Minutes of meeting held Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, NY 12084 at 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Stephen Feeney, Chairman
Paul Caputo
James Cohen
Lindsay Childs
Thomas Robert
Theresa Coburn
Michael Cleary
Jan Weston, Planning Administrator
Linda Clark, Counsel
ABSENT:
************************************************************************
Chairman Feeney called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. He noted the exits for the sake of the audience in the event they were needed.
Chairman Feeney made the motion to approve the minutes of December 14, 2005 with a few minor corrections. The motion was seconded by Thomas Robert and carried by a 5-2 vote by the Board. (Lindsay Childs & Paul Caputo abstained)
************************************************************************
MATTER OF MAROTTA - Grant Hill Road
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a concept presentation of a proposed 19 lot, clustered subdivision. Zoned R-40. Charles Sellis presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Marotta - Grant Hill Road
The applicant has applied for a clustered subdivision consisting of 19 lots on 41 acres. The property lies between Grant Hill Road and the Town’s sewage treatment plant, along the back of Nott Road properties. The eastern portion of the property is within the floodway and there are numerous fingers of federal wetlands. The land is generally flat, draining from west to east and the western and northern portion is wooded. Because of the snow cover, further land details were unavailable. I have the following comments:
- The applicant has submitted the required grid plan showing a layout at the R40 zoning. The envelopes include the required stream and wetland setbacks. Lot number 15 is questionable due to its very limited usable yard area. The grid plan also includes a road that would have three wetland and one stream crossing. Whether this plan would be approvable should be discussed to determine the number of lots permitted.
- The clustered plan shows 19 lots on a cul-de-sac. The general guideline for lots on a one access street is 13 lots. Although the Board can modify this number, it is generally only done when there is an overriding benefit to do so.
- Because of some topography issues on Grant Hill Road, a sight distance analysis should be made at the proposed new entry.
- The clustered plan offers 26 acres of open space. The zoning ordinance requires that 2/3 of the open space in a clustered subdivision be active open space. Although there is no break down of the open space acreage, it appears that a majority of it is wetland and floodway areas.
- The stormwater treatment area is partially located in the 100 year flood plain. I am not sure this is an appropriate location.
- This property is located adjacent to the sewage treatment plant to the east and a working farm in an agricultural district to the south. Notes should be provided on the plat and notification made to buyers of the potential for odors and right to farm issues.
Generally, my biggest concern about this subdivision is its impact on the overall drainage system of the entire area. This area is very low lying with the wetlands and flood plain associated with the confluence of the Hungerkill and Normanskill just to the southeast. Many areas along Nott Road already suffer from seasonal flooding and other water related problems. Careful attention should be paid to insure that any new development does not upset the delicate wetland and drainage system now in place.
Chairman Feeney announced for the record, a memo from William West, Superintendent, Dept. of Water and Wastewater Management, to Jan Weston, regarding the concept under R-40 stating that: Water is available from Nott Road and would require a water district extension. Sewer is available from Nott Rd. Mitigation fee would apply. Lots !2 & 10 may have conflict with existing sewer line and easement as well as overhead power line.
Under the Clustered Concept: Water is available from Intersection of Nott Road and Grant Hill Road. Would require water district extension. (Memo on file)
General: With both concepts notification that a sewage treatment plant with potential odors, 24 hr. noises, night time security lighting at plant and lighting from the ball fields should be provided to buyers. From a water and sewer perspective the clustered concept provides a water line extension that would benefit some of the existing homes on Grant Hill Road. The sewer extension with either concept may possibly provide some future benefit to existing homes on Grant Hill Road. The cluster concept provides a larger buffer from the sewer plant. Buffer area should be designated forever wild or given to Town. (On File)
Mark Jacobson, Engineer with Charles Sells, Inc., presenting: T he site is located between Grant Hill Road and Nott Road. It is 41.5 acres located in the R40 zone. The topography slopes about 3% to 5% towards the treatment plant. There is approximately 230 ft. of road frontage along Grant Hill Road and 700 ft. of road frontage along Nott Road. The stream runs from the property boundary of the plant to within the vicinity of lot #15.
The jurisdictional determination has not been done at this point, however, all the wetlands have been delineated by North Country Ecological and surveyed by my firm.
The conventional layout, taken into account all those facts, we have come up with the number of 19 lots. The roadway comes from Grant Hill Road to Nott Road and conforms to the Town of Guilderland standards with the size. The well is placed no closer to 50 ft. of the wetlands and are all in excess of 100 ft. from the stream corridor.
The cluster subdivision design that we have is based on our conventional layout of 19 lots. The smallest lot is 17,950 square feet and the largest lot is 51,750 square feet. Town roads would be proposed and offered for dedication and the clustered plan offers 26 acres of open space. Some of the wetlands are going to be isolated and we do not have a jurisdictional determination from the court yet. One end of the property is left rural, and there is about 700 ft. of uninterrupted land.
We have discussed with Ms. Weston, the possibility of offering the open space for dedication to the town. Mr. West, Water Department, stated that he would be desirous of obtaining the portion of the easterly property to buffer the treatment plant. We have in this cluster design minimal impacts. It is under a tenth of an acre, and I anticipate the total disturbance of the project to be greater than five acres. We will have a full storm water pollution prevention plan and a detailed storm water system to address both quantity and quality of storm water runoff. It will be somewhere in this area that Ms. Weston expressed some concern being in the 100 year flood plain.
The soils vary from gravel and sand to heavier soils. We have the potential of using both water and sewer hook ups and the water is located at the intersection of Foundry, Nott Road and Grant Hill Road.
The traffic volume was looked at and it is not an issue, however, the site distance can be an issue where the road is further to the west.
Mr. West did have concerns about the odors and wanted us to note on the final map that the buyers of the potential lots will be made aware of the treatment plan, and the rifle range being located nearby.
We are aware that an archeological study needs to be done.
Chairman Feeney stated: This Board has concerns on the number of lots and the drainage is a big concern and we will need the soil mapping on the site. Lot #10 and #12 may severely encumbered by the sewer lines. It is difficult for us to move on without jurisdictional determination and as far as the floodplains, you will also need to look at what the base flood elevation is and make any adjustments that may be necessary. What is on the map doesn't seem to follow a contour elevation. The wetlands need to be determined.
Chairman asked if there is access to the storm water management facility.
Mr. Jacobson stated: There will be an easement provided for that between lots #12 and 13.
Chairman stated: Access is usually simple. Narrow, long access between properties is discouraged.
Lindsay Childs suggested to have a path to get over to Nott Road park.
Chairman stated: This plan seems a little out of character with the neighborhood. The real issues is the drainage and have you done any deep hole testing?
Mr. Jacobson explained that we would do that in the springtime.
Chairman stated: One other general rule is, typically, we would like to keep the entire floodplain under common ownership for future homeowners to limit encroachment from neighbors and homes. Also, there is a lot more information that we need to gather before we establish the number of lots and more information on the stream.
Chairman added: We would also need to note on the final map to the potential buyers that there is a working farm in an agricultural district to the south.
Lindsay Childs stated: He has discussed about having a path along the sewer lines that runs from Rt. 155 over to the Nott Road Park and we are hoping that the path will eventually go through unused lands of the rifle range and then over to the golf course and the park. Your un-cluster roadway would be a nice route for the paths.
Thomas Robert mentioned that he spent time at the park near the plant during the summer. There were a lot of days it wasn't bad and then there were days that it was realy bad.Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
Chris Brusgal, 6103 Nott Road, would prefer the cluster cul-de-sac option, and to be reassured that the trees would not be cut down on the opens space land and wanted to know if there are any constraints on when construction can be.
Todd Friebel, 6110 Grant Hill Road, was concerned about the odor from the treatment plant, the flooding , the drainage and the streams and the designing of the road. I am also concerned about the open space preservation adjacent and am against this subdivision.
Dick Sigmore, Principal of Florida Terra Firm Corporation, has an approved 3 lot subdivision directly across from the open spaces. I am in favor of the cluster development but concerned about the open space preservation and would like to see it stay as natural forever open space as it is intended to be.
David Reid, Guilderland Hamlet Neighborhood Association, discussed some of the things that they look for in developments within the Guilderland Hamlet Neighborhood Association.
Tim O'Neil, 6115 Nott Road, asked: is there a requirement for a wildlife study
when any type of development goes in?
Richard Ravera, 6095 Nott Road, was concerned about the impact of traffic.
Scott Frush, 6130 Nott Road, biggest concern is the water issue and the wetlands and the wildlife and I do not support this subdivision.
Chairman stated: Just a point of clarification: this is the first concept meeting and we will probably continue the concept based on our discussion of needing more information to determine overall density. The Guilderland Conservation Advisory Council will need to walk the site. We will need jurisdiction determination from the Army Corps, floodway base elevations and a clear access to storm water detention area and a walking connection to the Town Park.
Chairman stated: The Planning Board operates under certain laws. We operate under the New York State Law, and under the laws of the town that has been adopted.
Chairman made a motion to continue the concept and the motion was seconded by Thomas Robert by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF LEVY - 1789 Western Avenue
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a site plan review to allow the conversion of the art and framing store to a women's clothing store. Zoned Local Business. Rosemary Levy presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Levy - 1789 Western Avenue
The applicant has requested a special use permit to convert the former art and framing business into a boutique women’s clothing store. An insurance company also occupies the building. All site features are pre-existing and no variances are needed. No planning objections.
Rosemary Levy presenting: Abby Rose Boutique will be a women's clothing store located at 1789 Western Avenue in the Town of Guilderland. It will carry women's apparel, accessories and gift items.
At this time we anticipate hiring 4 part-time employees. We plan to have 2 employees in the store at all times, and, if needed 3 on Saturdays. There are approximately 30 parking spaces with handicapped spaces directly in front of the building's entrance.
The total square footage of the boutique is approximately 2440 sq. ft. which 500 sq. ft. will be an office and storage.
Chairman stated: My main concern with the property is that the site plan does not indicate the connection of the sidewalks on either side of the business. We will need to see a plan for the connections between adjoining properties.
Lindsay Childs suggested that the sidewalk be at the level of the curbing rather than the parking lot.
Chairman added: When someone comes in with a site plan they will show where the sidewalk currently terminates on the other properties and then they design something that makes sense.
Ms. Weston suggested that the owner of the building can come to the Zoning Board meeting to know just where the connection of the sidewalks should be.
There was further discussion about the parking and the sidewalk.
Thomas Robert asked about how many customers do you expect to have at any one time?
Ms Levy thought about eight to ten a day.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to recommend approval for the site plan review with the following conditions:
· sidewalk connection be provided across the front of the property to provide a logical connection with adjoining properties.
· Consideration be given to extending the curb out front & removing the front parking spaces to incorporate the sidewalk in that approved island.
The motion was seconded by Thomas Robert and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF GOODNOW - 31 Ableman Avenue
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a site plan review for a customary home occupation. Zoned R-15.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Goodnow - 31 Ableman
The applicant is seeking a special use permit to use a small portion of his home as a home occupation for a driving school. The applicant is the sole employee and all business takes place off-site. The business car is parked in the driveway. No planning objections.
The applicant was not there.
Chairman stated: Do you see any reason why we should not address this without the applicant. We can move on and move forward with this review.
Ms. Weston stated: I have not heard of anyone having any issues with this.
Chairman added: He is moving to 31 Ableman Avenue from Suzanne Court to have their home office at this location. I don't see any planning objections to this.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to approved the site plan review for the customary home occupation.
The motion was seconded by Thomas Robert and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************MATTER OF SPANO - 1810 Western Avenue
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a site plan review for a 26 x 42 ft. addition to the building to allow for an ice cream parlor. Zoned Local Business. Kim Spano presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Spano - 1810 Western Avenue
The applicant is requesting a special use permit to construct an 1,100 sq. ft. addition which would house an ice cream shop. This would be an add on to the existing commercial building which contains Sbarchessy’s Pizza and West mere Liquor. The applicant also requires approval for the expansion of a non-conforming use since our zoning no longer allows multiple use commercial buildings. My comments are as follows:
- Based on the proposed layout and width of the lot, there is no need for two curb cuts. Eliminating one cut would allow for a safer and controlled access, a major goal of our Comprehensive Plan.
- The plan shows 30 ft. from the front island to the parking. Since only 24 ft. is required for a two-way drive aisle, there is an opportunity to greatly enhance the front green space.
- There is an informal pathway through the southwest corner of this property. It does not show on the plan, but all effort should be made to incorporate this path since an ice cream shop is a natural draw for kids and families from the residential neighborhood to the south.
- There are no elevation drawings in the file. The Zoning Board should insure that the addition blends with a cohesive facade for the building.
Kim Spano presenting: What we are trying to do is add an addition to the building. There is an existing building that contains Sharchessy's Pizza and a liquor store. The addition would be a 16ft. by 44 ft. and it would be set back from the front of the existing building by 6ft., given it a 10 ft. actual sidewalk area. We are planning on keeping the front the same as the rest of the building. We have put a total of 37 parking spaces in and plan on clearing and cleaning the rear of the property. We will be expanding the parking availability in the rear, but will reintroduce green space back into the cleared area by planting trees. There will be two lamp post lights attached to the rear of the building. In the front, along Western Avenue, we will expand the sidewalk for pedestrians and add green space to that area along the
sidewalk. On the west boundary between Cabernet Café and our ice cream store, we will add green space by placing Arborvitae shrub every 10 ft. for a total of 12 shrubs or 120 feet.
We were hoping to keep the two curb cuts in there because of the traffic flow coming and going around the building for the parking spaces in the back, and would be exiting on the other side of the building making it easier for an exit as well on the second curb cut.
The store will be a seasonal store and will be open from April thru October and will be open seven days a week, 11:00am to 9:00pm employing 3 people with no delivery service.
Paul Caputo asks if there will be outdoor seating and wanted to know if the businesses are all commonly owned?
Kim Spano explained: There will be no inside seating and do plan on putting some picnic tables in the green area in the back and the structure of the building is all commonly owned.
Chairman Feeney did have some concerns with the design and the site plan. I would anticipate extending the curbing around the west side of the structure to protect the building from being run into. It would be nice if there were a curb sidewalk along the side of the building for the pedestrians to walk and to make the environment as safe as possible.
I would suggest also to eliminate parking in the front of the proposed addition and to have NYS DOT to review and approve this and consideration be given to narrowing the existing 30 ft. access way. You will also need stamped plans and more of an engineering document to show what you are going to do.
There was further discussion about the parking in the front and the greenspace in the back.
Chairman asked if there were any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to approve and to recommend this site plan review with the following conditions:
· eliminate parking in front of proposed addition and provide a curbed convenience seating area with a sidewalk connection to the parking in the rear.
· narrow curb cuts in front of the structure to a standard one-way in & one-way out configuration, and provide logical sidewalk connection to adjoining properties.
· Provide a landscaping plan including expanded curbed area in front.
Suggestions:
· consider expanded seating area in the rear of the building and reconfiguration and reduction of parking.
· provide a crosswalk for direct pedestrian access from Western Avenue to the structure.
The motion was seconded by Thomas Robert and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF SIKULE - 2073 Western Avenue
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a site plan review for the expansion of the Just Cats veterinary clinic. Zoned Local Business. Susan Sikule presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Sikule - 2073-2075 Western Avenue
The applicant has requested a special use permit to allow the expansion of the existing Just Cats veterinary clinic into the adjacent building, with an addition to join the two buildings. No variances are needed for this project and there is additional land in the rear if more parking is deemed necessary. Further, the renovations will create an attractive facade along Western Avenue.
My only concern is the access. The proposal calls for the relocation of the existing house’s driveway to the western property line. This places it closer to the adjoining office building’s access and also to the entrance of the Twenty Mall. The DOT will have to approve this new curbcut. Ideally, there would be only one entrance but it appears the space between the structures and the property lines are too narrow for two way traffic. Further, the area seems tight to allow for truck deliveries.
I have no objection to approval contingent on the issues of access, vehicle circulation and the location of the new curbcut should be closely examined.
Susan Sikule presenting: I am proposing to expand the existing veterinary clinic to a neighboring building and would like to enlarge the Just Cats veterinary clinic. I share a driveway with a neighbor and also share a garage. My plan is to improve the architecture and the look and would like to improve the building flow. The traffic flow should remain the same. In regards to the concerns of the tractor trailers trucks backing in to deliver cat food to the facility, this proposal should eliminate that.I am working with Vollmer Associates and they are helping me develop a plan that will incorporate the ability for those trucks.
Chairman asked: Are you going to add an additional driveway?
Susan Sikule said yes. There is now a driveway between the two buildings that I want to eliminate with the addition between them and then make it just an exit on the way out for that second curb cut. I will be asking for one curbcut further west.
Chairman asked if you can modify that rear parking area to allow a truck to circle around.
There was further discussion about the curb cuts.
Ms. Sikule added: I will have fifteen parking spaces and now am proposing 30 parking spaces.
Chairman suggested: You will want to approach the NYSDOT earlier than later about your proposal. When the Zoning Board looks at this, you should have a letter from DOT with their approval of your design.
James Cohen wanted to know the dimension of the addition in the middle.
Chairman read the letter from Albany County Planning Board, dated December 15, 2005, of their recommendation as follows:
Modify local approval to include: 1. Review by the New York State Department of Transportation for design of highway access and assessment of road capacity. (On File)
Chairman also had a letter from Wayne Crounse, next door neighbor, dated January 9, 2006, expressing his concerns about the traffic on the shared driveway and the illegal use of my property by customers and employees of Just Cats, and the trucks turning around on his property. (On File)
Ms. Sikule mentioned that he wrote the letter without seeing this new design.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
David Reid, Guilderland Hamlet Neighborhood Association, wanted to mention two things that were not in the plans to the Board: 1. a pedestrian connection in the front of Western Avenue, and togo along the front of the property to the structure.
2. to have the lighting consistent with what is required in this area.
Chairman made a motion for approval and recommend this site plan review with the following:
CONDITION: the applicant provide a lighting plan
SUGGESTION: consider providing a direct pedestrian connection from Western
Avenue sidewalk to the building.
The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************MATTER OF COUGHTRY - 6332 Frenchs Hollow
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a site plan review to allow an in-law apartment on site. Zoned Agriculture. Leslie Coughtry presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Building Department as follows: Coughtry - Frenchs Hollow Road
The applicant is seeking a special use permit for an existing in-law apartment within a property the owners are trying to sell. There is adequate on-site parking. No objection contingent on the future buyer conforming to all applicable laws regulating such accessory units.
Leslie Coughtry presenting: My father-in-law passed away in 2001. When the house was built it was built as a family dwelling. It was meant for the second family unit to be rented by family or family members. When we decided to sell we were informed that the in-law apartment should have been zoned in-law. I had no clue and would like to make this legal.
Chairman stated: The only concern that I have is the septic system and the well. Were they adequately designed?
Ms. Weston explained: My only concern is that any buyer would be fully aware of what the regulations are for that in-law apartment.
Chairman made a motion to recommend and approve this site plan review for the Coughtry in-law apartment.
The motion was seconded by Thomas Robert and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
Meeting Adjourned: 10:20 P.M.
TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
PLANNING BOARD
January 11, 2006
MATTER OF MAROTTA - Grant Hill Road
MATTER OF LEVY -1789 Western Avenue
MATTER OF GOODNOW - 31 Ableman Ave.
MATTER OF SPANO - 1810 Western Ave.
MATTER OF SIKULE - 2073 Western Ave.
MATTER OF COUGHTRY - 6332 FRENCH HOLLOW
| 
