Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190539 Zoning Map Amendment Response to UDO Technical Report 6-6-19 Zimbra m.lynn.bachner@saratoga-springs.org Fwd: UDO public comment: Beekman Street Art District support From :Meg Kelly meg.kelly@sar'atoga-springs.org Wed, Jun 05, 2019 08:45 PM Subject :Fwd: UDO public comment: Beekman Street Art District support 1 attachment To :nn lynn bachner m.lynn.bachner©saratoga-springsorg ig 1.18 Uri Sent from my Phone P0 6 X019 Begin forwarded message: Ely From: Arts District on Beekman artsonbeekman gmail.co Date: June 5, 2019 at 3:35:14 PM EDT To: meg.kelly_@saratogaLsp_rirags.org, Michele.Madigan@saratoga-springs.org, skip.scirocco@saratoga-s rings.org, peter.martin©saratoga-springs,org, john.franck Saratoga-springs.org,Arista Strungys astrl ngy_ _ arr iron. eni , isares@camiros.com Cc: b irg @saratoga-springs.org, sus n.barden@saratoga-springs.org, mair . . terson@saratoga-spry gs.org, rnik .sharp©saratogaaprings.org, joe.oneill@saratoga-sp i gs.org,john.daley_@saratoga-springs.org Subject: UDO public comment: Beekman Street Art District support Reply-To: artsonbeekman©gmail.com . To Mayor Kelly and the City Council, Deputies, Directors and Consultants, Attached are signatures from our Beekman Street supporters who wish to preserve the Arts District by requesting special zoning in the UDO for the 3 block area between Grand Ave and West Circular. The following statement was signed by 74 supporters (as of Weds afternoon at 3 pm)These are almost all Saratoga Springs residents but they may have been online at other locations. Thank you for considering our request. Cecilia Lockwood Beekman Street Arts District 518-583-2129 We would like to strongly express our support of preserving the Beekman Street Arts District as an arts district. To ensure the continuing progress of attracting and keeping arts-related businesses in the neighborhood,we would like to have the city recognize the 3 blocks on Beekman from Grand Ave to West Circular with zoning language that would prioritize available space for arts-related and boutique-style retail shops. We look forward to working cooperatively with the City to see that the zoning for the Arts District is achieved. Signatures Attached as PDF file Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail.Thank you for your cooperation. Beekmansupporterspetition.pdf 45 KB change.org Recipient: City Council of Saratoga Springs Letter: Greetings, Beekman Street Arts District Signatures Name Location Date Art District Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-04 Lara McBride Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Francelise Dawkins Saratoga, US 2019-06-04 Julie Leininger Gansevoort, US 2019-06-04 Susan Rivers Gansevoort, US 2019-06-04 EDEN COMPTON CLAY Charleston, US 2019-06-04 Mary Ellen °loughlin Gansevoort, NY 2019-06-04 Laura Miller Newcomb, NY 2019-06-04 amejo amyot Saratoga springs, NY 2019-06-04 juliAnn Gessler Albany, US 2019-06-04 Stephanie Hample Marathon, US 2019-06-04 Kristin Marshall Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-04 jenny Woods Hamilton, US 2019-06-04 Kristina Gillmore Gloversville, US 2019-06-04 SANDRA SCHWARTZ Stillwater, NY 2019-06-04 Zoe Burghard Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Geoff Bornemann Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Christine Tierson Richmond, VT 2019-06-04 Kim Vanyo Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 M J Garrand Queensbury, NY 2019-06-04 Name Location Date Susan Kellogg South Glens Falls, US 2019-06-04 Andrea Blackburn Glens Falls, US 2019-06-04 JON INV' OOD Brooklyn, NY 2019-06-04 Lesley Reich Manville, US 2019-06-04 Nancy Miller Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Nancy Sharples Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Anthony S o ovich Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Sarahiordan Schenectady, US 2019-06-04 Terry Harlow New Yor , US 2019-06-04 Kerry Laberge Albany, US 2019-06-04 Chris Preble Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-04 Meryl Davis Ballston Spa, US 2019-06-04 Jennifer True Findlay, US 2019-06-04 Carol Puntel Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-04 Laura Bulatao Latham, US 2019-06-04 Cecilia Lockwood Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-04 Velvet Kyle Clifton Park, NY 2019-06-05 Michael Wayne Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-05 Claire Lockwood Schenectady, US 2019-06-05 Dorothy Foster Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-05 Jennifer Zeh Greenfield Center, US 2019-06-05 Beth Payer Greenfield Center, NY 2019-06-05 Name Location Date Sandi Costello Albany, US 2019-06-05 Arthur Storey Guilderland, US 2019-06-05 Michael Stanko Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Ellen Beat Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Mary Cobb Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Danielle Maslowsky Ballston Spa, US 2019-06-05 shari parslow Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Glory-Anne Jones Wyna ntskil 1, US 2019-06-05 Emily Gorman Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-05 Gary Gensler Germantown, US 2019-06-05 Bradford Beal Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-05 Danielle Harden Waterbury, US 2019-06-05 Siobhan Hart Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-05 phil kellogg South Glens Falls, US 2019-06-05 Schuyler Lockwood Chicopee, US 2019-06-05 Charlotte Moody Saratoga Springs, US 2019-06-05 Sheila Olesky Queensbury, US 2019-06-05 Linda Cuminale Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Art Holmberg Ballston Spa, NY 2019-06.05 Jeff Goronkin New York, US 2019-06-05 Bob Ashton Basseterre, St. Kitts & Nevis 2019-06-05 Tina Ashton Basseterre, St. Kitts & Nevis 2019-06-05 Name Location Date Gary Zack saratoga springs, US 2019-06-05 Charles Kish Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Mark Waldek Greenfield Center, US 01 -o -0 Anne Ernst Saratoga Springs, NY 2019-06-05 Wendy Hamilton Buffalo, US 2019-06-0 Heather Rose Forney, US 2019-06-05 Michael Walsh Syracuse, US 2019-06-05 Kathy Klompas Clifton Park, US 2019-06-05 Eric Shiel Lake Lu erne, NY 2019-06-05 March 28. 2019 tE E 11 no I., UU Juiv 00 2019 Mayor Meg Kelly Commissioner of Finance, Michele Madigan Commissioner of Accounts, John Franck Commissioner of Public Safety, Peter Martin Commissioner of Public Works, Skip Scirocco Dear Mayor and City Council Members, RE: UDO PROPOSED ZONING MAP ALIGNMENT AMENDMENTS I am very pleased to see that efforts to implement the 2015 Comprehensive Plan through the Unified Development Ordinance are back on track and moving ahead. I attended the March 12th presentation of proposed 18 zoning amendments that were offered to align the zoning map with the 2015 Comprehensive Plan's policies reflected on the Future Land Use Map. I am somewhat familiar with issues since I served on the 2105 Comprehensive Plan Committee and once worked in the City's planning office. For your consideration I would just like to point out a few concerns or issues I have with some of the proposed amendments. • I would recommend that the report be amended to include a brief rationale as to why the zoning amendments are proposed. One has to do some research from the Zoning Ordinance text and the 2015 Comprehensive Plan text to understand why the existing zoning is not compatible with the policies expressed on the Future Land Use Map. A brief explanation from the consultants would make the proposals more transparent. • A number of proposed amendments actually have several alternative zoning designations and none of those were presented or evaluated in the presentation. There are two important bullets on page 55 and 56 of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan that read (I have underlined portions of the text for emphasis): "The land us categories are general guides to future zoning or other regulations. State law mandated that zoning must be in conformance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. This means that the density with the zoninfor a .articular area are must be el ual or less than that what is described with this document. \Then areas are to be rezoned, the uses and densities permitted within the zoning district must be compatible with the ranges presented in the land use category." The land use categories reflect a vision for the City in the future. It may take years for the proposed changes to occur. The vision is something to aim for 1 and work toward. Since zoninis the orimar tool to imslement this *Ian the zoning for an area may be changed or upgraded several times in an effort to reflect community ." Thus, I think it would be very beneficial for the City Council to know which of the proposed amendments are: Mandated: Situations in which the existing zoning designation is clearly incompatible with the uses and densities expressed in the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Desired (but not mandated): Situations in which the current zoning designation is still less intense than that prescribed in the use or density expressed in the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. In these situations the Council has the option to either rezone at this time or not to rezone at this time. The City Council has options. The text in the Comprehensive Plan was intended to provide the Council with some options and flexibility. In my view very few of the proposed 18 amendments are "mandated". • Proposal#1 - Morgan Street: The recommendation is that these two parcels be rezoned to"Office Medical Business - 2 District" which permits institutional related medical facilities. This is certainly a valid option, but another option would be to rezone this area "Saratoga Hospital PUD" which would only require an amendment to the existing PUD on the neighboring properties. Some of the non-institutional uses permitted in the proposed OMB-2 district regulations may have more adverse impacts on the neighbors that those that could be effectively controlled in a City Council written Saratoga Hospital PUD amendment. I think it would also be legally acceptable (but maybe not desirous) to keep the parcels in their current UR-1 zoning classification. • Pro sosal#3 —Matt's Auto on Ma•le Avenue: The recommendation is that the existing commercial uses comprising Matt's Auto be rezoned from "Tourist Related Business" to "Urban Residential-2". There may be a few mistakes here. I believe the current zoning map that is on the City website shows a designation of"Highway General Business" for this area. Furthermore, I think the Future Land Map clearly designates this area of the south side of Maple Avenue as "Complementary Core" — a medium density mixed use area. I remember very clearly that the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee recommended that the north side of Maple Avenue be changed from commercial use to residential use, but not the south side. The existing commercial zoning for the south side of Maple Avenue is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan "CC" designation and is supportive of the existing viable businesses. I would suggest that the City Council might not want to adopt this recommendation. 2 • Proposal#4 Townhouses along High Rock Avenue: The recommendation is to change the existing "T-5" zoning for the row of townhouses across from the Mill to the "UR-4" zoning district. I believe these townhouses were constructed under the "T-5" development standards. The existing structures do not meet the development standards of the "UR-4" district, so this change would be detrimental for the existing owners. Furthermore, I think the Future Land Map clearly designates this area as "CRN2" which should be compatible with the existing"T-5" zoning. I don't recall the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee making any policy change recommendation for this area. So, I don't understand why this change is being recommended. • Pro.osal#9— Former Landfill on Weibel Avenue: The recommendation to change the Brust property Open Space Bond Act acquisition parcels from a zoning classification of"RR" and"INST-MP" to"INST-PR". I believe that the northern two small parcels in the area proposed for rezoning were not part of the Brust purchase, but rather are parcels under the former landfill. These existing two parcels have for many years been zoned"INST-MP". I believe these two parcels have no open space deed restriction and should not therefore be designated parkland. • Proposal#12— Westbury Drive: The recommendation is to change the zoning designation of this property from "UR-1" to "RR". This does appear to be compatible with the 2015 Comprehensive Plan designation of CDD. But I believe this property actually has a deed restriction that prohibits any further development because it was part of the designated "open space" for the adjacent development. This raises the issue of whether the City Council ought to consider a similar zoning designation for several other deed restricted property that have "open space" designation on other conservation subdivisions all around the city. • Proposal#10— Lake Avenue next to the Military Museum: This recommendation is to change the designation of this parcel from "NCU-3" to"UR-4". I do not believe that is this change is driven by any Comprehensive Plan policy change. Rather, I think the current designation of this parcel is just a technical zoning map error. • Proposal# 14 — West Avenue just north of Grand Avenue: This recommendation is to change the rear sections of two lots from UR-2 to T-4. I do not understand what this proposal would accomplish. I do understand that it is desirable to have a lot in a single zoning district. But since the western section of these two lots are zoned T-5, so the proposal still creates two zoning districts on the lot and actually provide less protection for the single family neighborhood just to the east. • Proposal#16— Blue Streak Blvd.: This recommendation is to change the designation of a number of parcels just west of the high school parking lot from the zoning district UR-2 to T-4. This area is pretty clearly not marked CMU as is most of West Avenue. I believe this area retained a INST" Comprehensive Plan land use designation in order to facilitate a possible future expansion for the school parking 3 or other facilities. I do not recall the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee making any decision to have these parcel increase in density or change from residential to commercial use. I think this amendment is not compatible with the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. • Proposal# 17— Land adjacent to Railroad Run Trail: The recommendation is to change the strip of land from West Circular Street to New Street from an IND zoning district to INST-PR and T-4. I think there is a mistake here for the northern portion of this strip. I recall that the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee clearly changed the northern portion from South Street to West Circular Street from an IND-2 designation to a predominately single and two family residential classification of CNR-1. Therefore, this proposal to change this northern section to a T-4 zoning district would be contrary to the use and density policy as stated in the 2015 Comprehensive Plan and, thus, not compatible. • Qposals# 5#6 #7,4#3,#9 (most of), #10, #11 3!;, -Tartc.panc14118:The recommendation is to change the zoning on these publicly owned parcels from RR (low density residential) to INST-PR (parks and recreation). Since these are publicly owned lands, they are exempt from zoning restrictions. These changes may be desirable but not necessary. Also some of these parcels do not have public access and may never. So, I am not so sure INST-PR is the right designation. Perhaps they could be treated as one of the overlay zoning districts. Some thought ought to also be given to those "open space" parcels in conservation subdivisions that have deed restrictions held by the City. I am concerned the March 12th presentation represents that the Spring Run Trail and the Bog Meadow Trail are incorrectly shown on the Comprehensive Plan FLU map as RP and not CDD. If the Council wants the designation of these areas changed, a Comprehensive Plan map amendment would be necessary. I believe that the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee also made three other policy changes that are not yet part of the packet of zoning amendments. These are: • Yaddo Lands on North Side of Union Avenue: I remember that the Committee made a conscious decision to change the designation of this "equestrian event" parcel from a land use category of"Institutional" to "Equine and Related Facilities". Therefore, it might be desirous to change the zoning classification of this parcel from "Institutional-Educational" to "Institutional-Horse Track Related". • Area near the corner of Union Avenue and East Avenue: I remember that the Committee made a conscious decision to change the designation of area from a land use category of'Medium Density Residential -2" (max density of 6.7 units/acre) to a "CNR-1" (max density of 10 units/acre). Thus this Comprehensive Plan policy change would allow the zoning in this area to be increased from its current UR-3 designation to a denser one. • South Broadway just south of Crescent Avenue: I remember that the Committee made a conscious decision to change the designation of this area from "COMM-5" 4 (low density office park) designation to "SPECIALITY PARK". I believe that some of the existing uses and development standards of the existing OMB-1., OMB-2 and TRB zoning districts are incompatible with the 2015 Comprehensive Plan policy change. I recommend that the Council put a high priority on making a corrective zoning change for this area. Thank you for the opportunity to offer some comments. Sincerely, Geoff Bornemann 39 George Street Saratoga Springs, NY 21866 cc: B. Birge, Office of Planning & Economic Development 5