were that the little arches on the east elevation seemed busy, and if there was any way to move the tower or address it differently. The model shows one larger scale dormer, rather than three. In addition, there was a comment about the awnings looking like black and white piano keys that were missing a few, however, she said she feels it is important to keep the awnings separate in order to keep a verticality to the building; however, she suggests going to a different color. She said there were some concerns that the trellis is too light, and it was suggested to add a Mansard roof. She said this is the north side that doesn’t gain as much sun as on the south. She feels if they want to keep it open and inviting there shouldn’t be a flat roof that is going to be dark and not very open. She said she does like the idea to address how to fully do that. She said the trees she shows are a buffer to hide the parking lot, making it a more inviting pedestrian friendly way to come in. She said the proposed plan expands architectural elements out to visually carry the building, which is not in compliance with build-out. The south elevation has been simplified by not having the arch where the “M” is, because you don’t see that. The roof there hides the mechanicals and it also gets away from the flat roof strip-mall appearance. She said there was a concern with the way the service area projects out. She said the way to address that is with some vegetation or screening, or there could be a change of materials, which could make it push back. Chris Boyea said large deliveries will use the alley and will come across the alley to the back door. Patrick Kane asked if the delivery doors could be moved around the corner. Chris said that is tough because of the flow of fast food production. If the delivery doors were moved, they would have to move part of the cooking line, which would not be worthwhile from an operations standpoint. Pat said that is important, but architecturally it is irrelevant. Sue Davis said the other details of the building will be where the eye will focus. Chris Boyea said they could do something vegetation-wise to screen the delivery doors and empty racks. Clark Brink indicated that there has been a directive by McDonald’s that racks can no longer be left outside the restaurant for sanitation purposes, so that problem is gone in all McDonald’s locations. Michael Perkins said he would like to hear zoning weigh in regarding requested variances, which will affect what the Planning Board is doing. Mary Anne Macica said The Zoning Board has looked at a few different designs, but this is the first time they have seen this design, which does not have the build-out at the road. She said the number of variances that were needed were very few and very small. She said at that point in time, the Zoning Board felt comfortable with the plan going to DRC. She said they have an old city lot that they are trying to rehabilitate. She said if it were working for the Planning Board and the Design Review Commission was happy with it, at that point in time two small Area Variances were needed, which the Zoning Board was comfortable with. She said that was the plan seen in June that the Planning Board was happy with regarding the Site Plan, but not the building. She said the Zoning Board has not seen this particular plan. Michael Perkins said that plan had the building turned, which required City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 4 of 21 less of a build-out variance required, and it was not a two-story building, but appeared to be a two-story building with a façade. Chris Boyea said the Design Review Commission looked at that and felt the back of the building was prominent facing north, which would be the side seen heading south. He said with Sue Davis’s help and the DRC’s comments, they turned the building and now multiple sides of the building are very attractive. Amy Durland asked Chris to compare the height of the old design versus the new design. Chris said the existing building is about 18 feet, the current design proposed is upward of 20 feet. Sue Davis indicated that the model she presented is to scale, it is about 22 to 24 feet, and then it goes higher to the peak. She said the height of a two-story would be 20 feet plus the roof, so this conforms to the massing. She said no one would want to live above a McDonald’s. She said they are in a situation of conforming to all the requirements of the three boards. She said she doesn’t think there is a solution that does that, so they are trying to find a solution that addresses most of the concerns, with safety and traffic being vital. She said architecturally she feels it is more appropriate to have a narrower higher building than a large rectangle facing south and then articulate where the entryway is. Phil Klein indicated he would like to hear more from the DRC regarding signage. Steven Rowland said the DRC maintains a strict set of standards, they strive for less is more. He said the signage on the south side doesn’t accomplish much. He said having multiple signs on all façades of the building would be an issue. He said they look at where signs are located and how visible they are, and they try to minimize them. He said he thinks the building will attract attention and people will know what it is. Patrick Kane said no signs are allowed according to zoning above the first floor. He said South Broadway is in evolution, the pedestrian feel is being brought back by bringing things down to a human scale. Laura Rappaport asked if there is any provision for bicycle parking. Chris Boyea said there is opportunity for that, it is just not shown right now. Clifford Van Wagner asked about the dumpster location. Chris said it stays where it is today in the back area. Clifford Van Wagner said the requested zoning relief is more than with the other project, the Zoning Board will look at the build-out, the use of the trellis and the fencing, which is permitted to be no taller than 42 inches. Sue Davis said they have modified that in the latest revision to be 42 inches. The height of the lettering, logo signage, placement of the wall signage are also a Zoning issue. Cliff said the goal tonight was to give the applicants and their agents some indication on where they go from here. Patrick Kane said the Design Review Commission’s critical pieces are signs, materials and plantings. He said it is critical to address the gap between Dunkin Donut and McDonald’s, because the goal of the Transect Zone is to have parking behind the building. He said the height/second floor will set the tone for South Broadway. He said the DRC is not recommending the synthetic materials that were called out. The DRC also talked about the awning materials, outside lighting and the roof consistency. Clifford Van Wagner said no action will be taken tonight. The Planning Board will do a SEQR determination, if a negative declaration is declared, then it goes to the ZBA. He said this is the time for the Planning Board to address issues before the SEQR determination. He said he thinks there should be something along the property line on the Site Plan to separate the Dunkin Donuts, they should look at how they will use plantings or fencing or something for deliveries. Jamin Totino said he completely agrees with Mike (Perkins) and Pat (Kane) in regard to the intent of the T-5 District. He said looking back at the meeting minutes, from the Planning Board level, having the building oriented in such a way where there is such a large relief for frontage build-out, and the height is less than half of what is expected for a T-5 district and there is no second story, is a lot to ask from the City. He said the Planning Board has been fairly consistent on that message. He said when he saw this plan he was somewhat disappointed. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 5 of 21 He said he had that opinion originally, and he shares it again. He said he thinks it would be a mistake for the City if this plan were approved. Chris Boyea asked Jamin if he liked the old plan better. Jamin said he liked it more. Laura Rappaport asked why, architecturally and from a business perspective, there can’t be more build-out. Chris Boyea said that is where they have been over the last year. He said when you turn the building to get more build-out, everyone has to cross the drive-through traffic. There was also a stacking issue that could block in car spaces, which were a concern of the City Engineer as well as Traffic Safety, who weren’t budging on that. He said the DRC also had some valid points regarding the service side of the building being very prominent. He said when the building faces the road, the services are hidden on the back. Steven Rowland said the DRC has discussed ways to mitigate some of the relief. He said one suggestion was an extension of a Mansard roof across the front of the pergola, which brings the building farther north. Additionally, there was discussion regarding creating a solid base at the bottom of the pergola with an opening in it. Also, there may be an opportunity to create more solid piers between the fence to create more weight to the fence. All of these things architecturally help express the building components farther north. He said even though these changes won’t change the relief needed, it mitigates the aesthetic impacts. Richard Martin indicated that regarding Sue’s concern with the Mansard roof being on the north side, they aren’t looking at a solid Mansard roof, they still want sun to come in, but this would extend the front facade. He said that also better relates to the step up in that zone. Sue Davis said she agrees they are asking for a lot of zoning relief, but you have to look at the way the building functions and what makes sense on the lot. She said the prior plans meet the frontage, but it doesn’t work, and it is difficult to make it look right. She said she feels strongly that this is the way to go to make it work. She said they can add a mansard roof, or beef up the fence, and add landscaping. She said the boards have to step back and coordinate what they can live with. She said pedestrian safety is huge, the drive-through is 60% of the business. She stated she needs some direction as to the basic overall direction. Phil Klein said he agrees with Steve. He said he thinks the height of the building is fine considering what is around it, but the frontage could be extended with a wall with a fence on top of that with shrubbery, which would also somewhat hide the cars and lights. Mark Hogan suggested adding a water feature of some sort. He said it will be difficult to try to accomplish all of the needs, but from a DRC standpoint, this is worlds above what they saw the last time. Mary Anne Macica said this was a McDonald’s before the T-5 zone was created. She said even though more variances are requested, it is important to work within the Planning Board and Design Review Commission guidelines. She said what is there needs to be changed and it needs to fit, but not everything fits. She said the Planning Board and Design Review Commission should keep in mind what the zoning requirements are in trying to make it become closer and reducing the variances. She said there is no change in the neighborhood or use, the building height of a two-story building would be that height, so the boards should take a realistic look at what will best fit into the intent of the T-5 zone, and give the ZBA some recommendations. She said the ZBA knows there have been alternatives, and the ZBA can work within the framework given to the ZBA from the Planning Board and Design Review Commission. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 6 of 21 Amy Durland stated that the most useful feedback to the Zoning Board from the Planning Board and Design Review Commission are relating to building orientation, which has huge implications for the frontage, and also the faux second floor. She said if the Planning Board and Design Review Commission can give some sense of direction regarding these issues to the Zoning Board, that will accomplish something. Mary Anne Macica said the second floor issue is not that it has two floors, but that it has the height of two floors. Clifford Van Wagner said the application will be on the next agenda in two weeks to discuss what was said tonight, if they are ready, when the Planning Board will look at SEQR determination. He said if the Planning Board comes to a consensus, the applicant will go to the Zoning Board to look at the reliefs that need to be issued, if that works, they come back to the Planning Board for a Special Use Permit, and then to the Design Review Commission. Amy Durland clarified that the zones refers to the number of stories, not the height. Mary Anne Macica said Tony Izzo is verifying that. Jaclyn Hakes stated that the wall sign as proposed would require a Use Variance. Chris Boyea said the value of having this joint meeting is phenomenal. He said his concern, and speaking for Francis from Corporate, is that leaving here they are no further ahead. Cliff Van Wagner said that will not change, no action will be taken tonight until SEQR is completed. Chris said Jamin’s comment was that he doesn’t like this layout as much as the other ones. He asked if they could have a sense in the next 30 seconds of the direction to go in. Cliff said that can’t be done tonight. Mary Anne Macica said Tony Izzo indicates that the second floor must incorporate a residential use, which would require a Use Variance. PUBLIC COMMENT: Jaclyn Hakes said there are no public hearing requirements for SEQRA. Cliff said he is not obligated to, but for transparency and because a former Planning Board member requests it, he will take comments. Bob Israel said the elephant in the closet is the second story issue. He said if you want to change the zoning, then change it, but that is not a two-story building and it will never look like a two-story building. He said the vision in that zone is for a two-story building there. He said he understands that the applicant wants a suburban building, and that is what was there, but that is not what the vision for that area is. He said it would set a tremendous precedent. He said in the past, the Planning Board has considered hardship, sometimes things were permitted that should not have been, which was not good for the applicant or the city. He asked the Board not to make it into something different than what the Ordinance envisions it to be. Elliot Masie, 46 Circular Street, said it is wonderful when the three boards get together. He said for full disclosure, he has breakfast every morning with Clark (Brink), and he has watched this go on for a year and a half. He said this town and economy are in an economic crisis. He said as an investor, he would head to Wilton right now. He said the City has to figure out how to get to an accelerated yes. He said it sends a clear message to developers and business people that this town is able to make some adaptations. He said this local business investor has gone through a planning nightmare in this situation, and he came here tonight to get some sense of how to get to yes. He said there is business after business looking at empty space in this area. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 7 of 21 He said he can go to other areas and figure out what the pathway to yes is. He said he hopes the boards can tell the applicant how to get to yes. Mark Sopronowitz, owner of the Carriage House, said his concerns of the project all along have been late night noise in the parking lot between Dunkin Donuts and McDonald’s, late night delivery noise, young people patching out coming out of the drive-through at night, and kids congregating late at night at the patio in front. He said the previous proposal addressed all four of those concerns satisfactorily. He said the new plan does not deal with the late night noise in the parking lot or the patching out of the exit. He said the delivery noise and the patio outside potentially is going to be better in this design. The Public Hearing is left open. All Zoning Board of Appeals members and Design Review Commission members left. The Board recessed from 8:14 PM to 8:26 PM. B. APPLICATIONS  09.039/09.040 Market Center at Railroad Place, Railroad Place and Division Street This is a continuation of a Public Hearing on a 2-lot Subdivision and a Site Plan Review of a multi-use building in a Transect-6 Urban Core District. BACKGROUND: Clifford Van Wagner stated that the Planning Board had requested input from the Preservation Foundation. The Planning Board has received a letter from the Preservation Foundation, dated October 22, 2009, in support of the project. He said two items of discussion by the Planning Board were regarding traffic, the intersections of Church Street and Railroad Place and Division Street and Railroad Place. These concerns will be discussed tonight, as well as any other issues. He said the SEQR process will begin tonight; however, it will not be completed pending some data that the applicant will collect over the next two weeks, specifically regarding cueing on Church Street. Jaclyn Hakes said that data has been requested by the Traffic Safety Department as a result of a meeting with Paul Male and herself discussing the proposed mitigation for traffic impact that was presented to the Board at the last meeting. The applicant is expecting to have that available for the next meeting. Appearing before the Board was Mike Ingersoll, with the LA Group, representing Sonny Bonocio. He said this evening the Board will see a few modifications to the project. He said there are six items to be talked about this evening. First is a lighting diagram. All lighting will be kept to half a foot candle or less on the edges of the property, with no spillage beyond the property. He said half a foot candle is just enough to see to get a key into a door. He said the existing lighting fixtures are about 32 feet tall, the new fixtures will be 27 feet tall, which includes 16 feet below the deck, and they will be cut-off fixtures. There will be as little lighting as possible while being safe. The next item is different types of crosswalks for the mid-block crossing being proposed. He said it is not a budget factor for them, they want to do the best thing. The Public Safety Department and Paul Male prefer a beveled curb bump-out. Clifford Van Wagner said bicycles should remain on the roadway, but they can drive onto the beveled City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 8 of 21 curbs if necessary. Mike Ingersoll said it is their preference to have the raised surface because it gives the most protection for the pedestrian and also accommodates snow plowing. He said there was discussion on the service exit only onto Division Street. Currently there is a 2-foot wide lane which is about 65 feet away from the crosswalk. The concern was that trucks coming out might block the intersection. Shorter trucks will be utilized, and the exit has been moved to discourage any trucks from going into the neighborhood, for a distance of about 90 feet from the Railroad Place crosswalk, which is the length of two service vehicles. This will also be one lane only. Jaclyn Hakes said on the proposed site plan, there are four parking spaces there that Public Safety has identified as a concern. Mike Ingersoll said they didn’t want to remove parking, because it is a premium; however, they will if the Board requires it. . Phil Klein recommended moving the proposed tree where delivery trucks exit because it is a hazard. Mark Nadolny said a delivery truck is typically about 7 ½ feet off the ground, so you would be able to see over a parked car that is about 4 feet high, so the tree would be the issue and not the cars. Mike said the tree can either be moved, or not put there. Jamin Totino asked about the frequency of trucks exiting. Mike said they have a preliminary service delivery projection, which they will review later on in the meeting. He said Price Chopper has a representation of a cross-section of stores, because they haven’t figured out all their delivery vehicles for this project yet. Sonny Bonocio said regarding concerns about what the delivery doors will look like, they will blend with the storefront with smoked or opaque glass. There will be “no parking” signs placed there. Mike Ingersoll distributed a preliminary projected delivery schedule to the Board. Price Chopper’s general grocery deliveries from their warehouse are the ones they have control over. They will try to deliver off anyone else’s peak. The hardest to predict are the other deliveries of bread, Pepsi, etc., which are done on their own schedule. Price Chopper will try not to have trucks backed up and stacked in the delivery area. The Price Chopper delivery trucks will not be the full tractor-trailers that come in now and line up in the back of the building. He said Price Chopper also anticipates less deliveries than currently. Jamin also expressed a concern about refrigeration trucks idling for long periods of time. Mike said the loading dock will be under the parking deck and enclosed, so the noise will be greatly reduced. They are also working with mechanical engineers on how to deal with the fumes. Cliff added that unlike the problem with the Price Chopper on Route 50 with multiple trucks idling, by nature of this design, more than two trucks will not be able to idle behind the store. Sonny said because trucks will be unloaded in the enclosed area, that can happen quicker. The other difference is this is a smaller store than the one on Route 50. Laura Rappaport asked if there would be noise from the ventilation system. Sonny said no, because the ventilation will happen on the roof. Phil Klein asked of deliveries could be scheduled for 7:00 AM, rather than 6:00 AM, so they don’t disturb the tenants. Mike Ingersoll said he has heard that the trucks coming down from Canada will make every attempt, but they would have to idle out in the street until 7:00 AM. He said the schedule is better than what exists today, so the impact will actually be better. Sonny Bonocio explained that once they come in under the building, they are not below the apartments, they are below the deck. Amy Durland asked if the dates can be controlled. Mike said the dates have to do with marketing and stocking of the shelves. Amy said she is concerned about the Sunday 6:00 AM truck delivery. Mike said that cannot be avoided. Jamin Totino added that the deliveries are not different from what is happening now, but the difference in the future is it will be enclosed and will be less of an impact. Sonny said that in his discussions with the Phase II owners, they were happy with the enclosed delivery only exit. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 9 of 21 Mark Nadolny, from Creighton Manning, showed a chart of the daily distribution of project land uses, comparing residential and grocery store traffic pattern throughout the day. He said the level of service “E” represents the possible worst case conditions. He said there would be an average of about a 7% increase in traffic on Division Street, which would not be noticeable. The requirement to justify installing a signal at Division Street and Railroad Place would be 100 people crossing the street every hour for 4 hours, or 190 people crossing the street in one hour. Amy Durland said if the numbers used were existing, the question really is what is projected. Mark said this is a redevelopment of an existing grocery store, so you anticipate the same pedestrian traffic. He said the residential component will be added, but the existing permitted parking will not be there any more. He said he, the City Planner and the City Engineer don’t feel that a traffic signal was the appropriate mitigation, but Mr. Benaquista has requested the information so he can come up with his own assumptions. He said the level of service “E” during the PM peak would be improved with a signal; however, by improving the level of service “E” on the side street, the delay will be moved to Church Street. The question is whether it is worth it to improve the level of service “E” for that couple of hours in the afternoon, when there is enough capacity, to delay traffic on Church Street all day. In addition, the cueing on Church Street would extend to the Woodlawn Avenue intersection or even down to Long Alley. He said Mr. Benaquista also asked what would happen with a protected turn lane on the westbound approach to get rid of the cue down Church Street. He said this does help the cueing on Church Street, but it will still on average cue through Woodlawn Avenue because there is only 80 feet between the two intersections. He said as a traffic engineer, he doesn’t feel these conditions justify the installation of a signal there, which is why they didn’t recommend it. Amy Durland said on the presented chart, it looks like the increase in traffic begins around 2:00 and goes on until 6:00 or 7:00, which is a substantial amount of time. Mark said the PM peak is around 5:00, and around 2:00 will be about 80% of that, which is why you look at the peak hour. Cliff said the numbers show only a 2% increase of the daily traffic, which is not a big number. Cliff said he hasn’t seen statistics for pedestrian traffic for the residential project. Mark said the numbers used are typical residential and suburban statistics. He said the statistics are for worst case suburban, where everyone uses their cars, and they didn’t take any sort of urban credit. He said they are trying to mitigate vehicular traffic by promoting pedestrian traffic. Mike Ingersoll added that the traffic counts also include the existing 30,000 square foot store, so the analysis is for the new project plus what exists, so they are analyzing 60,000 square feet of commercial space. Mark said when presenting worst case the numbers look big, but in reality they are going to be less because of the urban environment. He said the existing grocery store generates 44% less vehicle trips than a typical suburban grocery store. Jamin Totino said he agrees, and he agrees with Cliff that the impact is not that significant, but this is more likely what can be expected once the original grocery store is re-developed. Amy added that it is not going to be that great an impact, but it is already a difficult intersection now, and maybe the traffic studies don’t indicate that. Mark said in reality, the wait is not very long in the middle of the day, but this condition exists up and down Church Street because of the nature of the urban environment, and adding a signal is not justified based on the volumes. Laura Rappaport asked if a 3-way stop has been considered at either Railroad Place and Church Street or at Woodlawn Avenue and Church Street. Jaclyn Hakes said after talking through and reviewing data, Traffic Safety’s issue is not with the level of service at Railroad Place and Church Street, but on the safety aspect. She said perhaps that is a do nothing alternative, or perhaps it is a signal or something else. Whatever it might be might not be readily accepted by the driver. Mark said rear-end accidents could increase if a signal is placed where it is not justified, because people will run the signal or try to beat the signal. Jamin said that the applicant has not asked for any relief on the redevelopment of the current grocery store, so the Planning Board will look at it again down the road. Sonny Bonocio said it is their hope City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 10 of 21 that true urbanism decreases vehicle traffic and increases pedestrian traffic. Amy asked if that was part of the marketing analysis. Sonny said right now they have 85 people, 40% of them currently work downtown, but live or work in other apartment complexes or single-family residences, and they don’t want to deal with a single-family house any more. He said that is what they saw in Franklin Square. Laura said that is a great goal, but it may be optimistic because there may not be that many jobs downtown for people who could afford to live in these apartments. Mike Ingersoll said they can talk about this issue at the next meeting. He will provide Mark Benaquista with the data. He said Mark has also stated that he doesn’t necessarily feel a signal is warranted. He said there are a lot of things going on, there is a city parking garage that was put in with no improvements, and there are things the city has to understand and this applicant can’t solve all the city issues. He said if the next phase or other development happens in that area, this will be a good test for the future and if not this, what is it. He said the zoning code stimulates and encourages infill and development downtown, and this is meeting that code. He said they may be able to provide corrections to another intersection that will alleviate some problems, but they are working to try to get there. Jamin added that this is what the public has asked for. George Olsen showed the requested view of the proposed building looking north on Israel Lane. He said one thing discussed with the Preservation Foundation is moving the storefront wall on Division back 7 feet and continuing the arcade around that side, which opens the sidewalk up and provides more relief to that area. Clifford Van Wagner thanked the applicant for addressing the issues they were asked to address. Jaclyn Hakes stated that because of the location and proximity of the project to Church Street as well as to the county property to the east, a Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. This has been received, dated October 19, which states there are no countywide or inter-community impacts. As such, they will return it for local action. PUBLIC HEARING: Bob Israel, adjacent property owner, said he has had discussions with Sonny about the project. He said overall he thinks this is a great project, it is what the public is asking for. He said he likes the arcade, and the fact that the commercial space will be more on Railroad Place than Franklin Square, and the apartment entrance will be on the Franklin Square side. He said it would be nice to not have any truck traffic there, but everyone has to assume an urban burden. He said the park will be designed to be inviting for pedestrians. He said it is important to maintain the veterans’ monument there, and also the soldier should be there. Sonny Bonocio said he is working on the design of the veterans’ memorial with Gene Corsale. Mr. Israel said there is a bandstand that was associated with a trolley, which he put on permanent loan to the City as long as that remained a park, and he would be happy to continue that. It could be moved to the park with the fountain across the street. He said his preference would have been to step away from Franklin Square and add mass to the building on Franklin Street, even if it were more than 6 stories; however, he understands it is late in the design process. He said he thinks it is such as great project that it is certainly acceptable the way it is. He also thinks it is important for the DRC to make sure it is compatible with the existing buildings. He said he would like to see some Greek Revival iron work incorporated. Andrew Corbett, 22 Clinton and 7 Butler Place, stated that his primary concern is safety of pedestrian traffic on Butler Place, which is the issue he raised two weeks ago. He said he was City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 11 of 21 told access from Butler Place was mainly for fire access; however, from talking with fire officials, that is less of a concern because they can get access from the back side through the Blackmer lot. Mike Ingersoll said they concede his point. He said the Fire Department would still like to come into that parking lot, they talked about a crash bar on the back stairs so you can’t get in without a pass key but you can get out, with a knox box for the fire department to get into the stairs. Mr. Corbett said he hasn’t heard any resolution of how that will be done. Mike Ingersoll said there will be a list of conditions at the end. He said there is no objection to it being for egress only. Jamin Totino suggested adding a motion light to an existing pole. Sonny said before Mr. Corbett owned the property, he offered to add coach lights on the carriage house, which wasn’t desired by the owner. He said however Mr. Corbett would like to work that out he would be happy to work with. Phil Klein asked Mr. Corbett to discuss this issue with Sonny, which will be addressed with the Board at the next meeting. Mr. Corbett said his issue isn’t the light itself, it is with promoting traffic, and then if you do promote traffic you would need light. He said if traffic will not be promoted by putting in a crash bar, it is not as much of an issue for him. Phil said traffic will not be promoted, but certain kinds of traffic at certain times of the day should be discouraged. Samantha Bosshart, Executive Director of the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation, reiterated her written comments to the board, stating what a positive dialogue they had with Sonny. The Foundation appreciates that he listened to their concerns, including the canopy which they felt opened up more into Franklin Square to encourage pedestrian activity into the square. Jaclyn Hakes said most of the Board members’ comments she had received were discussed. She said there are a couple issues that the Board could discuss tonight, and others would be more appropriate to discuss when more traffic information is received. One issue to consider is the location of the dumpster and the removal schedule, which has been discussed in terms of Price Chopper, but not in regard to the residential aspect. Mike Ingersoll said it is a shared dumpster owned by Sonny. Sonny said there will be a trash chute that goes into a corridor that will also get picked up on the day-to-day. Jackie said another item raised was regarding possibly incorporating a Doggie Depot similar to what is in Congress Park. Sonny said no problem. Amy Durland asked how blasting will work. Sonny said this will be built on grade and up. He said one spot where there is a little concern is where the elevator pit is, but there are non- invasive ways of removing a small amount of rock. Right now they are not planning on doing any blasting. He said when they bring the water line across, if the Department of Public Works wants it to go down another foot, that is something DPW can create. Amy asked if any structures, like drainage lids, will not be flush with the street that could cause problems negotiating the space on a bicycle. Sonny said the street will be better than any other street in Saratoga Springs. SEQRA: The Board began SEQRA review. The Board discussed the following:  Number 11, all members agreed that the answer is “no”.  Number 15, all traffic mitigation being proposed is unclear. This answer will be put on hold.  Number 17, the Environmental Assessment Form indicates that blasting will occur; however, the applicant indicated no blasting will occur. Mike Ingersoll said it is not the intent to blast, only possibly by DPW for the water line. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 12 of 21 All other answers indicated the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental effects. Clifford Van Wagner indicated that the Public Hearing will be left open. The Board will not vote on the Subdivision tonight. The Board recessed from 9:55 PM to 10:01 PM.  09.048 Greentree Farms Staff Housing, 36 Nelson Avenue This is a Site Plan Review for a staff dormitory in the Institutional Horse Track Related District. Clifford Van Wagner stated that the zoning that this property currently enjoys allows a staff dormitory with a Site Plan Review. Saratoga County Planning Board referral is pending. The number of parking spaces exceeds the 20% allowed in that zone, which would require a waiver to be requested. Buffering along the west and east sides of the parking area will be discussed. When the Planning Board viewed the site on it’s caravan, there were questions about where the access road and parking lot will be, which the applicant stated they will stake out before another site visit; therefore, no action will be taken tonight. Appearing before the Board was Dave Carr, LA group, Tom Frost and Matt Hurff with Frost Architecture. Dave Carr said they are seeking Site Plan approval for a 50-bed, 11,500 square foot dormitory building and a 52-space gravel parking lot. The entire site is 106 acres. The dormitory is planned to be built in the rear northern corner of the property, which is bound by Yaddo to the rear and the NYRA backstretch. The property line is about 2,400 to 2,500 feet from the mansion. He said he will stake the 4 outside corners of the building and probably the 6 corners of the parking lot. He said the intent is to fit the building and the parking into the site as much as possible with doing the least amount of disturbance. There is very little grading, all of the surfaces are proposed to be gravel with stone dust, which is very horse friendly, as are all the surfaces out there. The majority of the horses will be there for the racing season, the month before and the month after, so no snow plowing will be done. There is a caretaker on the property. The trees were surveyed, which are mostly pine, so there is not a lot of screening. The area is very wooded with a lot of shadows and not a lot of sun, and the intent is to keep the existing character. The location of the parking lot was chosen to be in a low point so that there will be very little grading, which is about 5 feet below the fence line. Water will drain into the site. He said they don’t normally design long narrow parking lots, but this fits the site much better. The reason for the number 52 is based on the applicant’s experience and their need. There are 96 stalls on the facility, the workforce will be one exercise rider for every 8 horses, which is 12 riders. One groom is needed for every 4 horses, which would be 24 grooms. One hot-walker is needed for every 6 horses, which is 16 hot walkers, which comes to 52 employees. There may be a question of whether every employee will have a car, but their experience tells them 52 spaces is what they need. The zone allows for 38 cars plus an additional 20%, which is 46 cars, so a 6-car waiver is being requested. He said if the Board doesn’t feel comfortable granting the waiver, that will be done, but then there may be some occasions when workers will have to park in other areas. He said some of the workers will live off-site. He said this building will hook into an existing water line on the site and connecting to a sewer force main built on Nelson Avenue to serve the entire facility, that was approved by Paul Male. Clifford Van Wagner asked Dave Carr if they would shave parking spaces off the back area of the lot, if they were asked to do so. Dave said they would shave them off the end, but they City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 13 of 21 would like to choose the exact spots in the field. Cliff said if they are going to stake the parking lot out, they should stake out what is requested. The Board would need to know how a smaller number of spots would impact where the stakes are. Dave said if they shave off 6 spots, the stakes would move in 30 feet. Phil Klein stated that because the parking lot will be stone dust and gravel, it will not be lined, which could pose a problem. He said he doesn’t think they will need 52 parking spots because not all employees will have cars. Phil said there was some parking on the prior Site Plan for the barns. Dave Carr said they were removed as part of this and built into this lot. He said the thought is to get cars off the road and into the rear in order to have less interaction between the cars and the horses. He said the parking is really associated with the whole operation. Matt Hurff said that the employees working here are full-time employees, so they will probably have more cars compared to other facilities. Also, other people will be coming in daily in addition to the regular employees. Amy Durland asked if there are other places on the grounds to park, because the Board is interested in trying to keep the parking to a minimum. Matt said the only other parking would be on the driveway, which is not desirable. Phil pointed out that this is not paved parking. Laura Rappaport said the Board has been told in the past that stone dust is not considered permeable. She asked if there is an alternative greener surface, perhaps grass pavers. Dave said in reality the stone dust is permeable, but not by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation regulations. It does compact over time and becomes less permeable. He said the entire site is basically gravel, so that is something they would have to think about. Cliff said that is all that exists in the backstretch and throughout the site. Dave said that is the material the horse industry uses. He said there is not a lot of grass, it is basically a forest floor of pine needles. Laura asked if consideration could be given to an alternative more permeable surface. Dave said they can discuss this with the applicants. Amy Durland asked for the square footage of the parking lot and dormitory. Dave said the parking lot is about 14,000 square feet, the dormitory is a 2-story building that is 11,500 square feet total, the footprint is about 6,200 square feet. Phil Klein asked if the applicant will be fixing up the small outbuilding that is north of the proposed facility. Dave Carr said when the new building is built, no one will live in that and then they will decide what to do with it. Clifford Van Wagner suggested that the Board view the staked out parking lot before the next meeting on November 10. Amy Durland asked if Yaddo is aware of the proposal. Dave Carr said they are aware of it because it will be hooking into a water line that is jointly controlled. He said Matt has put in a call to them to go over plans if they want to do that. Michael Perkins said he is all for alternative surfaces, but he is not thrilled about grass pavers because of the location with the pine needles, and they also lose permeability. Dave said he doesn’t think that would be a good option for this site, because grass won’t grow. Laura said she would just like to consider some alternative. Tom Frost said there is an ongoing relationship between Yaddo and Greentree, they get along very well. He said he doesn’t anticipate any problems, but the proposal will be run by them. Clifford Van Wagner said the Board will review SEQR at the next meeting. Jaclyn Hakes requested clarification on the cover sheet of the Site Plan of the building height, maximum building height is 23 feet. Matt Hurff said the measurement is to the mid point of the roof. Jackie said on the west side there is not a lot of buffering along the fence line. She asked if there is an opportunity or a desire to further screen this property. Lastly, on the Site Plan City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 14 of 21 there is no walkway to the cottage. Dave said at this time they are not intending to use it. They don’t know what to do with it at this time because it is in very poor condition. PUBLIC HEARING: Hearing none. The Public Hearing is left open.  09.049 Proposed Stables at 37 Nelson Avenue, 37 Nelson Avenue This is a Public Hearing for a Special Use Permit for a 12-stall horse barn in the Institutional Horse Track Related District. Clifford Van Wagner said this is a parcel of land that received a zoning change. It is a single tax parcel, but it is split between UR-3 and Institutional Horse Track Related zones. The Board is being asked to comment on the construction of a new 12-stall horse barn. He said the Board has questions regarding: if the horses in the 12-stall barn will be harness or flat track horses, the material for the driveway, and an additional fence with a gate Appearing before the Board were Dan Neary, architect, and Karen D’Andrea, attorney for the applicant. Karen D’Andrea said presently there is a 10-horse stall barn on the property. The applicant would like to replace the existing structure with a 12-stall barn for thoroughbred flat track horses. She said the driveway material would be the typical horse-friendly material of crushed stone. She said regarding access to the NYRA track, on Nelson Avenue where the gray driveway comes out, approximately 60 feet where the fence line is on the left side the harness track leases the stables to trainers and owners. There is access there that crosses over Claire Court with a crossing guard. There is also presently an additional access that could incorporate going to Gridley Street if need be. It is a separate parcel owned by a separate corporation, but the applicant is part of that. Clifford Van Wagner stated that there was an agreement made a couple of years ago with the Planning Board and the City for when the horses need to come across Gridley Street, cones are placed along the south side of Gridley to keep a lane for horses only, and the street is also one-way at that time. Karen said she believes from 6:00 AM to 10:00 or 11:00 AM it is one-way. Cliff said there is a concern with having horses on Nelson Avenue with the traffic, so Gridley Street may be safer for horse traffic. Phil Klein asked if the applicant would be able to get an access easement. Karen said she doesn’t know if they could get a permanent easement, but it may be an option. She said the applicant’s paramount concern is safety, which is in part why they want to replace the existing stables. Currently there is a pre-existing, non-conforming house on the lot, which has a right-of-way across another parcel which is to Gridley which the applicant does have a permanent right-of- way to use for vehicle traffic. It is an empty lot used for parking, so there will be vehicles right there, and the length the horses would have to walk down Gridley Street wouldn’t be preferable, it would be safer to come out onto Nelson Avenue. They would not have to cross traffic, it is less than 75 feet, and there is a crossing guard. She said NYRA grants permits to applicants who want to stable their horses at NYRA. She said there is also a large dirt pathway on Nelson Avenue between the roadway and the property that is used for horse traffic. Dan Neary said the listing garage and stables are slated to be taken down. He said there are only 8 existing stalls, which was misstated in the application. Phil Klein suggested adding a second gate before the gate on Nelson Avenue for safety. Karen D’Andrea said she is sure that won’t be an issue to do, because their concern is safety as well. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 15 of 21 Karen D’Andrea said NYRA just replaced the southern fence line, and on the western end of the property at the harness track there is a chain-link fence. Phil Klein asked if there would be any reason to add access to that property. Karen said no. Dan Neary said they prefer to keep it secure. Karen said they have excellent working relationships with the neighbors, who are very pleased with how the property is used. Phil Klein suggested using the proposed barn for standardbreds in the off season. If this could be a possibility, consideration should be given of having access. Dan Neary said he spoke to the applicant about that, who said in the off season there is a surplus of stalls available and they probably wouldn’t be looking for extra stall space. Karen D’Andrea said during the season stall space is at a premium, so this project would be a viable option for smaller trainers that may have only 10 or 11 horses. PUBLIC HEARING: Hearing none. Jaclyn Hakes said this is an unlisted action which does not require coordinated review. She said a Site Plan is required. Dan Neary asked to have Site Plan review waived if possible. Jamin Totino said the City Engineer has deferred on comments until Site Plan review. Clifford Van Wagner said there are specific examples of very small projects where waiving the Site Plan review turned out to be not in the best interest of the city, so he suggests not waiving Site Plan review. Phil Klein asked if the house shown on the plans is used during the season and if so, how many people stay there and where do they park. Dan Neary said it is a single-family house with a dog-like driveway to the right for parking. He said the proposed plan shows one parking space because that is what is required, and on this site they would like to have a minimum amount of parking. He said the vehicles would be off-site. Phil said he would like to see the parking identified on the Site Plan. Dan Neary said it is hard to do a Site Plan without departmental feedback, which has not been received. Jaclyn Hakes said the feedback has been very minimal. The City Engineer would like to see plans for grading, and how storm water is being managed. The Fire Department comments recommend that the building meet NFPA 150 and 13 standards. There were no other departmental comments. Cliff said the applicant will start a Site Plan and will check with planning staff and Paul Male will weigh in. There is concern on this Board’s behalf with showing some parking, not creating any, but just delineating it better than a driveway that goes into a garage. SEQRA: The Board reviewed the SEQR Short Form. Section C, item C1, solid waste production or disposal will need to be addressed at Site Plan regarding where it is stored, how often it is taken away, etc. No significant adverse environmental impacts were identified. SEQR DECISION: Jamin Totino stated that based upon the information provided by the applicant in Part I of the SEQR Short Environmental Assessment Form and analysis of the information provided and presented in Part II of the SEQR Short Environmental Assessment Form, I find the project will not result in any large or important impacts and, therefore, is one that will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, and move to issue a SEQR Negative Declaration for this action. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 16 of 21 Michael Perkins seconded. Vote: Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, in favor; Michael Perkins, in favor; Laura Rappaport, in favor; Philip Klein, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Clifford Van Wagner, in favor. Motion carries 7-0. Dan Neary indicated that the applicant recently told him that he would rather have the back area just be grass, so the gravel drive would probably be a hammerhead in the front and would not be a loop around the building. Therefore, that might change the currently presented Site Plan. Jaclyn Hakes stated that that would be in general conformance. She said emergency access should be addressed in regard to that change. Karen D’Andrea said it would just be grass rather than gravel. SPECIAL USE PERMIT DECISION: Phil Klein moved to approve the Special Use Permit to allow a 12-stall horse barn that is in general conformance with the sketch that has been proposed, and in conformance with Article VI of Special Use Permit criteria. Jamin Totino seconded. Vote: Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, in favor; Michael Perkins, in favor; Laura Rappaport, in favor; Philip Klein, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Clifford Van Wagner, in favor. Motion carries 7-0.  09.044 Shafer Residence Subdivision, 718 North Broadway This is a continuation of a Public Hearing on a 2-lot Subdivision in the Urban Residential-1 and Urban Residential-2 Districts. Clifford Van Wagner stated that Paul Male had identified a connection to a private sewer, which is not legal. This has been resolved. The Zoning Board has granted Area Variances for the potential Subdivision to separate the carriage house from the North Broadway property. The Design Review Commission has granted Architectural approval. The Planning Board is concerned that there are no sidewalks along the north side of the Second Street and curbing on Second Street is basically non-existent. A letter was received from the applicant regarding a missing tree on North Broadway, the Board feels that one more tree should be there with some street lighting. Appearing before the Board were Susan Shafer, applicant, John Carusone, attorney, and Scott Kitchner, Tommell Associates. John Carusone said the applicant has received approval from the City Council for the encroachment on the city right-of-way on Bryan Street, which will be signed in the next week. He said the sidewalk on Second Street was not shown on the drawing the way it should have been. Scott Kitchner said there is a graphical error on the plan. It is the intent to extend the sidewalk from the existing driveway for the main house all the way down to Bryan Street. Jackie said it will need to meet city standards and ADA curb requirements on Bryan Street, Second Street and Broadway. She said the City engineer has requested 3 curb City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 17 of 21 cuts, but that is up to the Board to discuss. Scott said they are proposing to curb the entire length of Second street. He said there are existing street trees on Second Street that are extremely close to the pavement and are encroaching on the existing curb. He said they envision 2 breaks in the curb with a turned down section to prevent impacts with plows, to prevent damage to the trees. Clifford Van Wagner said that is subject to approval by staff and the City Engineer. John Carusone said they think one Victorian Street light would be orphaned, and they don’t think they need it. There is a street light close by. Jackie said this portion of North Broadway is in City’s historic lighting district. She said there are very few parcels that currently have the historic lighting. She said the decision for the Planning Board to determine is whether to start somewhere with the installation of historic lighting or to wait for a larger scale action by the City to install street lighting in the future along that corridor in that district. Historically in the city it has happened incrementally, parcel by parcel. John Carusone said there will be very little opportunity to impose that on other owners because most of them won’t need to come to the Planning Board, so the one light will likely be orphaned on one property. He said he thinks it should be done in a comprehensive way. Laura Rappaport added that she is all for historic lighting, but there are 2 cobra lights in front of the property. Jackie said the existing cobra lights do illuminate North Broadway very well, but it is very dark on the sidewalks because of the tree cover. She said this one parcel would be the only one illuminated at the pedestrian scale. Cliff said that is a Subdivision requirement and 99% of the Planning Board’s deliberations required those. He said as with sidewalks, they sometimes go nowhere, but they will be connected at some point in time. He said the Board members should weigh in on an individual basis on this issue. Susan Shafer said further up a subdivision was granted and no lighting was required. Cliff said it was subdivided for a different reason, and these parcels will not be sold but will remain joined. Jamin Totino said he believes that construction did not happen along Broadway. Susan Shafer said neither is this one. Jamin said that he thinks the subdivision line was in a different location, but he would have to refer back to the notes for the circumstances. He said the ability to waive a requirement is limited to unusual circumstances. He said he thinks they do have to start somewhere, and typically the only comprehensive way to do something is if the City pays for it or if a grant is funded. Dan Gaba stated that he agrees that the best way to approach this is comprehensively, but from a planning standpoint it has to start somewhere. He said he thinks the lights should be considered. Cliff asked for clarification of how many lights are in question. He said on the caravan they saw 2 on Bryan Street and one on North Broadway. He said perhaps input from Paul Male should be obtained Jackie said they are required to be at 150-foot intervals. Susan Shafer questioned where to start the 150-foot measurement. Amy Durland requested an explanation of the Historic Lighting District. Jackie said the Historic Lighting District extends along the frontage of North Broadway and downtown. There are specific requirements as to the type of Sternburg lighting to be installed, and the distances are based on the zoning district. She said all UR Districts state the lights shall be placed at 150-foot intervals. Jamin suggested getting input from Paul Male regarding where to start. His thought is in the middle of the property on Broadway and the wrapped around the corner. Cliff said he thinks it would look classy. Jamin said pedestrian safety is paramount, and with Skidmore in the area, safety and security issues are not insignificant. He said the more that can be done to protect the students the better. Laura Rappaport asked Jackie how many parcels currently have historic lights. Jackie said the most recent redevelopment is on the corner of Greenfield Avenue and North Broadway, and there is street lighting at much closer intervals in that location, which is the closest parcel she is aware of. She said there is other private lighting that may be in the right-of-way further up North Broadway, but they are not Sternburg lights and the City is not paying for that electricity. She said the property owner buys the light and installs it with supervision from the City Electrician, then the City takes over maintenance and electricity costs. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 18 of 21 Michael Perkins said according to the code, he thinks the lighting needs to be done unless there are extenuating circumstances. Laura indicated that she hasn’t through this all the way through yet. Phil Klein said he is for the lights. Amy Durland said she has no objection to the lights, but there are issues regarding the placement. She said she thinks it is a planning decision, not an engineering decision. Cliff said there is a question of where you measure from, the number is dictated by the formula. He said the determination to be made is whether you start measuring from an existing Sternburg, or locate one in an area that is aesthetically the best place to put it in the front. Amy said she thinks the Planning Board can decide where it goes. Phil Klein added that the Board could take the suggestion of the City Engineer. Susan Shafer stated that she would not want it right in front of the porch, and she would like the City to install the trees first. Phil Klein suggested that the applicant, the City Engineer and Jackie meet to decide where the lights will be. Jackie said the Board may consider requiring an historic street light on North Broadway with the specific location to be determined based on placement of the trees and the distance from the other things. She said this application could receive an approval with conditions, the Chairman could then do an administrative sign-off to make sure he is comfortable with what staff has come up with along with Susan. Similarly, she suggests that the Board help guide the applicant and staff with general ideas of where it would like the lights. If there will be lighting along Second Street, would it be between the driveway and North Broadway, or between the driveway and Bryan Street, and how many. She said there are some field issues that need to be worked out. Susan Shafer said the property is so close to the sidewalk, the lights would shine into the bedrooms if there were two of them. Jamin suggested reducing the lights to one on Bryan Street and one on North Broadway. Phil said a baffle is available to be installed so it won’t shine into the house. Cliff said that the Board has indicated that they would want minimally at least one light on North Broadway and minimally one on Second Street. He said the Board can get through this application tonight in the manner Jackie suggested, which is to make it a condition of the final plan being signed once technical staff has weighed in on it. Amy Durland made a correction of a typographical error on the square footage on the plan, which indicates the proposed lot is 3,066 instead of 30,866 square feet. Clifford Van Wagner summarized: the connection to the project sewer has been resolved, street lighting plan will be finalized before the plans are signed with input from the City Engineer, staff will talk to the Department of Public Works about the tree that is owed to the applicant. Jaclyn Hakes said it is strongly suggested that the easement that John Carusone referred to should be signed prior to the signature of the subdivision plat. John Carusone said it is already prepared, Mrs. Shafer has signed it and it will go back to the Mayor’s office for his signature, which will be done in a matter of days. Jackie indicated that there is a recreation fee of $1,500 for each additional lot created in a Subdivision, and a Letter of Credit for the improvements will be required before the Chairman can sign the final plat. This will all be included in the Notice of Decision if the request is successful. Phil Klein had questions about what trees would be removed. Susan Shafer said one is leaning on the building, which will be removed. The other on the opposite side of the chain link fence belongs to the City. She said she wants to keep as many trees as possible and will replace what is removed. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 19 of 21 PUBLIC HEARING: Hearing none. SEQRA: This is an Unlisted Action, no coordinated review is required. The Board reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form. No significant adverse environmental impacts were identified. SEQR DECISION; Jamin Totino stated that based upon the information provided by the applicant in Part I of the SEQR Short Environmental Assessment Form and the analysis of the information provided and presented on Part II of the SEQR Short Environmental Assessment Form, I find this project will not result in any large and important impacts and is, therefore, one that will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. I move to issue a SEQR Negative Declaration for this action. Laura Rappaport seconded. Vote: Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, in favor; Michael Perkins, in favor; Laura Rappaport, in favor; Philip Klein, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Clifford Van Wagner, in favor. Motion carries 7-0. SUBDIVISION DECISION: Jamin Totino moved approve the Subdivision application with the following special conditions:  A signed easement to be submitted prior to Planning Board signature  Curbing on Second Street  Sidewalk on Second Street  Waive sidewalks along Bryan Street  Add one street tree on North Broadway  Add historic street lighting along North Broadway and Second Street following a consultation with City staff and the applicant  Payment of a $1,500 recreation fee for the newly created lot  Letter of Credit or performance guarantee Dan Gaba seconded. Vote: Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, in favor; Michael Perkins, in favor; Laura Rappaport, in favor; Philip Klein, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Clifford Van Wagner, in favor. Motion carries 7-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 20 of 21 Laura Rappaport moved to approve the meeting minutes with submitted corrections for September 2, 2009, September 9, 2009, September 23, 2009, and October 14, 2009. Philip Klein seconded. Michael Perkins abstained because he was not at one of those meetings. NEXT MEETING The next Planning Board meeting is scheduled for November 10, 2009, at 7:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Clifford Van Wagner adjourned the meeting at 11:32 PM. Respectfully submitted, Kathleen Livsey Recording Secretary Adopted: November 10, 2009 City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – October 28, 2009 - Page 21 of 21