TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
PLANNING BOARD
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Minutes of meeting held at the Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, NY 12084 at 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Stephen Feeney, Chairman
Paul Caputo
James Cohen
Lindsay Childs
Michael Cleary keep this one
Theresa Coburn
Jan Weston, Planning Administrator
Linda Clark, Counsel
ABSENT: Thomas Robert
************************************************************************
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 11, 2007. The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 5-0 vote by the Board. (James Cohen abstained).
Chairman made a motion to approve the minutes of August 8, 2007 with a few minor corrections. The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
**********************************************************************
Chairman Feeney announced: The concept for LaFevre, 51 & 53 Gipp Road , the Planning Board determined that the lots were previously subdivided and no further action was necessary.
MATTER OF BLACK CREEK ASSOCIATES – 3483 Lydius Street
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a public hearing on the final plat of a 2 lot
subdivision of 34.9 acres. Zoned R-40. Paul Sciocchotti presenting.
Linda Clark, Counsel, read the Legal Notice as follows:
The case of Black Creek Associates will be heard on Wednesday, September 26, 2007 at
7:30 p.m. at the Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, New York 12084
for the purpose of obtaining final plat approval for an unnamed subdivision.
Such subdivision is proposed as a two lot subdivision of 34.7 acres.
The general location of the site is at 3483 Lydius Street
The property is zoned: R-40
Tax Map # 28.00-2- 2
Plans are open for inspection, by appointment, at the Planning Department during normal
business hours.
Dated: September 7, 2007
Stephen Feeney, Chairman, Planning Board
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows
Black Creek Associates – 3483 Lydius Street
The applicant is requesting final approval for a 2 lot subdivision, cutting the existing farm house and outbuildings along with 5 acres of land from the remaining 31 acre parcel. Many of the Pine Bush Commission’s comment’s are not applicable unless either parcel is further developed however, a note should be added to the final plat regarding the fire management of the adjoining preserve. No objection to final approval.
Paul Sciocchotti presenting: The property has 36.84 acres, and has one single-family home on the property, and a large barn and two small barns. The land is predominately flat and is zoned R-40.
The property is serviced by a private well and septic. We are proposing a 2 lot subdivision; one lot being 29.9 acres to be purchased by the Nature Conservancy and eventually will become part of the Pine Bush Preserve. The other 6.94 acres to be retained by the applicant. There are no proposals for any development, and for any installation of any infrastructure, and for the extension of the water or sewer. I added notes to the survey that I submitted for concept which were the reflection of the comments and recommendations of the Pine Bush Commission had set forth in the correspondence from Neil Gifford, conservation Director, dated June 21, 2007..
Chairman added: The only additional note that I am looking for is regular fire management the Pine Bush Commission referred to it as a smoke easement, but I referred to it just as a deed notice and not an easement. Also, the Board would want a note on the plat notifying prospective lot owners that the parcel adjoins the Pine Bush Preserve and the controlled or prescribed wildland fire is the primary management tool within the Preserve.
Mr. Sciocchotti said that he would add that note to the plat plan.
Chairman announced for the record that they received the site plan review from the Guilderland Conservation Advisory Council, dated July 3, 2007, and their conclusion read as follows: GCAC does not envision any negative environmental impact that would result from the proposed two lot subdivision.
Chairman asked for any comments from Board.
Lindsay Childs asked about the well that is shown on the plans for lot # 1. Is that a well that serves lot #2?
Mr. Sciocchotti said no. I believe that it was servicing lot #1 and serviced the single family home that is there. From what we looked at was that there were two wells there. One in the survey and one that is going to be on the property that is going to remain with the single family home on lot 2. To my knowledge the septic and well is located on lot 2.
There are no plans to have that home occupied or rented out and I believe that home will be torn down.
Lindsay Childs stated: We would like to know where the well and septic are located on the plans and you will need approval from the Albany County Health Department to install the septic system.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to close the hearing. James Cohen seconded the motion.
Chairman made a motion for SEQR Determination as follows:
In Accordance with Section 8-0113, Article 8 of the New York Environmental Conservation Law, this Agency has conducted an initial review to determine whether the following project may have a significant effect on the environment and on the basis of the review hereby finds:
The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. This determination is based on a careful review by the Planning Board, and by the comments of the Guilderland Conservation Advisory Council, and by the environmental short form, which the applicant has filled out, and the minor nature of the proposed 2 lot subdivision and the sale of the 29.9 acre parcel to the Nature Conservancy for preservation in perpetuity.
The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
Chairman made a motion to approve the final plat for the proposed two-lot subdivision on Lydius Street with the following conditions:
· Town Highway Superintendent approval for any new curbcut
· Note on the plat notifying prospective lot owner that parcel adjoins the Pine Bush Preserve and the controlled or prescribed wildland fire is the primary management tool within the Preserve.
The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
MATTER OF JACKSON – 5899 Ostrander Road
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a public hearing on the final plat of a 2 lot subdivision of 8.9 acres. Zoned RA3. Brian Jackson presenting.
Linda Clark, Counsel, read the Legal Notice as follows:
The case of Brian Jackson will be heard on Wednesday, September 26, 2007 at
7:30 p.m. at the Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, New York 12084
for the purpose of obtaining final plat approval for an unnamed subdivisions.
Such subdivision is proposed as 2 lots cut from 8.9 acres.
The general location of the site is at 5899 Ostrander Road.
The property is zoned: Rural Agriculture 3
Tax Map # 50.00-2-16.7
Plans are open for inspection, by appointment, at the Planning Department during normal
business hours.
Stephen Feeney, Chairman, Planning Board
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Jackson – Ostrander Road
This is a final plat presentation of 8.9 acres vacant lot into two parcels. Although zoned RA3, the applicant is using the one time single lot exemption to create a 2.9 acre parcel. The final plat includes a note to this affect along with notes regarding the 250 ft. septic setback from the stream, and’T’ turnaround driveways. The GCAC found no environmental concerns. No objection to final approval.
Brian Jackson presenting: I am presenting tonight to get final approval for the 2.91 acre lot of the original 8.9 acres. Currently, there are single residence households on the west, north and east of this property. I have all four of the current requirements for subdivision listed on the map and I believe they meets the current zoning requirements.
Chairman Feeney stated: My only issue is that there are no limits of grading and clearing showing. You will need to file a SWPPP and a Notice of Intent with NYSDEC to be prepared prior to individual lot building permits.
You will need a notation on the map that includes the 250 ft. septic setback from the stream.
Chairman asked for any more 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 close the hearing. The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
Chairman made a motion for SEQR Determination as follows:
In Accordance with Section 8-0113, Article 8 of the New York Environmental Conservation Law, this Agency has conducted an initial review to determine whether the following project may have a significant effect on the environment and on the basis of the review hereby finds:
The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. This determination is based on a careful review by the Planning Board, and by the comments of the Guilderland Conservation Advisory Council, and by the environmental short form, which the applicant has filled out, and by the minor nature of this subdivision.
The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
Chairman made a motion to approved the final plat for the proposed two lot subdivision
on Ostrander Road with the following conditions:
- Town Highway Superintendent approval for any new curbcut
- Albany County Health Department approval (with building permit application)
- $1,500.00 per dwelling unit – Park & Recreation Fund (with building permit application).
- Note on the plat indicating that Notice of Intent must be filed with the
NYSDEC and SWPPP (erosion and sedimentation) be prepared prior to
individual lot building permits.
The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried b y a 6-0 vote by the Board.
********************************************************************
MATTER OF ROMANO – Routes 158 & 20
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a final plat presentation of a 4 lot subdivision of 14.7 acres. Zoned RA3. Tim Elliott presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Romano – Routes 158 & 20
The applicant received a negative SEQR determination and preliminary plat approval in April of 2007. She has now submitted the remaining requested documentation including the DEC permit, the culvert detail, driveway cross-section and deed restriction language. No objection to final approval.
Tim Elliott presenting: This is a 4 lot subdivision. Lot 1 has a single family dwelling on it and lots 2,3 and 4 will be new buildable lots. At our last presentation we were still lacking our ACOE approval, and the engineering details with culverts over the wetlands and details for the driveway. Eric Holt, P.E. our engineer, has provided the engineering details for both the wetland crossings and the driveway. We have made an application to and received approval from the Army Corps of Engineer and from the NYS DEC and have the permit.
The wetlands disturbance areas will be part of the driveway crossing with a culvert on the driveway entering lot 4 and a driveway crossing with a culvert on the driveway leading to lot 2.
We have also provided the deed language for the proposed 50 ft. buffer area along the eastern parts of lots 2 and 4. There will be no cutting or removal of dead or diseased vegetation only and no use of fertilizer in that area.
Chairman stated: For the record, we have received a letter from Albany County Planning Board, dated April 19, 2007, and their recommendation read as follows:
Modify local approval to include:
1. The location of wells and septic should be evaluated by Albany County
Department of Health as part of the subdivision of the land.
2. Review by the NYSDOT for design of highway access and assessment of
road capacity.
3. Notification to the City of Watervliet due to the fact that the parcels are directly
adjacent to the Watervliet Reservoir.
4. Review by the NYSDEC to determine regulatory jurisdiction pursuant to Article
24, Freshwater Wetlands, which are located adjacent to the property on the east.
5. Review by the U.S. Army Corps. Of Engineers to determine regulatory
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
As a matter of policy, the ACPB recommends municipalities try to avoid flag lot layouts within subdivisions whenever possible. (On File)
Communications from Donald Albright, Chief Fire Inspector, dated March 15, 2007 requested a 12-foot driveway with a turnaround to be built. (On File)
Chairman added: The highway work permit is on file from the Department of Transportation. A SWPPP is on file also and the only question I have regarding that is trying to determine what the limits of grading and clearing are on the map. They need to be indicated on the map, and you do make some reference to the water crossing, and the culvert design.
Mr. Elliott stated: We have a map from Mark Dempf by our engineer with the limits of grading and clearing on it.
Chairman asked for any more comments from the Board and there were none.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman stated: The SEQR Determination was made at the last meeting.
Chairman made a motion for final approval for the proposed four lot subdivision on Route 158 with the following conditions:
· Albany County Health Department approval (with building permit application)
· NYSDOT approval (for any new curbcut)
· $1,500.00 per dwelling unit – Park & Recreation Fund (with building permit application).
· 50 ft. no disturbance area along the easterly property boundary.
· ACOE notice per Nationwide Permit Program
· NYS DEC review and approval
The motion was seconded by Michael Cleary and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
MATTER OF TWENTY WEST – Route 20
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a public hearing on the preliminary plat of a 74 lot clustered subdivision of 181 acres. Zoned RO-40. Scott Lansing presenting.
Linda Clark, Counsel, read the Legal Notice as follows:
The case of Louis Masullo will be heard on Wednesday, September 26, 2007 at 8:00 p.m. at the Guilderland Town Hall, Route 20, Guilderland, New York 12084 for preliminary plat approval for a subdivision to be known as Twenty West.
Such subdivision is proposed as 74 lots cut from 181 acres.
The general location of the site is south of Route 20, across from Town Hall and west of Vosburgh Road.
The property is zoned: RO-40
Tax Map # 39.00-2-16.1; 39.1 and 40
Plans are open for inspection, by appointment, at the Planning Department during normal
business hours.
Dated: September 7, 2007
Stephen Feeney, Chairman, Planning Board
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Twenty West – Route 20
The applicant has applied for preliminary approval for this 74 unit, clustered subdivision. The project is comprised of 181 acres, 68 acres of which will be offered as Town parkland. I have the following comments:
- The TDE has reviewed the technical plans and found them to be in substantial
compliance with Town standards.
- A small parcel of land is shown that will allow a pedestrian and emergency access connection to the adjacent Bavarian Chalet project. Ownership and the details of the pathway construction needed to be determined.
- A sidewalk from Route 20 to the proposed parkland has been added. The
sidewalk should be extended to meet the pedestrian connection to the
Bavarian.
- Lot #38 is a keyhole that should be eliminated.
- The applicant is requesting a significant density bonus under the RO40 regulations in addition to having the park fees waived for the land donations. The Board needs to make a final determination on these conditions
- The stormwater management area at the end of Vosburgh Road appears to be incorporated into the two private lots, which is generally unacceptable.
No objection to preliminary approval contingent on the above concerns being addressed.
Scott Lansing gave an overview presentation of the preliminary project narrative that was submitted to the Planning Department. The intent of the project narrative is to describe existing conditions, outline the proposed development plan, review the history and significance of the open space areas and discuss the next steps of the project.
The preliminary submission includes the reevaluation of the site with respect to previously expressed concerns from the Guilderland Planning Board and the environmental characteristics of the site.
The applicant’s dedication of the 68 acres of the Drahos parcel that includes the Vosburgh Site provides a valuable link in a chain of open space that is rich in history and significance to the Town of Guilderland and Albany. The applicants have expended considerable funds on the archaeological studies to date and will make all information available to the Town to be used in seeking grant monies for continued investigation or preservation efforts and to assess in the acquisition of the Debit parcel that includes the Battle of the Normanskill site.
The applicant has been diligently working over the past 48 months to collect site data and work with the Town of Guilderland Planning Board to develop the proposed plan and the preliminary design drawings that have been submitted. The applicant’s development objectives have focused on creating an effective plan that balances environmental constraints, open space and pre-historical preservation and community benefits.
At this time, I will go through some of the extensive data that we have obtained for preliminary submission development. Investigations begin We have perform onsite test pits, completed boundary survey of the parcel, site topography, and have verified facility capacity for water and sewer, wetland delineation was perform for the parcel. We had the Army Corps of Engineer and New York City Jurisdictional Determination for the delineations for those delineations. A wetland report was prepared for the parcel and the Guilderland Conservation Advisory Council has reviewed the site. A traffic study was prepared for the project with NYSDOT review. The water report was prepared for the project and sewer was prepared for the project and outlining the flows from the residences within the project and the adjacent areas within the projects
that would convey to the central pump station. We have the Albany County Planning Board recommendation and the Guilderland Highway Department was consulted as well. They did review the road layout, and the cul-de-sac configuration.
The Department of Water and Wastewater was also consulted and the Town
Designated Engineer and all comments to date have been responded too.
We just received a set of comments from the TDE and have responded to those comments.
The Town Planning Consultant was also consulted on the project. The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been developed for the parcel. The applicant does intend to have a disturbance in excess of 5 acres.
The Archaeological investigation Phase 1 and Phase 2 has been provided for. NYS DEC permit for adjacent area impacts has been submitted and DEC is ready to issue a water quality certification pending negative declaration which we are requesting the Board’s consideration for that tonight. The Army Corps of Engineers nationwide permit application has been submitted and are ready to issue a permit pending the 106 consultations from DEC.
Mr. Lansing stated: We are requesting the Board’s consideration for issuance of the Negative Declaration and hopefully preliminary approval.
Chairman stated: For the record: We do have recommendation from the Albany County Planning Board, dated October 19, 2006. (On File)
Chairman asked for comments from the Planning Board.
Lindsay Childs asked: I have a question from the Twenty West – Residential Cluster Preliminary Submission Project Narrative, dated September 21, 2006. (On File)
On Page 7, you talk about the applicant proposing a trial system corridor around the perimeter of the project. Could you address that?
Mr. Lansing explained: The project initially had a trail system corridor around it going through the archaeological site. It was something that SHPO (State Historic Preservation Office) did not want to see the trail system back there at this time.
Chairman stated: For clarification, SHPO (State Historic Preservation Office) does not want a trail across that property.
Mr. Lansing said yes. That is correct
James Cohen wanted to know if there would be discussions between the Town, once they take over, and SHPO.
Lindsay Childs asked about the comments made about sidewalks on Western Avenue.
Are you proposing a section of sidewalk between the western entrance and the eastern end of your property until the local business area comes in.
Mr. Lansing explained: Nothing is proposed at this time.
Paul Caputo questioned lot 38. I think that lot looks very much out of place and the keyhole lot should be eliminated.
Mr. Lansing explained: The applicant would like to leave that lot. The applicant is talking about pushing that lot back providing additional buffers around that.
James Cohen wanted to note the cul-de-sac coming out of Vosburgh Road. There will be four lots there and will be isolated from the rest of the development. What is the justification for doing that out of Vosburgh? Why connect to Vosburgh?
Mr. Lansing explained: It is a nice setting there and we feel that it is appropriate.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
Paul Laudato, 6446 Vosburgh Road, was concerned about the 14-lot guideline for cul-de-sacs. There is only one outlet for Vosburgh Road and I think that there is a good reason for that guideline and I don’t know that anything has been stated in terms why that guideline should not be followed.
I would also like to know if the applicant has any improvement plans for Vosburgh Road as a result of the additional 4 lots on Vosburgh Road. Will the town’s sanitary sewers service these lots?
I do have particular issues that I talked to the Highway Superintendent about. There is an underground drain line that comes out of my driveway and this is a concern. That drain will have to be handle somehow coming off my property even if they build a road to town specs.
The last concern is, when the area for the 4 lots is cleared; the winds will kick up a lot of dirt and debris and deposit it on my neighbors. I would like some precautions added to any approvals that are given to prevent that this happening during construction.
Chairman stated: As far as the stormwater management areas, they would need to be on separate parcel.
Mr. Lansing said that the stormwater management area is now on its own separate parcel.
Chairman added: As far as extending the additional four lots, we did look at connecting to the proposed subdivision, but that has some environmental impacts in and of itself. It seems that many of the residents on Vosburgh would rather not have the connection. That is something that we could mandate to avoid the 13 lots limitation. We have decided not to go that route due to concerns of the neighbors about adding more traffic to a substandard road and the environmental impacts is a concern. We do recognize Guilderland’s limitations and still have the option to connect.
Gerry Housel, Glenridge Drive, suggested that if some accommodation can be made where the builder could derive additional revenue from the site and at the same time take a portion of that revenue and put it towards a footbridge across the Normanskill in the main part of the Park.
Chairman stated: We are interested in that but we do not have access to that point from this project, but the applicant will provide something to access the open space that they are proposing now and not to impact the wetlands.
Lindsay Childs requested at least a stub of a trail coming out of Vosburgh Road adjacent to lot #71. Our experience is that you develop a lot before a trail is put in; the lot tends to take over the public land next to it and make it very difficult to start a trial.
Brian Ladd, 300 Lawlor Lane, stated: the town really needs to push for guaranteeing some more connections in this project before it gets approval.
Paul Laudato, wanted to address what the chairman mentioned. Without those four lots the owner somehow denied the ability to constructively use his property. That is not the case here at all. The issue is whether you are going to add four more lots to Vosburgh Road. The point is that that acreage is accounted for in the rest of that subdivision and then that subdivision could not maintain that density if it wasn’t for that acreage.
Lindsay Childs wanted to know if there was any way that you could move those four lots in the other part of the parcel.
Chairman commented: One of my principle concerns is with the Hammerstone Court, the one cul-de-sac as you come in off of Western Avenue. To me it seems like an excessive amount of infrastructure. You can easily provide three additional lots without any infrastructure.
We certainly would like to try to minimize the amount of infrastructure we have to maintain.
Chairman asked about the highway access permits. Have they been granted?
Mark Nadolny, Project Engineer, Creighton Manning Engineering, did the traffic report, and we did received a comment letter from DOT and did respond to all of their comments. There last comment letter had two issues: 1. Whether or not the roads are going to be town roads or private roads. They will be town roads.
2. Had to do with the access on to Rt. 20, the western access closer to the St. Boniface Episcopal Church line to make sure that any impacts associated with right-of-way for that entrance would be taken care of.
I believe that the applicant is in the process of doing that.
I talked with Mark Kennedy, Regional Transportation System Operator, and did speak with them about the protective left turn. We went through some of the criteria that would need to be met in order to warrant that left turn. They did not feel like it is warranted. We did some additional analysis for the study and it was agreed that if this criteria was not met, they still wouldn’t recommend doing that. Understanding that putting in a left turn would have impacts to the westbound right turn on Route 146.
Chairman stated: There is some communication on file, from DOT, stating that they had reviewed it and there is no need for any kind of improvements at that intersection.
James Cohen wanted to know if you presented to us a traffic study the last time.
Mark Nadolny said yes. It was done on July 2004 and it was updated on October 2005 based on the lower density of the development. A study was presented and DOT had reviewed it.
There was discussion about the stormwater management plan.
Chairman added: The stormwater basins and cul-de-sacs constitute and ongoing expense and cost to the community.
Terry Coburn mentioned that we have not really talked about the number of lots and the density bonus.
Chairman mentioned that needs to be clarified at least what the percentage is for the record and what is the density bonus that you are requesting.
Mr. Lansing explained: Based on our conversation, six lots in addition based on the 68 lots.
Chairman thought that the bonus was much higher than that.
Lindsay Childs mentioned that in backs of lots 71 and 72 runs right into the NYS DEC wetlands and I wonder if there were any reason why you need to have lots run into and back into the wetlands.
Chairman mentioned a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Shinas regarding an easement or right of access to the restaurant and the odors.
Chairman added: You will need to show us some kind of construction detail on the trail crossing. At least consider Mr. Childs comments whether your applicant is going to modify the lot lines. Show some indication of the trailhead at the Vosburgh Road, and will need comments on the stormwater plan. I am assuming that all the issues with DOT has been resolved and need to continue to review this and make sure that there are no problems with them. To show the proposed sidewalk connection along Western Avenue and the cul-de-sac modification
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience.
Chairman made a motion to close the hearing. The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 4-2 vote by the Board. (Lindsay Childs, James Cohen opposed)
Chairman stated: We have a limited amount of time to render a final decision. Therefore we will schedule the application for two weeks from tonight for decision only and that will include the SEQR Determination.
************************************************************************
MATTER OF NEVERMAN – County Line Road
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a concept presentation of a proposed 3-lot subdivision of 44.7 acres. Zoned R20. Doug Hewett presenting.
Terry Coburn, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
Neverman – County Line Road
The applicant has applied for concept approval to cut two lots off the front of a 44 parcel. There are a few structures on the property, most notably a house dating to 1780 that the applicant would demolish. The area of the proposed building lots is generally flat mowed land. The applicant plans on obtaining water from the Town of Rotterdam and using septic systems. I have the following comments:
- I have no problem with the two new building lots, but the balance of the
property also becomes the third lot. The plan should show a building
envelope and existing structures on this lot.
- Lot #3 also contains at least one stream and DEC wetlands along the eastern
boundary. The GCAC found evidence of other wet areas and a delineation
should probably be done to insure that there is a viable building envelope on
his parcel.
- A discussion should take place to determine what, if anything, can be done to
preserve the house which has some historical significance.
No objection to concept approval contingent on lot #3 being shown to have a legal building envelope.
Doug Hewett presenting: The applicant wants to sell some land and divide it into 3 lots and keep the rest of the land. I would proposed to leave access on each side of his house in case, in the future, he would want to further develop the land. From what I understand, the old house would have to come down. I don’t know that it has any historical value to it besides the fact that it is 300 years old. These people have no money and they are looking to reduce their taxes and need to sell.
Chairman stated: A typical subdivision process is that we do request a historical evaluation and research on the property if it has any historical significance.
Another concern is the wetland area in the back of lot 3. A delineation should probably be done to insure that there is a viable building envelope on this parcel.
Doug Hewitt did not understand why all of this has to be done. I would have to run this by Mr. Neverman.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, commented: If the Board is leaning towards giving concept approval contingent on this information coming in, then I would say take that step. Then if you want to continue at least you have that step completed.
Chairman stated: Conceptually, I do not have a problem with this.
There was further discussion about the house and the historical significance.
Chairman stated: You will need to show a buildable envelope on lot #3 and show the setbacks from the wetlands.
The Planning Board agreed to continue the concept with the following items:
- A Phase 1A historic assessment should be done on the 1780 house.
- Show a buildable envelope on lot #3 including any required setbacks from
State or Federal wetlands.
Concept continued.
MATTER OF QUADRINI – Ashford Drive
Chairman Feeney announced that this was an advisory opinion on rezoning a 6.2 acre parcel from RO40 to Multiple Residence. Armand Quadrini presenting.
Jan Weston, Town Planner, read the comments of the Planning Department as follows:
The applicant has requested to rezone 6.2 acres of vacant land from RO40 to Multiple Residence for the purpose of building two 4 unit condo buildings.
The parcel is generally flat with scrub type of vegetation. 3.2 acres of the parcel would be used for condominiums while the remaining 2.7 acres will be dedicated to the Town for parkland.
The parcel is located adjacent to Oxford Heights apartments, east of Kraus Road, south of Cosmos Plaza and west of and adjacent to the 8 acres parkland parcel that was recently donated to the town by BBL.
The land is adjacent to an existing MR zone and the location of the proposed new buildings will have no adverse impact on the surrounding neighbourhood.
The donation of the parkland will not only adds to the recently donated parkland, it will also buffer the houses on Krauss Road for further development.
The developer is also offering a multi-use path through the property that will allow a good portion of the Westmere neighborhood to access the future parkland without having to go around to Western Avenue or Johnston Road.
8 condos are proposed on 3.2 acres, an average of 2.5 units per acre, which is well below the 12 units per acre density allowed.
I would recommend this rezone request with the following conditions:
- That the rezone be conditioned on the donation of the 2.7 acres of parkland along with the construction of the multi-use pathway.
- That only the southern 3.2 acres be rezoned to the MR designation, with the
parkland portion remaining RO40.
- That the rezone be conditioned on the construction of two, 4 unit building
only.
Also, if this rezone is approved by the Town Board, that the whole project would be back in front of this Board for site review and special use permit.
Chairman noted for the record: There is notification from the Albany County Planning Board, dated September 20, 2007 and their recommendation was: Defer to local consideration
1. This board has found that the proposed action will have no significant countywide or intermunicipal impact. Defer to local consideration.
Armand Quadrini presenting: We are proposing to build (8) condos, (2) buildings of (4) each on Ashford Drive. The applicant is asking to rezone this parcel from RO40 to Multiple Residence. The parcel contains 6.12 acres and would only be accessible from Ashford Drive, Town Road and north side of Oxford Heights. The parcel has access to town water and sewer. 2.7 acres will be dedicated to the Town for parkland and will not impact any wetlands. The site is sandy soil and dry.
Chairman asked: You are proposing to donate 2.7 acres to the Town, is that correct.
Mr. Quadrini said yes.
Chairman added: It appears that the bike path would have to cross the property of the town homes. If this were the case, then we would need some sort of maintenance easement.
Chairman stated: You will need to stay under an acre of disturbance to avoid the stormwater management plan.
Terry Coburn commented: I had a call today from someone who owns a home on Ashford Drive, got notification of the hearing before the Town Board. They did not feel that the legal notice was correct; because they felt that the property fronted Malpass Road or Krauss Road not Ashford Drive. The description in the legal notice was not correct.
Chairman asked for any comments from the audience and there were none.
Chairman made a motion to recommend the rezoning on Ashford Drive with the following recommendations:
- Condition on donation of 2.7 acres of parkland and construction of multi-
use path.
- Limit rezoning of MR to southern 3.2 acres.
- Condition on the construction of two 4-unit buildings only.
Seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
MATTER OF WOODSFIELD – Lydius Street
Chairman Feeney announced that this was a determination of completeness of the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Chairman Feeney asked for any comments from the Board.
James Cohen had questions on hydrological impacts and would like to review the stormwater pollution prevention plan.
Lindsay Childs stated: The sidewalk issues has been addressed and had some trail issues that I did not understand. There should also be a connection between DiCaprio park and Lone Pine Park. Also, to make it accessible from this neighborhood to DiCaprio park.
Chairman stated: Some of the trails we may want to limit in their (Pine Bush Commission) management of these properties
Our proposal now is to connect through to the adjoining Lone Pine Park and the trail that goes from Lone Pine Park to Spawn Road. There are couple other trails that are shown in the plan that the intent would be for the town to accept and potentially dedicate to the Commission for management.
There was further discussion about the trails.
Chairman stated: We did include a Phase 2 Archeological survey and there is a recommendation that they would have to do a Phase 3 in that small location.
Lindsay Childs asked about the dune. Is that going to be preserve and part of the town park.
Chairman said yes. We did make some recommendation in the EIS in response to comments and proposed eliminating this cul-de-sac, and replaced by two keyhole lots. We are proposing into the document eliminating most of the lots on Lydius Street across from the rifle range and shifting some of those lots around and actually preserve the stream corridor more.
The property across Lydius Street was deed restricted heavily that was subdivided and that is in the watershed.
We did try to concentrate the development up into the far corner and to modify some of the originally proposed lots to reduce stormwater impacts and get further away from the ravine.
I am comfortable with the completeness of the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
We will take in written comments, if we do tonight accept it as complete. There is a ten day period and we will take written comments, and will try to address those comments during our findings process.
Chairman added: We will accept this tonight as complete and then we are allowed to file the document with all the involved agencies and will distribute hard copies to anyone who request it within reason After the ten day period then we are free to make findings and then make preliminary approval of the subdivision.
Chairman made a motion to approve the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Woodsfield Subdivision as complete.
The motion was seconded by Paul Caputo and carried by a 6-0 vote by the Board.
Meeting Adjourned: 10:45 P.M.
TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
PLANNING BOARD
September 26, 2007
BLACK CREEK ASSOCS. – 3483 Lydius Street
JACKSON – 5899 Ostrander Road
ROMANO – Routes 158 & 20
TWENTY WEST – Route 20
LaFEVRE – 51 & 53 Gipp Road
NEVERMAN – County Line Road
QUADRINI – Ashford Drive
WOODSFIELD – Lydius Street
| 
