Planning Board

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES (FINAL) WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2015 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM PRESENT: Mark Torpey, Chairman; Dan Gaba; Clifford Van Wagner; Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman; Tom L. Lewis; Janet Casey ABSENT: Howard Pinsley STAFF: Kate Maynard, Principal Planner, City of Saratoga Springs CALL TO ORDER: Mark Torpey, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING: Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the proceedings of this meeting are being recorded 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 PENDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 14.067 STONE PROPERTY, 68 WEIBEL AVENUE ,SEQR review for proposed action in a Transect-4 (T-4) District. 14.064 UNION FOX APARTMENTS, 72 Union Avenue, Site plan review for multi-family residential in an Urban Residential-4 (UR-4) District. 14.010 SUBDIVISION OF LANDS OF HARRISON, 180 Meadowbrook Road, public hearing for a two-lot subdivision in the Rural Residential District. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR: UPCOMING PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS/AGENDA WORKSHOPS: Planning Board Caravan, Monday, November 23, 2015 at 4:00 P.M. Planning Board Workshop, Monday, November 23, 2015 at 5:00 P.M. Planning Board Meeting, Tuesday, November 24, at 7:00 P.M. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR: None heard. APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION:  1. 14.052 CITY CENTER PARKING GARAGE, High Rock, Lake and Maple Avenues, site plan review of a parking facility in the Transect-6 Urban Core (T-6) District. BACKGROUND: Mark Torpey, Chairman, stated the Planning Board issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on December 10, 2014. The Planning Board also issued an approval for sub-division for this project. The project was before the DRC for architectural review. No ruling for mass and scale approval was obtained. City Council approval of a lease arrangement remains. This project is currently before the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval for a proposed variance related to solar access from adjoining property. Two alternative proposals were received in response to an RFP by the City. We also have an Article 78 Petition which has been filed by the Mouzon House. The Planning Board sought advice from counsel. Mark Schachner, Counsel to the Planning Board, Tony Izzo, Deputy City Attorney and Vince DeLeonardis. City Attorney advised us to continue to review the project. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated this is the first time the Planning Board is actually seeing this site plan for the project. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner reiterated this is the first time this project is before the Board for site plan review. The Board previously reviewed this project for SEQRA review, as well as subdivision application. In the T-6 District a parking structure is permitted with site plan review. Transect zones are designed to be more flexible with a focus on sound architectural and site design elements to encourage creative and sustainable new and in-fill development. The intent of the T-6 zones is to encourage a diversity of complementary uses, promote successful urban form, extend traditional circulation systems with interconnecting streets, reinforce a strong pedestrian emphasis and provide for civic space. Plans were last updated and provided on November 6, 2015. Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required and response has now been received by County. City Engineer Tim Wales comments have been largely addressed. At the workshop the Board suggested looking at each item individually. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the updated plans have not been posted on the web as of this date. Applicant: Mark Baker, City Center Authority Agent: Matthew J. Jones, Alex Beso, Jones Firm, Michael Ingersoll, LA Group; Jay Stasack, Envision Architecture Chris Bertram, Chazen Engineering; Alana Moran, Creighton Manning Mr. Jones provided a visual presentation of the site location. Both parcels are anticipated to be leased. The property encompasses 2.62 acres, which was subdivided. If the project is successful the structure will be built on .77 acres of land. The City lot will be retained for future development. Existing surface lots house 279 spaces which will remain. There will be a total of 580 spaces, 93 will remain on the city lot, 62 on the surface lot and 418 in the parking structure. Seven spaces will be built on York Street. Mr. Jones reviewed how the traffic will circulate into and exit the site. All entrances will have the ability to change to exist should the traffic volume require it. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned the space for cueing of vehicles in the entrances. Alana Moran, Creighton Manning, Traffic Engineer stated the type of gates proposed for the parking garage can accommodate 275 vehicles per hour. There’s enough space for stacking of 4-5 vehicles. Mr. Jones provided a conceptual rendering of the pedestrian circulation on the site as well along High Rock noting the 10 ft. wide area which will be used to denote the green belt trail. We will provide a sidewalk connection in front of the property. Mr. Jones reviewed the pedestrian connector from the parking garage to the City Center and the exit routes from the garage either via the stairwells or elevator for pedestrian traffic. Kate Maynard sought clarification as to whether there was a marked, specific pedestrian connection. Mr. Jones replied no, that connection is on asphalt City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 2 of 14 travel lane through structure and parking lot. There are three stair towers and two elevators in the structure. This pedestrian connector does house 45 parking spaces. Mr. Jones provided information on the Agora noted its size at 120ft in width and 18 ft high. Currently a Memorandum of Understanding has been drafted for the Farmer’s Market to be the Agora’s anchor tenant but is not finalized. Mr. Stasack, Envision Architecture provided a brief overview of the Agora space. Space within the Agora is 18ft. in height. When in the Agora looking out you get the feeling of a large open space. Accent lighting to be used in the evening. LED lighting on the inside at the T’s. These are dimmable for different lighting levels. There is a “feature wall” inside the Agora for art renderings, etc.; there is a brick retaining wall with mesh screening to provide screening from parking. Landscaping in the front. The area will have stamped concrete flooring with colored concrete wall for accent. The entire area will have security camera surveillance. Lighting under the underpass will consist of continuous tubes. As you enter Maple Avenue we attempted to make the underpass more inviting. We stair stepped the elements as much as possible to create some visual excitement. From the north side we have repeated the elements to provide the same feel in the underpass. The tower has changed we have added more glass. The revised entry off of High Rock as well as the revised underpass adding additional mesh screening. In the south elevation stairwell glass was also added. We revised the elevations for the underpass. This elevation is also mirrored on the north side to give some continuity in design for the project. We have reviewed the floor plans and enhanced the area off of Ellsworth Jones and enhanced that area with some trees and benches for sitting similar to a mini park. There is a drop off area for the City Center which is covered for inclement weather. In the view from the underpass we created a 3ft high mesh fence with columns. This helps to break the elements to provide an open feel. The height of the underpass is 15ft high per code. The elevator stair tower on the High Rock side with access down to Maple Avenue as well as the City Center. Precast concrete colors for the building have not yet been chosen. Stamped concrete will be used as well. Mr. Jones reviewed the site layout with the Planning Board. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked the applicant what specifically have they done relative to the design of this facility to maximize flexibility for future development. Are there any specifics you could provide? Mr. Jones stated he did not know if that was their intent. Bob Bristol questioned the additional RPF’s which were sent out how were they integrated into this proposal. Mr. Jones stated when that issued arose in August, our view was, and the City Council spoke clearly in September of 2014, and again in September of this year that we should proceed with our application like anyone else who comes before you in the hope of becoming successful. Mr. Stasack, Envision Architecture reviewed the landscaping plan for the Board’s review. Based on Staff comments, shrubs along High Rock have been changed out to shrubs which are 36” in height and upwards to 6 ft. We have the ability to block off the parking from High Rock. Street trees along High Rock, as well as along the back portion of the building. Landscaping continues through the site. At the top of Maple Avenue where Ellsworth Jones comes down we have created a park like element with park benches, low shrubs and trees. It provides a visual break. Janet Casey questioned the Agora space and if trucks were able to back up to this area. Mike Ingersoll reviewed the proposed plans for the Board in this area. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned if there were any questions or comments from the Board. None heard. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 3 of 14 PUBLIC HEARING: Mark Torpey, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:17 P.M. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Jonathan Tingley, Attorney for the Pedinottis. Mr. Tingley stated they are objecting to the Site Plan Review of the Proposed City Center Parking Garage as well as subdivision approval. There is a statutory stay. The subdivision review is not zoning compliant. We reserve our rights. Researching at the Saratoga County Clerk’s Office today, notes that the subdivision plats have not been filed and should not be considered part of the site plan review. Mr. Tingley provided information packets to the Board. This information includes the November 12, 2015 letter. Also provided is an October 13, 2015 letter and email concerning the statutory stay, a letter dated November 10, 2015 from Mr. Millspaugh, of Sterling Environmental Engineering concerning technical review of the site plan. An October 6, 2015 letter from Mr. Millspaugh which was previously provided to the Board to be included in this site plan review record. In terms of the site plan review the garage does purport to comply with the building height requirement. However, it raises the grade in front of the building creates a slope from the path down to the street. This could create a hazard. The site plan covers 1.62 acres and the garage is located on .77 acres of that site. It does not comply with zoning because the site plan does not propose an 80% minimum build along the frontage on the garage site but not on the entire site plan. The site plan also proposes a perimeter of the block in excess of 1200ft without screening the garage or providing for civic space as that term is defined in the zoning code. The site plan does discourage pedestrian traffic from Maple Avenue to High Rock Park or the York Street. This would require pedestrians to walk around the parking garage or through the parking garage when there appears ample space for pedestrian access on the north side of the building. The garage is neither 50ft back from the street frontage nor does it provide civic space within the yard? This is what the zoning code provides for. The Agora is not considered civic space it is contained within the building. Mr. Tingley requested additional information concerning the façade openings since there is a limitation on these in the zoning ordinance. The T-6 zone does look to create mixed uses on the building lot and block level. This does integrate mixed uses. Mr. Tingley questioned the inconsistencies in the number of parking space and handicap parking spaces and requested updated information concerning these calculations. Also, is the 10% green space requirement met in the surface lot? This impacts the neighbors. My client is the most impacted by this garage. One of the things this Board can do to minimize the impact which might be acceptable to my clients is signage denoting the Mouzon House is located behind the parking structure, and we would ask the Board to require that. The parking spaces to be created along York Street, is there any possibility that they can be designated for the Mouzon House use given that it is the only use back there. Perhaps this can be considered as part of this review process. Concerning the entrance and exits. The applicant stated they do not yet know how this is going to work. The Board should have this information nailed down because this will dictate how the traffic will flow. Further information is necessary to address this issue. This could be a safety hazard. Lastly, regarding the staffing of the facility concerning security. I request that the applicant identify exactly what this means 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, evenings. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned the filing of the subdivision plat being filed. When a site plan is before the Board for review, is it required for the subdivision plat to be filed prior? Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated we have not in the past required for the subdivision plat to be filed prior to site plan review/approval. It is understood and noted with each relevant project that any site plan proposed on portion of site in compliance with subdivision is contingent on subdivision plat being filed prior to the site plan. Mark Torpey, Chairman then questioned the concern regarding the 80% minimum frontage. Should we be considering the entire leased areas to be in compliance with the zoning? City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 4 of 14 Mr. Izzo, Deputy City Attorney, if you know the entire project is going to exceed the .77 acres then you do have some obligation to consider the entire area. Mr. Jones stated this was the discussion with the building inspector concerning compliance. The whole notion why you are able to consider site plan at this time is to show a zoning compliant building on a zoning compliant lot. We have subdivided a lot and we have shown you a building or structure that is lawful on that lot. We have not shown you a structure or building on the other leased lot, which is the remaining 1.64 acres. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated concerning the questions in the number of parking spaces. A slide presentation was provided. Jay Stasack, Envision Architecture stated building code compliance notes handicap spaces required are 9, we are providing 13. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned the 10% green space requirement in a parking area. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner, stated overall within the parking portion of the supplemental portion of the zoning there is a requirement that 10% of a parking area above 15 spaces be landscaped. This is with an existing parking area, which should be confirmed since this is a requirement. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated pedestrian access on the north side of the building was questioned. Is that something which is being contemplated? Mr. Jones stated that is not being contemplated. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated signage is being requested for the Mouzon House, is that being contemplated. Mike Ingersoll, LA Group stated as a member of the Special Assessment Board, this Board accepted the way finding plan. Documents have been submitted to City Hall. There is a kiosk sign and directional signage to the Mouzon House, as well as High Rock Park. Mr. Ingersoll encouraged anyone to come to one of the meetings and request to be on one of those signs. This is part of a different signage plan for the entire City. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned the applicant relative to the garage staffing. Is it intended that the garage be fully staffed 24 hours. Mr. Baker, President City Center, stated this will be a fully staffed 24 hour under surveillance secure facility, with the ability of additional staff when the volume of traffic requires it. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to comment on this application. None heard. Mark Torpey, Chairman suggested we walk through the major points and ascertain if additional information is required from the applicant. We will start with traffic. We spoke about an off-site analysis, who determined level of service. This was completed by Creighton Manning. That analysis showed a very small change in the level of service in terms of the intersections which were studied, which were Ellsworth, Maple, Broadway High Rock and Lake Avenues. Tim Wales, City Engineer has reviewed that as well as Mark Benaquista. No issues were defined. Some details on the structure entrance and exits and we do need further information on how this will flow effectively. Tom L. Lewis stated he felt it was very thorough, and I am very comfortable and surprised that it was such a minimal impact. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 5 of 14 Clifford Van Wagner stated there is also some flexibility on where you can locate the gate or the kiosk to monitor the traffic once you enter the site. The ability to build in a larger level of cueing if necessary. Alana Moran, Creighton Manning Engineering stated information was obtained from the Thruway Authority who has the same type of gate system and there is the cash payment versus credit card payment. 275 vehicles per hour per lane at each of those gates. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the next topic would be structure. Part of the Planning Board site plan review we do have jurisdiction over size and design. DRC has jurisdiction of Mass and Scale. I would like to see the view from different vantage points. One would be Broadway looking down Ellsworth, basically the size and scale of the design. The layout of that particular design or view is really imposing. It’s pretty heavy, my opinion it needs some additional work to cut back on that. I will open this up to the Board. Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman, stated he no longer has a problem with this project any longer. The design has come a ton of distance. The quality of the architecture and the site work is reaching a first class level. Clifford Van Wagner stated that sure it’s big, but it’s intended to be big. It has improved dramatically since we have seen it. It has to serve a purpose, and they have done a nice job in the design, it fits. Mark Torpey, Chairman, stated looking south, the building does represent itself as the back of the building. It does seems to need more work. It looks like the backside of the building, not the front. Mark Torpey, Chairman spoke relative to the overpass. The Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation weighed in on this project via formal written documentation. Samantha Bosshart, Executive Director stated the Foundation has made comments relative to their concern of the overpass. This has not been changed to the satisfaction of the Foundation and I respect their opinion. Their concerns were in regard to the length of the tunnel and design and is this issues resolved to the Board’s satisfaction. Howard Pinsley stated there is nothing we can do about the length. Tom L. Lewis stated his whole purpose of supporting this is the parking which is needed and along with that he does like it. Saratoga keeps on growing, it’s a trade off. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the overpass needs to be code compliant. Can the applicant speak to that issue? Jay Stasack, Envision Architecture stated they have met with Steve Shaw, Building Inspector and we have received the interpretation from the State Russell Whitney and Joe McGrath. The state agreed with the design. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated we would need to have that in writing. If you could provide a copy for the file. The second item in terms of a structure going over the City right of way and how that is being handled. Typically, this would be handled via an easement. In this case this would be a conversation with the City Attorney’s and the applicant. Mr. Jones stated it is a form of easement, because the City will retain ownership of the land. We will be a tenant. This will be a right contained in a lease agreement providing us with a right to construct on city land. Kate Maynard asked if this is currently being drafted as part of the project lease agreement, or separate? Mr. Jones noted that this was proposed to be contained within that same agreement. Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman stated this project will continue to refine itself. As it goes forward, between now and when construction actually begins, things will continue to refine themselves. Those details will be important. There are several items which are good protection for us. There are architects and engineers who must comply with City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 6 of 14 the rules of the State of New York and the community. They do not have a choice. Their licenses depend on it. There is no question, it is a must do. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated on mixed use, in a T-6 District, retail, eating and drinking and office, residential, and civic use should be integrated at the building lot and block level. In this particular project, it is not. I consider not to be related to civic use, but it’s an aggregate. It is mixed use intent and the project in my mind does not capture it. We have created a subdivision here. We have a separate and distinct lot, and that component of the language applies to this project. Is this relevant or not? Clifford Van Wagner stated concerning civic space, there is 6,000 square feet here on the lot level and the farmer’s market possible tenancy. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated this is different from the parking garage referenced in the T-5 zone, different requirements. That structure was on private property, this will be on city owned property, a bit different. Dan Gaba stated you do have an aspect of retail with the Farmers Market going in there. RFP’s were sent out, and City Council did not accept any of the retail suggestions which were made within these RFP’s. One of the things which is very important to downtown Saratoga is the City Center. What do we do to help keep the City Center moving forward? It is not taking the entire parcel. Janet Casey stated she is thinking less about the RFP’s and more about the project here before the Board. I like the Agora, the whole space is flexible. I would like to know for sure that the Farmer’s Market is a done deal. I like the look from High Rock much better than the other side Maple Avenue. This side is big and bulky. The DRC will hopefully look carefully at this and mitigate some of that in terms of refinements as we go along. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated we will now move onto civic space which is separate and distinct from mixed use is the requirements for linear buildings in a T-6 District. It states, if no liner building is constructed, the yard should provide accessible civic space. Civic space is defined as an area designed for public use and enjoyment such as a park, green square or plaza. A liner building is a shallow building designed to mask a parking lot or disguise a parking structure. I really do want to get a separate opinion specifically on the civic space. I have a different idea as civic space. How will this be made available to the public? We cannot make a decision yet since we have no real use designated. Mr. Baker stated we do have a MOU document for the Farmer’s Market. We have also approached other entities, art in the park, marathons, could they start and stop in this area. The enclosed or covered space is anticipated to be used by many organizations. This are will serve a need and bring more activities in this corridor. Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman stated the development of the MOU was suggested by myself to the applicant. Discussion continued and noted that both responses to the City’s RFP for overall development for the entire High Rock site had “missed the mark” and were being turned down. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner clarified that Tuesday night was the first time the two responses were presented to the City Council. A number of questions were asked of the two development teams.The evaluation committee continues to meet. It met today, to look at each specific response and report to the Council. This process has just begun, no decisions have been made on proposals. Janet Casey, I would be less inclined towards this if we had dozens of this type of area in town. We do not. Civic spaces should be varied. One of the things I find attractive about it. It will serve a very particular need that we do not have elsewhere. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 7 of 14 Mark Torpey, Chairman discussed the design of the structure. It does not indicate to me there was a proactive attempt on how to figure out or build in the most flexibility with this design into something that really most effectively considers future build out. Discussion ensued regarding the structure and its flexibility. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Roger Goldsmith, own a business, on the Board for the City Center and a Saratoga homeowner. This is an independent structure. This is part of a long term goal of the City Center to survive. We need to look at the big picture. This is a positive move in the right direction. David Pedinotti, owner Mouzon House. You are all looking at this like this is the only choice we have, but it is not. There are other pretty decent looking designs and they are flexible. The cost is less. You need to open your eyes and look at other options. Mark Torpey, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:30 P.M. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion from the Board. None heard. Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman made a motion to approve the site plan for this project. The advancement this project has made is fully in compliance and should be supported. Clifford Van Wagner seconded. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Tony Izzo, Deputy City Attorney stated you have a project which has been before you several times, as well as other Land Use Boards, you may wish to avail yourself of staff for wording the motion and appear at next meeting with formal draft resolution. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked the Board if they would like to craft a more formal response to this application. Mr. Jones, Attorney for the applicant stated we are the party at risk, and I am perfectly fine with accepting the Board handling this with a motion and second and allow this to move forward. I have been before this Board for over 30 years and have no issue or need. Discussion ensued regarding crafting a more formal response to the application. It was the consensus of the Board that it is not necessary to craft a more formal response since the Board has addressed each and every issue. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman, in favor; Howard Pinsley, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, opposed; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-1 City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 8 of 14 The Board Recessed at 9:33 P.M. The Board Reconvened at 9:45 P.M. 2. 15.041 77 EXCELSIOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, Excelsior Avenue, Site Plan review for mixed use Development with 101 units and 1,300 sq. ft. of commercial space is the Transect-5 (T-5) District. BACKGROUND: Project requires special use permit which was issued by the Planning Board on July 8, 2015. Site plan review and DRC Architectural Review required. SEQRA: SEQRA negative declaration issued by the Planning Board on July 8, 2015. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated the electronic version recently revised was provided to the Board this evening. During the workshop, a review was done of items which have changed. Saratoga County Planning Board referral has not yet been received. Applicant: Beechwood Prime, Todd Curley Agent: Dave Carr, Doug Heller, Caitlin Corey LA Group; Michael Tuck, Balzer and Tuck Architecture Mr. Carr, LA Group stated the applicant received a Special Use Permit and SEQRA Negative Declaration from this Board on July 8, 2015, for a maximum of 101 residential units and 5,000 square feet of commercial space. On this site plan we are proposing 90 residential units, 3 of which are live-work units, 1440 square feet of commercial space and 165 parking spaces. Mr. Carr stated the applicant was before the DRC last week where they received Mass and Scale approval for buildings 4 and 5. Additional images of Building 6 were requested by the DRC before final approval. Mr. Heller, LA group provided a visual presentation to the Board reviewing the site plan of Buildings 4, 5, and 6. Mr. Heller reviewed the approved uses granted in the Special Use Permit. Each of the buildings has a parking garage below ground level. As previously mentioned 90 apartments are currently proposed, 3 of which will be live work units. 1,440 commercial space in building 4 which is along the frontage of the property. Between building 4 and 5 there is civic space with seating and a waterfall area. An aerial view of the development site was provided. Building 3 is currently under construction. Mr. Tuck, Balzer and Tuck Architecture stated we are currently looking at three buildings; the Fresh Market building about 20,000 square feet and that was built first. The second building is 20,000 square feet of commercial. Building three has just begun construction. A review of elevations was provided. A portion of the building is commercial and the other portion is an open lower level, loft style for home business use, and the intent is to market it as such. Mr. Tuck reviewed all elevations as well as an area for civic space. A water feature will be added to this area. Building 4 is four stories high and houses approximately 54 apartments and 1440 square feet of commercial space. Visual renderings of building 5, all residential and building 6, all residential. Civic space is required for the project. A small water feature is added and seating area off the access road into the site. Building heights and its compatibility with the site were reviewed. Floor plans of the work/live space were reviewed. Mr. Tuck did provide a preliminary plan of the landscaping proposed in this area. Mechanicals will be screened in a mechanical corral on the roof. Building 5 is an entirely residential building with the entire basement level for parking. All of these units have balconies. Juliet balconies are provided on the pool side of the building. The applicant is still working these balconies to ensure they do not take away from the pool terrace. A review of all elevations was provided. Trash will be collected in the trash City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 9 of 14 rooms and wheeled out for collection by a private sanitation company. Building 6 was reviewed. A review of the parking for this building was provided. A floor plan of the apartments was reviewed. We are looking at adding some skylights to the units at the top of the building. There are parapets on some corners to shield mechanicals. Building 6 has a trash chute, Building 4 and 5 have trash rooms due to the lower occupancy. There are 47 units in this building with a total of 90 units in the development. Building 6 has 47 units, building 5 has 27units, and building 4 has 16. A review of all elevations was provided. There is a sense of an entrance on Route 50 façade even though it cannot be accessed from the road. A sidewalk system will be provided for access around the building. The right of way tucks in very sharply in this area so it really does not give us the ability to plant anything in this area. A black wrought iron look fence along Fresh Market Route 50 will be replacing the current chain link fencing. Mr. Tuck reviewed the live work area units. They are ground floor level office space with open living space upstairs. There is 500-600 sq. ft of office space provided. There has been an interest in this area for this type of space. In the event this should not work, commercial area can be separated off and operate independently on ground floor. Todd Curley, Prime Companies stated we have had a lot of people interested in this type of space. A CPA, Attorney and Pharmaceutical Sales Representatives. There is a shared amenity in Building 3 a Business Center, Conference Room is available for tenants, which they can sign out for use. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Amy Durland, Saratoga Springs. I am concerned regarding the pedestrian access from Excelsior Avenue and what the internal pedestrian access will be for this project given the inclusion of large residential structures. Also, was there some connection planned for the Spring Run Trail entrance. On this agenda there are four separate applications centering around this area. As you are evaluating these applications you may wish to consider cumulative impacts as well. At one time there was some discussion of having an Excelsior Avenue Special Assessment District to contribute to the common good of that corridor. Mr. Carr stated the applicant is improving the entire frontage along Excelsior Avenue with larger civic type seating areas. There are sidewalks proposed all around the perimeter. Crosswalks were installed to Maple Dell. The corridor question they have all been through the special use permit process. They have all been assessed fees dependent upon their amount of traffic. This applicant has made the largest contribution. They are widening of the entire block from East to Marion and beyond that they were all assessed a mitigation fee, for the corridor study which was done in 2005. Alta is doing the cross section design which all of the projects have contributed to, so I believe this Board has been on top of it. It has been ongoing. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated in terms of the East and Excelsior Avenue upgrade we spoke about this during the workshop and I would like to get a sense from the Applicant, what help and assistance could be had for this particular intersection. Perhaps a crosswalk for entrance to the Spring Run Trail. Mr. Carr stated a crosswalk and appropriate curbing has been proposed for this project. Mr. Carr stated in conversations with the City Engineer and the applicant we have discussed the existing deteriorated condition of Excelsior Avenue and proposed topping which would be a large expense. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the applicant will return before this Board following their appearance from the DRC. We will also have the Saratoga County Planning Board referral at that time. 3. 15.040 EXCELSIOR PARK PHASE 2A, Excelsior Avenue, site plan review for 18 residential units in the Transect-5 (T-5) District. Mark Torpey stated this is a site plan review for 18 residential townhouses in the Transect-5 District. There is also City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 10 of 14 a proposal for some micro-units as part of this project. This is Phase 2 of a 4 Phase Project. Phases 3 and 4 have expired. Applicant: Excelsior Park, LLC - John Witt Agent: Dave Carr, Doug Heller, Caitlin Cory, LA Group Mr. Carr stated this is the last part of Phase 2. We are calling this Phase 2A. A subdivision was approved in August which allowed this project to move forward. There are 33 residential structures built. 3 homes and 30 condo units. In the Burns project you approved 105 units. Total 138 out of 160, basically 22 units left to be developed. What we are proposing this evening is 18 owner occupied units. 4 units left which someone could develop as commercial. The site was reviewed. Phase 2A site is 6.2 acres in size. The original master plan was reviewed, which accompanied the Special Use Permit which was approved in 2003. The way this project was approved was that it would be developed in conformance to this plan. We would like to continue these owner occupied townhouses. Maybe another residential/commercial building on the corner. The only real difference is the original plan the buildings were much larger, had subsurface parking with multiple large units over. Now, what the applicant is looking at are smaller attached owner occupied units in the same area. The commercial would remain the same. The major change is maybe the streets would not connect like originally planned. Just keep the pedestrian connections. This is open for approval when we come back for a new special use permit. Mr. Witt discussed his more affordable housing and the site proposal. They are not big footprints. They will hit a market which does not exist in Saratoga now. The thought is we can build these at a faster pace. This will meet the market demand. These are similar to row houses. I have redesigned the project. An aerial view of the site was also provided. The layout of the site and proposed row houses was provided to the Board. Including several 3 bedrooms row houses. Parking will be provided in the driveway and garages as well as out front of the homes. Parking is not an issue. We will return before the Board with the concept. John Witt stated he would like to review the master plan for this. We can provide a stone path to the Spring Run Trail from the development in lieu of the street connection shown in master plan. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if the micro units added to the 18 residential allowed for 22 proposed units which could be considered as affordable housing, does this allow for a density bonus for this project. Peter Rosecrans, Burns Management spoke regarding marketability, bank financing and operating costs associated with these apartments. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Amy Durland, Saratoga Springs. I was involved with Excelsior Park. The intent was to create a high density compact project in a natural setting. To preserve as much land as possible. Affordable housing, I believe the affordability was to start in Phase II and that it was based on providing a density bonus. Now, I am hearing that the density bonus will not be adequate. I still feel this was required in Phase II. Discussion ensued regarding the provision of a density bonus. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated the density bonus was left to the discretion of the developer if he chose to avail himself of the density bonus. To date, the applicant has not chosen to implement affordable housing and invoke this provision. A review of the site layout revealed that the extensions of streets are incomplete. Appear to be dead ends instead of completion of the streets. Wetland crossing is required. Garage frontages, the drive in garages on the front are not in keeping with the master plan. Layout awkwardly adjacent to the 4 units in the rear. Saratoga County referral was received with several comments noting the site plan is to be a continuation of the existing development, with infrastructure and improvements being extended in line with City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 11 of 14 the originally approval four phases. Mark Torpey, Chairman reviewed the items required for Site Plan Approval: 1. The applicant will provide a stone path connection from the development to the Spring Run Trail. 2. Applicants proposing total of 22 residential units, 3. The applicant will provide some connectivity internal to the site on Gibson and Whistler when Phase III application is made. Clifford Van Wagner made a motion that for this portion of development under Phase 2 of the Excelsior Park Special Use Permit did not introduce any project components that were substantially different from the plan as subject to the GEIS findings and determination, and that no further SEQR review was required. Janet Casey seconded the motion. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman, in favor; Howard Pinsley, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Clifford Van Wagner made a motion in the matter of the Excelsior Park Phase 2A that the site plan application be approved with 22 residential units, noting that the Board requires a stone dust connection to the Spring Run Trail, and dead ends on Gibson and Whistler are at this stage acceptable, however, the Board would like to see connectivity when Phase III is applied for. Janet Casey seconded the motion. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Dan Gaba, in favor; Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman, in favor; Howard Pinsley, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Dan Gaba recused himself from the last agenda item and exited the meeting at 11:30 P.M. 4. 15.042 EAST AVENUE RESIDENCES, East Avenue, Site plan review for the construction of 2 duplex residential units in the Transect-5 Neighborhood Center (T-5). DISCLOSURE: Tom L. Lewis stated that Dave Trojanski is building a home for him. He has no financial interest in this project. No need for recusal, simply disclosure. Agent: Dave Carr, Doug Heller, Caitlin Cory, LA Group SEQRA: City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 12 of 14 Action was identified as Unlisted with the Planning Board and DRC as an involved agencies. The Planning Board Accepted Lead Agency Status and issued a Negative SEQRA Declaration on July 22, 2015. BACKGROUND: Special Use Permit issued July 22, 2015 for project with condition – public parking be retained and the easement Assigned to property owners both north and south. Mr. Carr stated this is exactly as was presented for the Special Use Permit. 2 residential units, 4 parking spaces on .4 acres. Easement as presented during Special Use Permit. Each unit has its own sewer and water connections. This project has received full architectural approval for Mass and Scale and design details from the DRC. Mr. Carr reviewed the floor plans. Site view was reviewed including 2 entries, garages and rear of the property. Howard Pinsley made a motion in the matter of the East Avenue Residences, East Avenue, that the Site Plan application be approved. Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman, in favor; Howard Pinsley, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 5. 15.043 EAST AVENUE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, East and Excelsior Avenues, site plan review for 12 multi-family residential units and 6,028SF of retail/office uses in a Transect-5 Neighborhood Center (T-5) District. SEQRA: Action was identified as Unlisted with Planning Board and DRC as Involved agencies. The Planning Board Accepted lead agency status and issued a Negative SEQRA declaration on July 22, 2015. BACKGROUND: Special Use Permit issued July 22, 2015 for twelve residential units and 6700 sq. ft. of commercial space Retail or office use. Agent: Dave Carr, Doug Heller, Caitlyn Corey, LA Group Mr. Carr stated this project is for 12 residential use and 6,028 sq. ft of commercial space. It is less than what was proposed, it is just how the building was laid out. This project is on 0.9 acres. 42 parking spaces onsite and off. This is the same configuration which was presented to the Board during Special Use Permit. We will be providing curbs, sidewalks, etc., Floor plans were reviewed. Stormwater management will be handled on site. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 13 of 14 Residents will be assigned 18 parking spaces; public parking spaces are also available. We will correct the light spillage issue in the rear of the building. The ROW corridor has a bike lane planned, parking and sidewalks planned. We are subject to the geometry of the site. We will conform to the cross section plan. Crosswalks will be installed. Air conditioning units in the rear of the property will be screened. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated Saratoga County Planning Department referral stated no countywide or intercommunity impact. Also there is a 10% landscaping requirement for the parking lot based on the number of spaces provided. Dave Carr stated they will confirm the parking space numbers. Mark Torpey, Chairman reviewed the conditions for the Site Plan Approval. 1. 18 parking spaces designated in the rear of the property for the residents. 2. 42 total parking spaces to be provided for the project. 3. Crosswalks will be provided at 2 locations 1at East Avenue and 1 at Excelsior Avenue. 4. Cross section layout in terms of the street plan comporting with the cross section plan analysis to be completed with the next several months. 5. Screening of condensing units, to the best extent. 6. Light spillage relative to the 2 residential units. 7. Look at opportunities to provide for 10% landscaping in the parking lot areas. 8. Confirm with Public Safety the additional need for pedestrian control. Clifford Van Wagner made a motion in the matter of the East Avenue Mixed Use Development, East Avenue that the Site plan be approved with the aforementioned conditions. Janet Casey seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman, in favor; Howard Pinsley, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6-0 APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Meeting minutes were deferred to the December 9, 2015 Planning Board Meeting. MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Mark Torpey, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 11:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 14 of 14  Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 12/9/15 City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes – November 12, 2015 - Page 15 of 14