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 July 12, 2006 with a few minor corrections. The motion was seconded Terry Coburn and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF SALUZZO-COX - 6332 French's Mill Road
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a concept presentation of a proposed 2 lot subdivision of 6.1 acres. Zoned Agriculture. Frank Saluzzo presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Saluzzo-Cox - 6332 French's Hollow Road
This is a concept presentation to cut a 2.5 acre building lot from a 6 acre existing home site. This parcel is one of only two that are still zoned Agriculture, with all other surrounding residential properties zoned R-20.
The site is generally flat and heavily wooded . The existing dwelling contains a pre-existing second unit plus an in-law apartment and must maintain a minimum lot size of 3 acres.
There is public water to the site but a private septic system must be installed. No objection to concept approval.
Loretta Cox presenting: We bought the two-family house with the intention of my husband and I and my mother-in-law and my parents to all live there. It is a two family house with a in-law apartment. However, when we moved into it we found out that the rental apartment that goes along with the house, was built on an Alaskan slab. In order to put any kind of addition on, the foundation would not support it. To add an addition for my parents would be just as expensive as it would be for us to build a new house.
We are proposing a two-lot subdivision so that when it comes down to making a final decision as to where my parents are going to live. Whether it will be in our home or to build a new home. We would have those options. There is public water but no sewer.
Chairman asked to clarify the use. Is the use is in an allowed use?
Ms. Weston explained: The second unit in the building was pre-existing and is grandfather in. They have to get a special use permit last year for the in-law apartment. That was taken care of.
Chairman asked for any comments from the Board and there were none.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to approve the concept plan for this two lot subdivision on French's Hollow Road.
The motion was seconded by Terry Coburn and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF MAROTTA - Grant Hill Road
Chairman announced that this was a continued concept presentation of a proposed 14 lot clustered subdivision. Zoned RA-3. Mark Jacobson presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Marotta - Grant Hill Road
Since the applicant was last in, the zoning on this property has changed from R40 to RA3, a rural designation that requires a minimum 3 acre average density. The design has also now shifted from a simple clustered subdivision to requiring a conservation subdivision based on rural design guidelines.
The applicant has submitted a grid plan showing 12 lots on the 41 acres. He then has calculated a 20 percent density bonus for greater than 60% conserved lands and for that land being substantially contiguous.
I have the following comments:
- All of the conserved lands shown are on private lots, basically the resident’s back yards. I do not believe that this will give any protection to these areas. Conservation enforcement would be very difficult and no one could enjoy the area except the private property owner. The open space should be placed with a homeowner’s association or other vehicle to insure that the lands will remain as open, conserved land.
- This property is now designated rural agriculture. The proposed design is a straight cul-de-sac, typical of any high-density suburban neighborhood. It seems that no effort has been made to make this development blend with the surrounding open, natural or rural character of the area.
- The clustered plan shows 14 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 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 concerns about this subdivision are its lack of rural design and 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.
Mark Jacobson, Engineer with Chas. H. Sells, Inc., presenting: The parcel is approximately 41.5 acres and is located within the Rural-3 district. It is located between Grant Hill Road and Nott Road and approximately 260 ft. of road frontage along Grant Hill Road and 700 ft. of road frontage along Nott Road.
The wetlands were delineated last year and verified by the Army Corps of Engineer. The Army Corps of Engineer do not give jurisdictional determinations anymore before you apply for the permit. Ms. Weston has been notified about this.
In the conventional layout, we have 12 lots connecting Grant Hill Road to Nott Road. Everything is conforming to town standards and the smallest lot would be three acres.
We are requesting a conservation subdivision in accord with the town guidelines set out last July. We have the base density of 12 lots and are asking for two additional lots based on the total conserved land being greater than 60% and the total contiguous land being greater than 75%.
The major points from the last meeting was that one of them being the wetlands, another the flood plain location. We verified the flood plain location and the maps are filed with the County Clerks office and on record with the Town of Guilderland.
We preformed a site distance analysis. Unfortunately, due to the vertical and horizontal nature of Grant Hill Road, we will only have one entrance at that location. Site distance meets minimum requirement.
The town code requires that in the conservation subdivision, you need minimum lot size of 15,000 sq. ft. We are proposing 6/10ths of an acre as the smallest, and our largest is approximately 18 acres.
Stormwater will be addressed and we do anticipate greater than 5 acres disturbance and will adhere to the state regulations, develop full swift storm water, both quality and quantity and the concerns will be addressed.
Ms. Weston mentioned a possible concern this being in the 100-year flood plain. DEC makes no regulations in the 100-year flood plain. We have identified site soils to be both heavy and gravelly and the heavy soils almost exactly conform to wetlands.
Utilities are both available, sanitary and water. The floodway base elevations has been confirmed and based on the FEMA mapping and the final maps that we had before.
We are not considering pathways to the parklands at this point. It was our feeling that the town isn't interested in taking over this land as part of expanding it to the parkways or connecting it. We will require a nationwide permit.
In regards to the road design, we have no town standards to go by with for the design of this road.
Mr. Marotta, applicant, explained: We will be leaving most of the trees in place. The houses are going to be cut into the wooded area. I don't understand how you don't think that this is going to fit in.
Chairman explained: The first point would be the access point. You will either be at the northern end or the southern end.
Mr. Jacobson stated: We would like to come in at the southern access point because it is closer to grade but we do not have adequate sight distance.
Chairman asked: How extensive would the grading be?
Ms. Weston stated: I think that this Board would like to see a design that meets the purpose and intent of that zoning district.
Chairman added: The design itself could be improved upon significantly. We are looking at something a little bit more sensitive to the sight. This development does not blend with the surrounding open rural character of the area.
As far as the road standard, I would like to think that we would have a rural road standard. You may in fact end up with a 50 ft. right-of-way as opposed to the 60 ft.
Mr. Jacobson wanted to know if there were any problems with the keyhole lots.
James Cohen questioned that the conservation enforcement would be difficult because it is in the neighbor's backyard. Are we going to consider that as legitimate?
Ms. Weston explained: We will have to work out the details of that and maybe put that on a separate lot but have the town own a conservation easement on it. The way it is designed right now is that it is really the people's backyards. It will be written in their deeds that they cannot do anything about it, but the Town has no control. This is what I am concerned about.
Chairman added: How many houses will be permitted remains unresolved as well as issues of whether the town or a homeowner's association will be responsible for maintaining the shared open space.
Lindsay Childs would like to see two pathways. One along the sewer lines up next to Nott Road and the other one would connect at the end of the cul-de-sac to that sewer line.
Terry Coburn was not convinced that 14 lots should be allowed. Once you start putting 13 to 14 houses you begin to set a precedent.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
Laurie Buno, 6103 Nott Road, wanted someone to explained the easements and where it would go. I am concern about the existing wooded areas in back of our properties and am concerned about that will be cleared out by the individual homeowners.
Chairman explained: If the town takes the land over, it would be more of a guarantee. But at a minimum we would require a conservation easement, which will prevent people from clearing it.
Jeanne Daniels, 6095 Nott Rd., wanted to know what impact, if any, the plan and the design as it exists might have with the water issues. This is already a very wet area for many of our homes and concerned about the grading and the impact of it increasing the waters.
Chris Buono, Nott Road, was concerned about the character of the land
Todd Friebel, 6110 Nott Rd., had questions about the proposed roadway and where it is going. Also, I am concerned about the drainage and the impact it will have on my property.
Mr. Daniels, Nott Road, was concerned about the traffic coming in and out and the impact that it will have.
Chairman explained: The main concern for this Board is the safety of the access to Grant Road.
Jennifer Italiano, Campus Club Rd., A resident suggested having some police control.
Chairman added: Conceptually, I don't have a problem with the number of lots nor the concept design for the shape or layout of the open space. I think that it would be nice to have access to the Nott Road Park.
Paul Caputo was in agreement to the number of lots. My concern is the conservation area in the way that it is being proposed here.
Chairman stated: The stormwater management area needs to have a decent access between the lots. The stormwater needs to be contained in that open space area and we will need more details on the access road.
At your next stage of preliminary, you will provide cross sectional views of all the grading and filling and I would prefer that the open space is all in one contiguous parcel, and that the road provide some sort of meander and character. We are looking for trees and vegetation preservation along Grant Hill.
You will also need to provide storm water management plan and soil analysis findings.
Terry Coburn was concerned about the number of lots and I don't ever remember us approving a concept whereby the map doesn't look like anything like we are looking at for preliminary.
Chairman mad e a motion to approve the concept for the Marotta subdivision at Grant Hill Road.
The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF GLASSWORKS VILLAGE - Western and Winding Brook Drive
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a concept presentation of a proposed 190,000 sq. ft. commercial and 327 residential unit Planned Unit Development. Dan O'Brien presenting.
Jan Weston's comments were being incorporated to the consultants comments.
Daniel O'Brien, partner in Glass Works Village, gave an overview to the Board on the changes that were made since the last hearing. Then turned it over to Nick Ranieri.
Nick Ranieri, Dominick Ranieri Architect, P.C. presented the detailed changes to the project.
The plans, part to the concept, are approximately the same in terms of the relationship of the Village green to the actual relationship of the library.
We have provided sections showing how the angle of repose was developed. The storm water management ponds that were behind these buildings, now created them as public enmities, and will be putting fountains in.
We have eliminated the clubhouse and moved the houses to the opposite side of the road and there is a promenade now that walks all around the green space and that will give everyone the view of the forever-green space. There will be a gazebo and an amphitheater. We enhanced the use of open space and we exceeded the 25% requirement for active green space areas.
Other changes include:
- sidewalks will be all along the major streets. The sidewalks trails will connect to
the YMCA and all connecting to the Winding Brook Road.
- Parking has been increased
- we have reduced the density by almost half and now the plan includes a total
of 337 units instead of around 350 units,
- Commercial and retail space will be dispersed throughout the living spaces
and 53 percent of the 57.5-acre site will remain open space.
Michael Buser, Behan Planning Associates, submitted a memo to the Board, dated August 2, 2006, in regards to modifications that were made and issues that have been addressed in the updated version of the concept plan. (On file)
We did an updated version of the open space and an updated version of the removal of the central road and the clubhouse. Opportunities for limited clearing are available in southeastern section of the project. There were re-arrangements of several residential units to minimize views of parking lots.
Mr. Buser also gave a brief discussion on the variety of connections of the trials and further discussed the parking lots.
Mr. Buser talked about the shared parking arrangements, and the connections to the library and schools and connections with adjacent properties.
The site provides an excellent opportunity to tie together a number of community resources including the YMCA, the Library, the senior housing, and the elementary school.
We feel that the overall layout is significantly improved from the previous concept plan submission.
Chairman stated: I have several comments and some of them are as follows:
- The bus stop needs to be intergraded in there as best as you can.
- The issue with cutting through a dumpster area. We do not want to see the situation.
- Conceptual improvements have not been submitted to DOT for review and
that needs to be done.
The Town Board has issued a positive declaration and an environmental impact statement is being prepared. The Planning Board will not take any formal action until the Town Board makes some sort of finding statement on that environmental impact statement.
Lindsay Childs commented: One of the concerns of the people in the town has is what affect of intersection of Rt. 155 and Western Avenue will have.
We will need to get an accurate idea of what the real differences is between the no-build, and build option at that intersection.
James Cohen had questions on the shared parking.
Paul Caputo really felt that this parcel is really a good spot for this project.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
Robert Ganz, president of Guilderland Public Library, stated: the Library is supported of this project but would like to voice the only objection for the concept plan. We object to the placement of the road along the back of the library and the side of SPARC. This road would meet up with a proposed connecting road to Winding Brook Drive. We are concerned about the safety, the noise, the traffic and the parking in the front entrance of the library.
We would like to request that we have some input in future traffic studies . I would ask that the town staff supervise a meeting between First Columbia and the developers of Glass House Village to see if there could be a cost sharing win situation on the safety problem.
Terry Coburn asked Mr. Ganz about the fencing. If that were to change to a privacy fence instead of what we are seeing, would that help?
Mr. Ganz stated: The intention for that back fence is for greenery growing.
Chairman wanted to know if there was an expansion plan for the library that can be shared.
Lindsay Childs asked: There was a suggestion made earlier about the possibility of expanding the library east on to the western edge of this parcel. Have you looked at that at all?
Chairman questioned the number of parking spaces for commercial that was based on a ratio 4.25 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space.
Mike Tailenon, Chancleor Drive, wanted to share some of his concerns with the traffic impact.
Mary Sparano, Williamsburg Drive, had questions on the employees working at the new Mall and the parking and suggested building homes for retired seniors that they can afford.
Michael Buser, Behan Planning Association, stated: We will be prepared to addressed the CDTA regarding transit opportunities, and the application has been submitted to the Department of Transportation and will send you a copy of that.
The number of parking spaces for commercial is based on a ratio of 4.25 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space This is always a great debate and hope to address this further.
We think that the YMCA, the elementary school, even the Price Chopper and the library will be a great asset to this and want to find a working relationship with them. If we have to give up some land to accommodate the parking because of the library growing, we want to do that.
Chairman stated: You will need to submit the design to the State Department of Transportation and to determine if 4.25 parking spaces per 1,000 residents is appropriate.
Chairman added: When the environmental impact statement is prepared then all the details will be discussed.
The traffic analysis will be a big part of this project and the crosswalks.
Ms. Weston stated: A lot of the issues that I have discussed with Mr. Buser has been addressed and I am comfortable with this concept.
Mr. Buser stated: Most of our comments have been responded to. We have met with Dick Sherwood and Ken Runion and tried to outline generally how these approvals will precede and envision that at this point we would have a concept plan. Then we would move forward with the Town Board on the EIS, which should be around 60 days for that document to be complete.
Chairman stated: Conceptual, there has been a lot of changes and improvements made. They reduced the environmental impact statement and soften some of the major issues that the consultant has raised at the last meeting. You have responded to all of our initial concerns and I am comfortable with the concept.
Chairman made a motion for concept approval for the Glass Works Village PUD.
Terry Coburn made the motion and it was seconded by Paul Caputo.
The motion was seconded by Terry Coburn and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
SITE REVIEW OF ORSINI - 3445 E. Lydius St.
Jan Weston, Town Planner announced that this was a request of obtaining a 10' of the neighbors property.
There are 2 houses adjacent to each other on E. Lydius Street. The one person has a side load garage and doesn't have enough property to easily get in and out of the garage. The other neighbor has offer to sell them 10 ft. of their property which will alleviate that problem.
In this particular instant, when they move the line, the one house no longer meets their sideyard setback and then that requires a variance. Therefore, we will waive it.
Because of the timing issues for the applicant, I was hoping that we could do the concept tonight. Then that way they can go ahead and try to get their variance.
Chairman stated: I do not have a problem with this.
Chairman made a motion to approve the concept for Orsini at 3445 E. Lydius Street.
The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 7-0 vote by the Board.
************************************************************************
MEETING ADJOURNED: 10:15 P.M.
TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
PLANNING BOARD
August 9, 2006
MATTER OF SALUZZO-COX - 6332 French's Mill Road
MATTER OF MAROTTA - Grant Hill Road
MATTER OF GLASSWORKS VILLAGE - Western and WindingBrook Drive
MATTER OF ORSINI - E. Lydius Street
| 
