Planning Board

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES (FINAL) MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2016 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Mark Torpey, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: PRESENT: Mark Torpey, Chairman; Janet Casey; Tom L. Lewis; Clifford Van Wagner; Jamin Totino; Amy Durland, alternate; Ruth Horton, alternate ABSENT: Bob Bristol, Vice Chairman; Howard Pinsley STAFF: Kate Maynard, Principal Planner, City of Saratoga Springs Justin Grassi, Attorney for the Land Use Boards ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING: 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: 1.15.049 LANDS OF STONE, 68 Weibel Avenue, sketch plan review of office, retail, and multi-family residential in the Transect-4 Urban Neighborhood (T-4) District. 2.16.025 MENDENHALL SUBDIVISION, 101 Old Schuylerville Road, 4-lot preliminary conservation subdivision within the Rural Residential (RR) District. 3. 12.023.4 CONGRESS PLAZA EMBASSY SUITES, 46 Congress Street, proposed site plan modification to eliminate vehicular access from South Federal Street in a Transect-5 Neighborhood Center (T-5) District. 4. 16.038.1 PET LODGE, SEQRA COORDINATED REVIEW OF AN ANIMAL KENNEL USE, Route 9, SEQRA Coordinated Review in Tourist Business (TRB) and Rural Residential (RR) Districts. ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS APPROVED: -East and Excelsior Mixed Use-Adjustment of retaining wall and reduction of one parking space. -Macica Lot Line adjustment Stafford Bridge Road-Boundary adjustment among 3 tax parcels. -Joseph Street 2 Lot Subdivision – relocation of driveway, removal and replacement of tree. -Rite Aid-extension of time for temporary pharmacy. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR: Mark Torpey, Chairman, stated was notified by Kate Maynard, Principal Planner informing him that there will be a Technical Review Advisory Committee established. This is a review committee that will look at and review the Unified Development Ordinance which is being put forth in the city. Committee membership will be comprised of a varied group of nine members. With respect to the Land Use Boards there will be someone identified by the Chair or a Chair designated representative. This was just received today and I would just like to gage the Boards interest. Contact interest via email. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated as you may recall the presentation provided by Tina Carton she is assisting staff level coordination among all the parties in looking at our zoning ordinance and subdivision regulation overhaul into the UDO. This technical advisory committee has been discussed with the City Council and basically represents the regular staff members who have been involved, the City Attorney, Deputy Mayor, and three appointments to directly represent each of the Land Use Boards. It is an Advisory Committee. The representative will be serving in the capacity of providing advice and guidance with what the consultant is bringing forward. It will be a fairly rigorous schedule, an every two week schedule for meetings for approximately 4 or 5 months. UPCOMING PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS/AGENDA WORKSHOPS: Planning Board Caravan, Monday, December 5, 2016 at 4:00 P.M. Planning Board Workshop, Monday, December 5, 2016 at 5:00 P.M. Planning Board Meeting, Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 7:00 P.M. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR: None heard. A. APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION: 1.16.040 WEST AVENUE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, 106-120 West Avenue, Special Use permit for mixed-use development within the T-5 Neighborhood Center (T-5) District. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated this evening we haven’t yet requested Lead Agency Status for this application. We intend to broach that subject this evening. No action will be taken on the application this evening. We will however listen to a presentation by the applicant. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated this project was the subject of a Joint Board Meeting with the DRC in May 26, 2016. We spoke about a number of issues and reviewed the sketch plan. BACKGROUND: Site is located within the T-5 Neighborhood Center and Urban Residential-2 districts. Proposed project will require Special Use Permit and Site Plan review with the Planning Board, and Architectural Review with DRC. Joint meeting held for application on May 26, 2016. Planning Board primarily discussed parking violation on site from adjacent property expansion onto this site. This has now been removed and trees planted in location. SEQRA: Action appears to be Unlisted with Planning Board and DRC as involved agencies. Applicant: Bill Barber, AB Acquisitions Agents: Nick Costa, Advanced Engineering; George Olsen, Olsen Associates Mr. Costa provided a visual presentation of the project. Mr. Costa stated informational documents were submitted to the Board concerning this project. This project encompasses 1.48 acres and will be developed with 36 apartment units on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th floors as well as 4100 square feet of commercial space to be developed on the ground level as well as parking. The site will be developed with access from West Avenue with circulation and access to the parking at the ground level. There will be 70 spaces for parking interior and exterior combined. The existing utilities to service the project exist currently on West Avenue. There is municipal water which we will be connecting to. The sanitary sewer is City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 2 of 11 also located in this corridor and a lateral connection will provide service to this building. We have designed a storm water management plan which will be in compliance with the NYS DEC storm water management regulations. We have green infrastructure with porous pavement and also infiltration on the northerly side of the site within the proposed parking area. There will be underground retention. We have designed a sand filter to comply with the water quality volume which is required. The SWPPP was submitted to the City Engineer and also to Chazen who are currently reviewing this. Civic space was also added. George Olsen, Olsen Associates provided some information concerning the civic space which is about 30 x 30 in size or about 1,000 square feet. This area has not yet been developed. Green infrastructure in this area was suggested. The size of the structure was discussed with relation to the Kamen building and what is in the area. Applicant feels this is consistent with what is currently being built in this corridor. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner explained the split zoning in the area and providing the transition area from UR-2 to T-5. The transition from a mixed use zone and footprint of the current proposed structure, to the single family home structures which are much smaller in footprint, mass and scale from the current proposal. Lower intensity forms of uses. This is directly adjacent to residential parcels which abut the property. Current zoning boundary of 100 ft needs to be added to the plans. Mr. Olsen reviewed the conceptual rendering of the project for the Board noting the buffering proposed and reviewed the illustration of the rear of the building noting the tall trees that screen almost the entire 4 story proposed building. Discussion ensued stepping the rear of the building down to accommodate the UR-2 zone in the rear. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated one of the issues which was discussed at the Joint Board Meeting was that a lot of the newly constructed buildings are beginning to look like each other with a flat roof, box type of building. This is very similar to what we are seeing constructed in the City. We would like to see some alternatives to the plan to note a different roof configuration or architectural details and facades that blend better. Ruth Horton, Alternate questioned the traffic flow around the building. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated the transect calls for alley access that allows for traffic to utilize rear of site for movements as alternative to all trips first going out onto West, then back in to adjacent property. While the access is provided in the plans, due to the site design, cars would need to go back to rear of site, then along the rear of the property boundary to reach the other side. A more direct connection desired. We have spoken about cross access connection with the Kamen site at two points. Jamin Totino stated he agrees with Kate. He stated this area should function similar to alley access which exists throughout the City. Discussion ensued concerning the traffic flow, access, egress and parking. Jamin Totino stated the other issue is how this reacts with the pedestrian traffic. This is a very important project in this area of the City. How this reacts with the street and pedestrian access and interaction is supreme in this area. I strongly encourage a universal design and scope here so that both sides there are equal handicap access. Amy Durland stated the applicant may wish to consider more effort be put into the civic space, not just seating, but something which would give more credit to the project. Janet Casey stated she would like to see some creative thinking concerning the civic space seating or even a different location which would be much more amenable and aesthetically pleasing. City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 3 of 11 Amy Durland noted the importance of the applicant remaining in contact with the neighbors. They have legitimate concerns and it would be appreciated if continued conversations take place. I do have concerns with this roadway being 20 ft. from the rear property line. There might be opportunities there either tweaking the design or layout or providing significant buffers to ameliorate the neighbors concerns. The applicant may wish to review the Part I Short EAF, question #9 referring to the project meeting the state energy codes. The applicant stated no. This should be adjusted. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak concerning this application. None heard. Tom L. Lewis made a motion in the matter of the West Avenue Mixed-Use Development, 106-120 West Avenue to request Lead Agency Status for this project from the DRC. Clifford Van Wagner seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Amy Durland, Alternate questioned in the Lead Agency Status request how would the Board feel about indicating referencing something about the mass and scale, and in addition the compatibility of the proposal with the neighborhood and the community character particularly given the proximity to the neighborhood to the east and south and the UR-2 zoning designation adjacent to that site. Also to consider their thoughts concerning information on the civic space. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated he felt this would be appropriate to ask and hopefully get some good feedback. In our motion our request will also add we would appreciate their feedback on the civic space elements and the community compatibility as well, especially relative to the adjacent neighborhoods to the south and east. Tom L. Lewis amended his motion to include the request and comments from the Chair. Clifford Van Wagner seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, Alternate, in favor; Ruth Horton, Alternate, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 2.16.041 SLACK CHEMICAL COMPANY, 3 Unlimited Drive, Site Plan review of 29,000SF additional of Heavy Manufacturing use within the Industrial-General (IND-G) District. SEQRA: Action appears to be unlisted. BACKGROUND: Site plan approval issued by the Planning Board on October 24, 2012 for current facility. 20,000 SF future expansion was contemplated on plans as two 10,000SF additions on each side of the current building. Proposed shows additional City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 4 of 11 square footage, as well as additional clearing and grading and expansion onto eastern side of the site, closer to the power lines and Karner Blue Habitat. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated the Board is in receipt of the following information: Schenectady County Referral has been received, as well as traffic information which was discussed at the workshop. Correspondence was received late today from the DEC. They are responding to the original letter which was sent in 2012, basically a requested that a notatation on the plat is provided which notes that the no cut buffer will remain and not be disturbed. Applicant: Stewart Field, Slack Chemical Agent: John Munter, Munter Enterprises; Tom Nace, Nace Engineering Mr. Munter provided some history of the site. In 2012 we did this project encompassing 24,000 square feet. Since that Time Slack Chemical purchased that site as accessory to their main facility. Since that time their growth has brought them here for these two additions, one approximately 20,000 square feet and the other approximately 10,000 square feet. The no cut buffer was identified and the Karner Blue Butterfly habitat was noted necessitating the 25ft. no cut buffer per the DEC Regulations. The site designed in 2012 functions well. Storm water system has functioned well. No issues whatsoever. The engineering practices utilized to accommodate this site are basically the same which works great in this sandy area. Mr. Field spoke regarding the proposed facility. This is the 5th time I have been before this Board from the first building to this expansion. Thank you for the previous approvals because you have allowed us to grow from 4 employees to 30. We are looking to expand this facility. Mr. Field explained the basic principles and workings of Slack Chemicals. This is not designed for manufacturing but for general warehouse use. We do not anticipate any full time employees but will utilize current employees from the adjacent site. Additional truck traffic will be minimal, only 1 to 2 trucks per day. Outbound trucks will return with inbound product. Most of our outbound trucks leave 4-5AM and return in the middle of the afternoon. This will not affect the Geyser Road corridor traffic during the peak busy hours. Amy Durland, Alternate questioned the applicant concerning the height of the building and the current design. Mr. Field stated they have not settled on the design of the new building but it will be 8 – 10 feet higher than the current building. Discussion ensued concerning the possibility of a two story structure, traffic flow of truck traffic, ingress and egress. Mr. Field stated it is the nature of the product they are storing does not allow stacking of the product. He reviewed the truck circulation. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned if there was any information from Public Safety. Kate Maynard, Principal Planner stated they have not commented at this time. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned the possibility of rail transportation. Mr. Field stated they have the ability to use the rail system on the site; however their customers are not currently on a rail System. Amy Durland, alternate questioned the impervious surfaces and the use of porous pavement on the site. Mr. Nace stated we find that with heavy traffic it does not hold up very well. Especially in parking lots with an abundance of turning movements there is not enough binder in that asphalt to keep the top surface in place. It is something we would consider using if this was not an industrial site. City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 5 of 11 Amy Durland, alternate questioned the tree removal plan. Mr. Munter provided a visual rendition of the site noting the location of the tree line. Noting the clearing limits. The no cut buffer was delineated at 25 ft per the DEC recommendation but we will maintain more than 25 ft. A dry stack retaining wall will be installed. The reason for this is it does not require a deep excavation which would entail more clearing behind it. This will alleviate the need for further excavation and help to maintain more of the existing trees. Jamin Totino stated this is a straightforward project in an industrial area with good plans. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned the use of compressed natural gas. Mr. Field stated current engines cannot covert. SEQRA: The Board reviewed Part I of the short EAF submitted by the applicant. No concerns were noted. The Board reviewed Part II of the short EAF. No large or important areas of concern were noted. SEQR DECISION: Clifford Van Wagner 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. Janet Casey seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, Alternate, in favor; Ruth Horton, Alternate, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Mark Torpey, Chairman stated we will now move onto the Site Plan Approval. We spoke about the preservation of the buffer per DEC regulations, minimal impact of transportation based on the delivery schedule and the nature of the operation. Storm water management system looks good in terms of the design. Tim Wales, City Engineer has reviewed and weighed in on this. Jamin Totino made a motion in the matter of the Slack Chemical Company, 3 Unlimited Drive, that the site plan be approved as submitted. Janet Casey seconded the motion. City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 6 of 11 Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, Alternate, in favor; Ruth Horton, Alternate, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 3.16.047.1 SOUTHERN SUBDIVISION, 124 York Avenue, Advisory Opinion to ZBA on 2 lot residential subdivision within the Urban Residential-3 (UR-3) District. BACKGROUND: Applicant is proposing a 2 lot subdivision that does not meet UR-3 District requirements including: minimum lot size and average lot width. ZBA is requesting a required Advisory Opinion from the Planning Board. Should the application be successful, 2 lot subdivision would return to the Planning Board for review. SEQRA: Action appears to be an Unlisted action. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum lot size: Lot 1 6,600 sq. ft. 5,319 sq. ft 1,281 sq. ft. (19.4%) Minimum average lot width: Lot 1 60 ft. 48 ft. 12 ft. Minimum lot size: Lot 2 6,600 sq. ft. 5,279 sq. ft. 1,321 sq. ft. (20%) Minimum average lot width: Lot 2 60 ft. 48 ft. 12 ft. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the Board would not be weighing in on terms of hardship. This would return before this Board for a subdivision determination. Agent: Libby Coreno, Partner, Carter, Conboy Attorneys Applicant: Michael Southern Ms. Coreno stated the Board should be in receipt of a narrative on this project which was submitted. This applicant is in receipt of the property by way of executor’s deed from his grandmother. This was in 2014. This home was built in 1875. The applicants have performed enormous repairs to the interior of the home since their ownership in 2014. They have kept up this historic home. This lot was originally divided in the 1880’s. It is one of the only two parcels which have a north to south connective lots. This property has been in the family since the 1940’s. This is a unique situation. Visual presentation was provided to the board. Ms. Coreno stated her firm took a 700 ft. radius analysis of this neighborhood. They examined 122 parcels. We created a spreadsheet of this neighborhood and found the entire neighborhood is nonconforming. 92.8% non conformance rate. Visual presentation was provided to the Board. This will remove a gap which currently existing on Middle Avenue. Water and sewer are available along Middle Avenue. Stormwater management will be according to NYS regulations. This subdivision will be kept within the Southern family for a very long time. City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 7 of 11 Discussion ensued among the Board concerning the proposed residential subdivision as well as the density of the area and average lot width of neighboring lots, consistency with the neighborhood and the nonconforming neighborhood. Jamin Totino stated because of the consistency with the neighborhood and the reasonable split of the property, what you are requesting this almost forces a modest house in some respects. This is the type of solution to affordable housing that the city should be providing and looking for. I am in full support of submitting a positive advisory opinion to the ZBA. Janet Casey stated she feels as does Jamin Totino and this should be noted in our Advisory Opinion. Mark Torpey, Chairman spoke regarding the subdivision regulations, including infill development. The infill development is great. Amy Durland questioned if the Board if there is some succinct way to take some of the things which were discussed and provide that information to the ZBA in the Favorable Advisory Opinion. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the Favorable Advisory Opinion should note the applicants willingness to work within the community character not only with the subdivision but also concerning a height restriction, consistency with the community character as well as what is built there. Clifford Van Wagner made a motion in the matter of the Advisory Opinion to the ZBA on a 2 lot residential subdivision application that the Planning Board issue a Positive Advisory Opinion to the ZBA as submitted on the application with the relief requested. Tom L. Lewis seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Mark Torpey, Chairman stated he personally finds it helpful just to basically inform the ZBA what we are looking at. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, Alternate, in favor; Ruth Horton, Alternate, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Clifford Van Wagner made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2016 with corrections and additions as submitted. Jamin Totino seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, Alternate, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, in favor; Ruth Horton, Alternate, City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 8 of 11  abstained MOTION PASSES: 6-0 Clifford Van Wagner made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 10, 2016 with corrections and additions as submitted. Jamin Totino seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. None heard. VOTE: Clifford Van Wagner, in favor; Jamin Totino, in favor; Amy Durland, Alternate, in favor; Ruth Horton, Alternate, in favor; Tom L. Lewis, in favor; Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor; Janet Casey, abstained MOTION PASSES: 6-0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 9:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary APPROVED 1/26/17 City of Saratoga Springs – Planning Board – November 22, 2016 - Page 9 of 11