Planning Board

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 23, 2011 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM PRESENT: Clifford Van Wagner; Chair, Jamin Totino; Vice Chair, Philip Klein, Dan Gaba; Howard Pinsley ABSENT: Amy Durland STAFF : Kate Maynard, Principal Planner City of Saratoga Springs CALL TO ORDER: Clifford Van Wagner called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING: Clifford Van Wagner stated 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. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ADJOURNED PROJECTS ADJOURNED AT APPLICANT'S REQUEST: #10.042 THE MEWS, 60 Weibel Avenue, review of site plan of mixed use building in the Transect-4 District. #10.039 WASHINGTON COMMONS, Washington Commons, Washington Street and Central Avenue, special use permit for a mixed use building in the Transect-4 District. #10.054 DYER LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, 22 Dyer Circle, lot line adjustment. #11.001 420 BROADWAY (LILLIAN'S PARKING LOT), 420 Broadway, site plan for a mixed use building in the Transect-6 District. ADJOURNED – WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: #10.028 CELLCO-VERIZON CELL TOWER, 81 Nelson Avenue, SEQRA evaluation of potential environmental impact for a new 90' monopine telecommunications tower and associated equipment in an Urban Residential-2 District. #10.027 307 GRAND AVENUE MULTI-FAMILY, 307 Grand Avenue, public hearing on special use permit for multi-family housing in the Transect-4 District. #10.031 307 GRAND AVENUE MULTI-FAMILY, 307 Grand Avenue, review of site plan for multi-family housing in the Transect-4 District. #11.002 BUFF ROAD SUBDIVISION, BUFF ROAD AND ROUTE 9N, public hearing for a final 15 lot subdivision in the Urban Residential-1 and Rural Residentail-1 Districts. UPCOMING PLANNING BOARD MEETING/AGENDA WORKSHOPS: Next Planning Board Caravan, Scheduled for Monday, April 11, 2011 at 4:00 P.M. Next Planning Board Workshop, Scheduled for Monday, April 11, 2011 at 5:00 P. M. Next Planning Board Meeting, Scheduled for Wednesday, April 13, 2011 at 7:00 P.M. Quarterly Land Use Board Meeting, Scheduled for Tuesday, March 29, 2011 at 7:00 P.M. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR: Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated it is with a heavy heart that I announce tonight is Jamin's last meeting as a member of the Planning Board. Jamin has served for over five years. He has been Vice Chair for the last three years. I would like to say thank you. Jamin has served with integrity, and has been a real backbone for this Board. He is our expert on conservation easements and conservation planning. I speak for the Board in saying we will miss you. Hopefully, you will come back as an alternate. Thank you for all your hours, it is greatly appreciated. Jamin Totino stated it meant a lot to him to work with people of such integrity and thanks to Cliff and the Board. This turned out to be much more time consuming than I thought and I think most of the people out there do not realize what a time commitment it is to serve on a Land Use Board. It speaks to the commitment to the City and to working with the community of everybody who serves on this Board, and I thank you. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR: Opportunity for citizens in the audience to address planning issues not on tonight’s agenda. Dave Jelenik, CDJT Development. I looked at the minor amendment to the 124 Jefferson Street site map. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated I looked it today and from looking at the drawing, I question if the drawing that was approved had three entrances that were double load entrances and it has changed from three to five in the front. Dave Jelenick stated the plan shows to double entrances and three single entrances. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated this is not shown on the as built submitted and it is my understanding that is the request for the administrative action. Why did we change that? Dave Jelenick stated he has no idea. Tonya Yasenchak, Engineering America, stated it gives people more private access to their homes. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 2 of 8 Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated he understands but in the future since you are in front of this Board frequently, you should come in and ask for it before you do it because it is different than what was approved by the Board. I will be speaking with Kate later this week and see if we can take care of that. A. LETTERS OF CREDIT: 1. 06.015.3 SENIOR LIVING AT JEFFERSON FLATS CONDOMINIUMS, 124 Jefferson Street, Saratoga Springs, New York. Applicant: Dave Jelenik This project was approved December 7, 2005. The current amount of the letter of credit is $38,000. The applicant is requesting a reduction to 18,000, and an extension of one year. The City Engineer who was at the workshop on Monday evening, and said that the revised data which was requested is not attached. He recommends no change to the existing letter of credit, but just to extend it for another year if that is the applicant's request. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated she has a brief update. Received today from the City Engineer, he has had a chance to review what was submitted on Monday. It does have a table of items completed. So, he did recommend holding the 25% which is required of the initial amount. He does see the justification to reduce the letter of credit to $30,300. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman asked if there were any other questions or comments from the Board? Does anyone in the audience wish to comment on this Letter of Credit extension? None heard. Dan Gaba stated the extension can be granted for 18 months versus 12 months, without any additional fee or paperwork. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated we have a recommendation by the City Engineer to reduce the Letter of Credit from $38,000 To $30,300. We have a request from the applicant for for granting an 18 month extension. Any further discussion. None heard. Motion by Dan Gaba. Seconded by Jamin Totino VOTE: J. Totino, in favor; D. Gaba, in favor; P. Klein, in favor; H. Pinsley, in favor; C. Van Wagner, in favor ABSENT: A. Durland MOTION PASSES: 5-0. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 3 of 8 B. APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION: 2. 10.049 166 JEFFERSON STREET, 166 Jefferson Street, site plan review of 10 unit residential building in the Urban Residential-4 District. Applicant: Steven Ethier Agent: Bret Steenburgh SEQRA: Action appears to be unlisted. This Board has seen two sketch plans. The last time this applicant appeared before the Board was on February 9, 2011. This is planning. What Mr. Ethier initially put on the drawing board for this project is very different from what appears now. That is how sketch plans work. It is very heartening for a Planning Board to be able to have a sketch plan, ask the applicant to move things around, change them a little bit and he has done just that. Now we go from sketch plan to an actual site plan application. Moving the buildings, moving the parking, dumpster, landscaping, lighting those were all concerns that this Board had at the last two sketch plans. Now, they are here for site plan. Kate Maynard stated a few updates as to what the Board had concerns regarding, The ability to screen headlights from the parking area on the northern portion of the site . Previously the applicant had been amenable to placing some sort of screening there. The lighting. Currently there is one light that is being proposed along the project frontage. This needs to be moved out into the right of way. The lighting that currently exists is on poles as noted on the plans. There was a question of curbing, and the dumpster enclosure. The City Engineer is fine with the SWPPP. Bret Steenburgh, agent for the applicant stated he was speaking to the applicant before the meeting and he would like to install a 6 foot high vinyl fence along that section to screen the headlights, and for privacy if that would be amenable to the Board. Also, the applicant is willing to add curbing along the frontage of the project. The applicant will enclose the dumpster area. This addresses most of the issues. An item which is not on the plan is the bicycle rack, and the screening along the property edge, for the residents so they are not looking out at the barns. We would like to move forward with the project this evening. Also, gooseneck lighting is proposed at 3 points along the garage now will be placed on the side of the building to illuminate parking. Philip Klein questioned storm water drainage. He notice there is a dry well located close by. The applicant mentioned curbing and when curbing is place there is a displacement of water. Discussion ensued regarding curbing, sandy soil, grass strips, placement of a swale, porous pavement for the sidewalks versus concrete or possibly a break in the curbing to allow for drainage. Bret Steenburgh stated porous pavement is not the City's standard for sidewalks. He is not concerned regarding sidewalk drainage, but more the street drainage. Philip Klein stated perhaps we should check with the City Engineer regarding porous pavement for the sidewalks in this location. It would be a perfect place to try them. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 4 of 8 Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman would like to commend the applicant for listening to the Board. It is encouraging that this is not knee jerk on the part of the Board. It has been give and take to the benefit of two sketch plans. This plan is remarkably different than when we first started. We are very satisfied how you brought this project along. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. The Board reviewed Part I and Part II of short form EAF. No large or important impacts on the environment or area of concerns noted. SEQR DECISION: Jamin Totino stated that based upon the information provided by the applicant in Part I of the SEQR Full Environmental Assessment Form, and analysis of the information provided and presented in Part II of the SEQR Full Environmental Assessment Form, the project will not result in any large and important impacts and, therefore, is one that will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Based on this, I move to make a SEQR negative declaration for this action. Seconded by Howard Pinsley. VOTE: J. Totino, in favor; D. Gaba, in favor; P. Klein, in favor; H. Pinsley, in favor; C. Van Wagner, in favor ABSENT: A. Durland MOTION PASSES: 5-0. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman, stated now we are moving to the site plan review. Conditions of the site plan approval will include the installation of a bike rack, which is shown on the submitted plans. The screening on the east property line which is contiguous with the horse barns with some live plantings. Curbing along the frontage of the property on Jefferson Street, with curb cuts for drainage, to be assessed and approved by the City Engineer. A six foot vinyl fence on the north property line for screening of headlights leaving the garage areas. Adding dumpster detail to the drawing and the potential with the City Engineer's approval substituting concrete sidewalk for porous pavement which could assist in site plan drainage. The applicant has removed the lighting in the parking area between the two buildings, which was a freestanding light. The applicant has changed that to gooseneck lighting affixed to the buildings which is safer with less light spillage for the residents in the immediate area. One lighting fixture is proposed at the entrance. Dan Gaba made a motion to accept the site plan as conditioned. Seconded by Jamin Totino. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 5 of 8 VOTE: J. Totino, in favor; P. Klein, in favor; D. Gaba, in favor; H. Pinsley, in favor; Clifford Van Wagner, in favor ABSENT: Amy Durland MOTION PASSES: 5-0 3. 10.052 CDJT WORKFORCE HOUSING, Citywide, City Council request for an Advisory Opinion for review of Zoning Amendment Proposal request for workforce housing. Applicant: Dave Jelenik and Charles Touhey Presenting: Tonya Yasenchak, Engineering America Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated we are being asked by the City Council to give an Advisory Opinion for review of a Zoning Amendment Proposal request for workforce housing, basically an overlay. Site plan is not required with an advisory opinion. Parameters of an advisory opinion: "Per 15.3 (C) 1. The Planning Board in its written report shall recommend favorably the adoption of any proposed change only if it meets the following conditions: (1) The revision is not contrary to the general purposes and intent of this chapter; (2) The revision is accordant with the Comprehensive Plan" The applicant provided at the Board's request a more definitive map with color coding which shows the intent to provide overlay districts for UR-1, UR-2, UR-3, and UR-4 within the inner tax districts and any adjacent parcels that would be in addition to requirements of the underlying district. The time frame for this has been extended by the City Council from the standard 30 days reflecting all the give and take that the applicant and the Planning Board are going through I would suggest and propose that no action be taken this evening because we are still defining more clearly the exact impact of this. In order for the Board to make a recommendation back to the City Council, this Board has to clearly understand the ramifications of this and how it fits in these districts and again if it's not contrary to the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Code; and in accordance with the comprehensive plan. We are working through that. Tonya Yasenchak gave a brief overview of the project for the benefit of the Board member who was absent during the initial presentation and for the new Board member. Work force housing would be made affordable for families earning between 80 and 120 percent of the median area income, set in Saratoga County at $75,500, according to 2010 data from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. The proposed overlay district would apply an optional density bonus and reduced area requirements to lots in the city's inside district urban residential zones in exchange for a minimum development of four residential units, of which 75 percent would be required work force housing. Developers who elected to take advantage of the zone would also be required to complete economic market and social analyses of the effects of their proposed projects. Dan Gaba questioned the applicant if they had looked into deed restrictions regarding for sale units any issues it may cause for financing? City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 6 of 8 Tonya Yasenchak stated they are in the process of researching that at this point. There are different ways which that could be administered. It has worked in the past in many different municipalities. Often what they will do is the City will create a fund, and if something is sold over the amount that is in the deed restriction that additional amount goes to the City for improvements within the City. That is something deemed as legal in municipalities throughout the nation. I will look into this further. In order to be approved to buy within a work force housing development a family or new homeowner would have to go through a review process and proving that their mean income falls within that. They are getting a bonus in being able to purchase a house within an area that typically would be at a higher price, but the house would be lower so they will be receiving that bonus from the very beginning. The house is priced lower than it would if it was not work force housing. Discussion ensued regarding deed restrictions and financing in today's market and mortgage financing of work force housing. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated perhaps since we have several weeks before we reconvene as a Board perhaps it would give the applicant an opportunity time to check with one lender locally or whomever and question them and ask how would this effect their ability to lend money to somebody wishing to get into one of these agreements. The Board is struggling with this. We know that this is an overlay, and you have researched city tax records and identified vacant properties that were 0.28 acres or more and those are present in several zones as indicated on the map. Does that include paper streets? Does that include negative building lots, that by virtue of their dimensions they cannot accommodate a house because of the zoning districts front and side and rear yard setbacks? Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman gave an example to the applicant to explain how workforce housing would apply. If you were to take a house in UR-1 zone, 12, 500 ft., which is minimum lot size for a single family house. So, if we identify a parcel in a UR-1 zone that has minimum square footage of 12.500 square feet what would a developer be able to build on this space. Tonya Yasenchak stated they could only build one house. If we did the 1.5% for the density bonus we would only build one house. They would not be able to build any more than that on this size lot. If we were to double the lot size 25,000 square feet, we could look at the frontage and see if we could place two houses on the property. Then we would be able to multiply that by 3%, the code allows us to round us which would be 3. Now we have in our code that we would be asking for a minimum of four units. We have proposed in this housing amendment that it would be neighborhood consistent. So, if you are looking in an area that already has town homes then you would be able to use town homes in your development and then have a higher density. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman questioned how as a Board we get over question one. In the parameters that this Board has to deal with in this revision is not contrary to the general purposes and intent of this chapter. The Zoning Chapter says that in a UR-1 zone you can have one house per 12,500 square feet, and not more than one principal use on the same lot. If you double the lot size as we have done and you state we are able to place 3 houses on a 25,000 square foot lot, and the zoning code says we can have two, how is that not contrary to the general purposes of the zoning chapter? Tonya Yasenchak stated the way that it was originally reviewed, was it would be neighborhood consistent. Because there are a lot of homes in these districts that as they exist are contrary to City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 7 of 8 the chapter. They exist on pre-existing, non-conforming lots, so what we would be suggesting is that it maybe contrary to the chapter but that the chapter is actually contrary to what exists. Jamin Totino stated, so, what you are suggesting might be over on the west side on the treed streets area where there are a number of houses which were cut up into two family houses even though they were not necessarily zoned, or the zoning was not consistent. The City came along and zoned this area afterward. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman, stated we have a little bit of a conflict here we have to resolve. Jamin Totino stated language be included that would allow the principal uses of each zone to be altered to meet space requirements. Tonya Yasenchak stated she would return to the Board with a refined definition of how the city already approves density bonuses that create non-conforming construction. Clifford Van Wagner, Chairman stated the Board will begin looking into whether it can answer the second question required to pass the plan with a positive opinion. Does the proposal adhere to the provisions of the City's comprehensive plan. I believe we are moving in the right direction. We will keep working on this together, it is a worthwhile venture. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Jamin Totino made a motion to approve the February 23, 2011 meeting with corrections as submitted. Seconded by Philip Klein. VOTE: J. Totino, in favor; P. Klein, in favor; D. Gaba, in favor; H. Pinsley, in favor; Clifford Van Wagner, in favor ABSENT: Amy Durland MOTION PASSES: 5-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business, Clifford Van Wagner adjourned the meeting at 8:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary Approved: April 13, 2011 City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2011 - Page 8 of 8