Minutes of meeting held at Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, NY 12084 at 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Stephen Feeney, Chairman
Paul Caputo
James Cohen
Thomas Robert
Jan Weston, Planning Administrator
Linda Clark, Counsel
ABSENT: Terry Coburn
************************************************************************
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 March 8, 2006 minutes with a few minor corrections. The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF NORMANSKILL PRESERVE SUBDIVISION - Church Road
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a concept presentation of a proposed 75-lot subdivision of 214 acres. Zoned RO-40. Scott Lansing presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Normanskill Preserve Subdivision - Church Road
The applicant has submitted a 75 lot, clustered design subdivision for concept review. The 214 acre group of properties run from Church Road south to Krumkill Road and the plan relies on an inter-municipal road and utility system.
The land has many unique environmental features including two major ravines which carry two DEC classified streams southwesterly into the Normanskill. There is a New York State designated wetland along the southern border and numerous fingers of federal wetlands throughout the property. The northern two thirds are woods and brush while the lower third was farmed. There are a wide variety of soil types with the majority being a fine loamy sand. In addition to these features, New York State has listed this property on their Open Space registry, a property with high conservation priority. For the above reasons, I would recommend that if this proposal moves forward, that an Environmental Impact Statement be required.
Before tackling the proposed subdivision design, there are two major issues that will need to be determined: inter-municipal agreements and number of permitted lots. Fifty three Guilderland lots in the southern portion of the development will only have access to Krumkill Road in New Scotland. The proposal will require the two Towns to form an agreement on road maintenance and how taxes will be assessed for such maintenance. Agreements for the provision of emergency services will also need to be addressed. Whether the Towns are interested in such an agreement needs to be determined.
Water and sewer lines will also cross municipal boundaries. Whether the Town will allow service outside it’s boundaries must be determined. The application will require a water and sewer district extension. It is my understanding that extensions that cross boundaries require a different review process. I expect that Bill West will address this issue in his comments.
As required, the applicant has submitted a conventional layout plan to help determine the number of permitted lots in the cluster. This plan would require serious topography alterations, major stream crossings, wetland and angle of repose impacts - just for the construction of the roadway system. Many of the proposed building envelopes have severe grade changes and stormwater retention areas are shown in steep slopes and angle of repose areas. Overall, this conventional layout is not at all realistic and could not be approved by the Planning Board.
Obviously, a much more extensive review of this proposal will be required regarding issues of drainage, stream disturbance, grading and vegetation removal, municipal services, etc. However, until there some comments from the respective Towns about the provision of services, a preliminary analysis of sewer capacity, and a revised proposal showing a realistic layout submitted addressing the above concerns, any further review would be premature.
Chairman Feeney mentioned for the record, a review from the Guilderland Conservation Advisory Council. (On File)
Another letter from Denise Graves, dated March 19, 2006, in regards to her concern with the access road that will be directly across from her property due to the limited sight distances and curves. (On File)
A memo from Guilderland Water & Wastewater Management, from William West, Superintendent of Water and Wastewater Management, date March 20, 2006, stating: Water is available within that part of the subdivision located in the Town of Guilderland. Hydraulic modeling will need to be done. A water district extension may need to be done. Sewer: At this point sewer is available from the Guilderland Sewer District only. Most likely a pump station will have to be built to discharge to the Farnsworth Dr. pump station. Both pump stations, force main, and down stream gravity capacity will have to be hydraulically modeled before any commitment can be made to service. Any upgrades would be the responsibility of the developer. Additionally, if pump station is proposed and economic analysis with O & M costs vs. O
& M tax revenues received from project will need to be done. If approved, a mitigation fee would apply.
Service outside Town boundaries is potentially available, but, legally both the Town of Guilderland & New Scotland Town Boards must pass a resolution and contractually agree to have services provided along with a water supply permit approved from ACHD & NYSDEC as well. This would include issues such as who is responsible for maintenance, tax revenues etc. This will need to be addressed prior to any finalized commitments for service from the Guilderland water & sewer districts. (On File).
A letter from the Westmere Fire Department, dated March 21, 2006, requesting a current blueprint of the housing development between Church Road and Krumkill Road. (On File).
Scott Lansing, Lansing Engineering, PC, presenting: The site is comprised of three separate parcels. One parcel is approximately 92 acres and the other is approximately 62 acres and the last is approximately 60 acres in size. To the north of the parcel is Church Road and to the west is Farnsworth Drive, to the south is Krumkill Road into New Scotland where parts of the land are located.
The topography on the site is rolling and there are two ravines in the parcels. The draining generally flows west towards northwest of the parcel. Surrounding the parcel to the west is vacant land and to the northwest we have apartments associated with Farnsworth Drive, and immediately to the north we have single family homes. To the east is vacant land and then further to the east is single family homes. On the southern portion of the site, New Scotland side, we have agricultural lands and some single family residents.
There are existing utilities within reach and the parcel does have public water along Church Road and water located on the eastern side by Henry Drive and then off on the western portion of the side parcel.
As far as public sewer, there is currently a pump station located down at the bottom of Farnsworth Drive.
The zoning for the parcel is RO-40. We have done extensive research on four of the parcels to develop the conceptual plan. We have done a complete boundary survey of the parcel so the boundaries that are shown on the plan are accurate. The site topography has been performed on the entire site with 2 ft. contours throughout the entire parcel and wetland delineation has been preformed on the site. Both DEC wetland and the Federal wetlands are scattered throughout the parcel. The capacity of the utilities has been investigated. We have met with William West, Superintendent of Wastewater, at the pump station and understand capacity is available there now at this time. There is also the availability for additional capacity to be added on the pump station with some upgrades.
We investigated the water supply, both at Henry Street, Covington Woods and also along the Church Road area.
We prepared an environmental constraints map. The appropriate setbacks were added for the wetlands, which include the 30 ft. setback for the Army Corp wetlands and a 100 ft. setback for DEC wetlands. We added 100 ft. buffer for the continuous intermittent watercourse and the Angle of Repose reserve and protective slope reserve setbacks were also added to the plan. We prepared a comprehensive map outlining each one of those constraints lands and for review.
The applicant has selected single-family residential cluster development for this parcel.
The first step in that process is a cluster layout plan with the RO40 requirements. We are proposing 75 lots. In the layout, we are proposing two curbcuts on the Church Road area. Overall, the parcel with the road layout, we are estimating about .65 acres of wetlands impact for the parcel. We minimizied stream crossings as much as possible.
The applicant reviewed the conventional layout plan and felt that the plan did not balance the development and the environment. That is why he chose the cluster development layout to retain density and to reduce the overall impacts, and this would protect wetlands and environmental sensitive areas. As a part of the cluster plan, we were able to reduce impacts to a point where we are not anticipating any wetland impacts. The cluster proposal includes 75 lots similar to the conventional layout and we are dedicating 112 acres of open space to the Town and four acres of open space for parkland. The parcel does not incorporate any wetlands impact.
There is water service available on Church Road and along the southern portion of the project, and we would work on either connection to Covington Woods and or the Henry Street area. There would have to be a water district extension to service the project.
Sanitary sewers for the northern portion will be sending over to Farnsworth Drive, and the southern portion will go to Farnsworth Drive with upgrades to the pump station.
We are currently working with New Scotland on an application for the bottom of twenty nine acres where there could potentially be a wastewater treatment plant in that area.
We will be managing the Storm Water Management on site through a series of storm water management basins throughout the parcel.
Mr. Lansing addressed some of Ms. Weston's, Town Planner, comments. One was the unique environmental features including two major ravines. Other issues include exploring inter-municipal agreements and the number of permitted lots, as well as the number permitted in the cluster design. (On File)
Chairman Feeney stated: There are a lot of unanswered questions as far as the impacts. Our ordinance states: That to get the number of cluster lots you would have to have a conventional layout that is approvable. The conventional layout that you have proposed is not something that this Board would entertain due to the impacts. There is a tremendous amount of wetlands crossing adjacent area impacts, and a tremendous amount of grading and clearing, which presents major issues with respect to storm water management.
It would be helpful to the Board if we could get a new scale map that shows the conventional layout with the wetlands on one plan.
Chairman asked: Did you have any discussions with DEC regarding what they consider their wetlands and what is consider the Army Corp wetlands and where does the DEC wetlands stop and where the Army Corp wetlands begin?
Chairman wanted to know if the applicant had discussed this with the New Scotland Planning Board and who would be the lead agency.
Mr. Lansing explained: We will be making out an application out sometime this week and it is my understanding that under SEQR we can have only one lead agency.
Chairman stated: You are saying that the sewer system will be provided and is that a package plant?
Mr. Lansing explained: Yes, it would be a package plant. Albany County Health Department approved a proposed packaged wastewater treatment plant for the subdivision. 120 units on 29 acres in New Scotland would be included.
Chairman added: As far as our environmental review, we would take those 120 units into account as far as the traffic impact. This will be a complicated review and we will try to reach New Scotland Planning Board to see what their thoughts are on this. Obviously, things like a Boulevard Street, we do not allow.
Mr. Lansing stated: We did speak with the Highway Superintendent and originally, he was not favorable of a boulevard entrance. We could have two separate roadways going in there. This is something that we could work on.
Chairman further explained: Sewer service will be an issue and that it could be very costly to provide that service. The project would require a forced main upgrade and an upgrade to the nearby pump station.
Lindsay Childs asked: Did you ever set up potentially isolated wetlands on the layout on lots 62 and 64 by Church Road?
Mr. Lansing explained: There is one wetland in this area and the wetland consultant has indicated that he feels that it is an isolated wetland and is clearly disconnected from the other areas. This will be determined.
Chairman inquired about the zoning in New Scotland for that parcel?
Mr. Lansing said that it was medium density residential. It would be 20,000 sq. ft. lots but the applicant is applying for a PUD district.
Chairman added: This would mean that you would need a rezoning in New Scotland.
Mr. Lansing said correct.
Chairman stated: As far as SEQR goes, the town board, the town planning board and the town board of New Scotland will be an involved agency.
James Cohen asked about the maintaining of the roads.
Chairman stated: My sense is that this concept will be continued. There needs to be discussions with the other involved agencies.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
Sandy Smith, a resident, mentioned how dangerous Church Road is getting to be with the traffic, and the impact on the schools, the drainage and the open space not being used for development.
Another resident was concerned about the traffic impact, and also how close are they going to be to our units in Canterbury Estates.
Rosalyn Bowen, Church Road, was very concern about the traffic impact and that
Church Road does not have any sewer service and is concerned about the storm drainage.
Chairman explained: If this does moves forward at all, there might be some opportunity for some homes to hook into sewers.
Ronald Morrison, Church Road, was concern about the slippery roads at the turn, and suggested a traffic light.
Ann Applegate, Chaucer Place, was concerned about the corner at Schoolhouse and Krumkill road. It has very poor site distance.
Regina DuBois, Chaucer Place, stated: Another development off of Johnston Road, which has 33 approved lots will impact Church and Johnston Road. I would suggest to have a traffic study done to go along with the environmental impact that is going to be done. There are intermittent streams that are going to empty into the Normanskill.
Andy Mackey, works for the New York Audubon Society, asked that the town to require a full environmental statements. The area is worthy of protection and the property is home to five state listed species of special concern.
Dean Shealey, use to live on Church Road and moved to the town of Bethlehem, due to the traffic.
Dave Webber, Newman Road, concerned about the traffic impact and the limited sight distance issues and is strongly against this development.
Gary Bladett, Church Road, mentioned: Had an issue with the 30-degree slope protection on the area and felt that it should be investigated.
Mrs. Lowes stated: One of my biggest concerns is the problem that it is going to be in two different towns. I would suggest having some kind of overall plan that is going to address both towns.
A resident wanted to know if there are any reasons why this couldn't be a stop sign street?
Chairman Feeney mentioned: There are a lot of issues with this project. Fundamentally, from our prospective, is determining what would be an allowable density and are we going to issue a positive declaration. Another question is whether an EIS will be required at this point.
I was unaware that the actual town board was involved and we would need to open up a dialogue with the Town of New Scotland.
James Cohen agreed with Ms. Weston's comments that an Environmental Impact Statement will be required and to have a traffic study done.
Paul Caputo was concerned about the New Scotland's decision on the number of parcels that was being proposed. I would like to see that plan before we make any decisions.
Before they come back, I would really like to know what the status of that 120 units in the Town of New Scotland.
Chairman added: We would need a more identifiable layout so that we can get in there and get a better sense of the number of lots.
Ms. Weston stated: When you do that conventional layout, you will have to be much more sensitive to the topography that you are working with now. You had incredible impacts to that topography.
Chairman further explained: We will really need to try to figure out is what is the limited level of permits. It will be helpful if we can see what it is because that is going to shift the impacts. Clearly, what is the wetland impact, the Army Corp. verses DEC, and what is DEC's and what it Army Corps.
Ms. Weston further added: The boulevard is proposed to link two of the developed sections. A boulevard is expressly prohibited by our highway resolutions.
The Planning Board continued the hearing on a proposed 75 lot subdivision on Church/Krumkill Road with the following information that needs to be addressed:
need realistic building lots on the conventional layout plan
revised cluster plan based on lot number and other comments by the Planning Board.
environmental constraints shown separately
Chairman Feeney made a motion to continue the hearing for a 75 lot subdivision on Church/Krumkill road.
The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MEETING ADJOURNED: 9:45 P.M.
TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
MEETING NOTICE
March 22, 2006
MATTER OF NORMANSKILL PRESERVE SUBDIVISION - Church Road
| 
