HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230591 Weibel Ave Rear Use Variance ApplicationACRE 16 LLC
APPLICATION FOR
USE VARIANCE REVIEW
-----------------------------------------------------------
Weibel Ave Rear, Tax Map No. 153.-1-18
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
-----------------------------------------------------------
City of Saratoga Springs
Zoning Board of Appeals
Submitted August 14, 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------
Submitted By:
Justin M. Grassi, Esq.
Jones Steves Grassi LLP
68 West Avenue
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
(518) 587-0080
Table of Contents
Exhibit A Narrative of Use Variance Review Application
Exhibit B Use Variance Application
Exhibit C Appraiser Report
Exhibit D Short Environmental Assessment Form
Exhibit E Location Map
A
1
Aronson Application Narrative Relating to
Use Variance Approval Criteria
Introduction
Please allow the following narrative to supplement the Use Variance Application and
related Appraisal Report and exhibits. As demonstrated in the Application and this narrative,
the Applicant has satisfied all the factors related to granting a Use Variance. The attached
appraisal report prepared on behalf of the Applicant, Acre 16 LLC, provides an expert opinion
regarding the need for the Use Variance that supports this narrative and its conclusions.
History
This application for a Use Variance involves a parcel that according to the Saratoga
Springs Zoning Map is within the Weibel Plaza Commercial Planned Unit Development (the
“PUD”) which was adopted on March 16, 1992, subsequently amended on July 22, 1998 and
appears at Chapter 240 Appendix C of the Saratoga Springs Zoning Ordinance. The
application arises as a result of a provision in the legislation which sets an expiration of the
PUD zoning if final site plan approval for a building is not granted on or before July 1, 2012.
This expiration specifically applies to the “Zone B” of the PUD, which constitutes the 16 ±
acre parcel known as Weibel Ave Rear with Tax Map ID number 153.-1-18 (the “Parcel”),
owned by the Applicant. The Parcel is currently vacant, having no final site plan approval
granted to-date, and as a result the PUD legislation mandates the zoning for this site is to
revert to the zoning district in existence for the site at the time of legislation, Rural Residential
(RR-
2
2), which no longer exists. As the underlying zone does not exist in the current Saratoga
Springs Zoning Ordinance this “sunset provision”, as implemented, renders the Parcel with no
controlling legislation concerning permitted uses and area and bulk standards. Put another
way, as a result of the City’s Zoning Ordinance there are no uses which are permitted as of
right or through an available Site Plan Review of Special Use permitting process, and thus no
way for the Applicant to utilize the property and receive just compensation.
Applicant Cannot Realize a Reasonable Return
As the Parcel is vacant, any proposed use would require considerable investment in
infrastructure to access and serve the site, especially given steeper slope topographies and
wetlands within the Parcel. As evidenced in Exhibit C attached hereto, a Real Property
Consultation Report prepared by Jacqueline R. Conti, MA, a NYS certified general real estate
appraiser, the constraints of the site lend its development limited to only those industries
which remain the lowest in vacancies since the COVID-19 Pandemic. Specifically, such
report suggests that only industrial uses, such as those proposed in the instant application,
would permit the Applicant to realize a reasonable rate of return. As the zoning currently
stands, Applicant has no ability to realize any return as no uses are permitted. In fact, as
further detailed in the Exhibit C report, due to the existing conditions of the Parcel, the uses
of parcels in the immediate proximity and the zoning, the Parcel’s “marketability is poor and
is arguably unmarketable”.
Applicant’s Hardship is Unique
The Applicant's situation is undeniably unique. There is not another parcel in the
City of Saratoga Springs that we are aware has zoning which has expired and results in no
uses being available for a property owner. Applicant's burden is therefore unique and does
3
not apply to a substantial portion of the neighborhood.
Change in Essential Character of the Neighborhood
The variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood because of
the following reasons:
A. The neighborhood surrounding the Parcel consists of commercial and
industrial uses which are similar to and consistent with the proposed
use. There have never been any residential uses on the site and no
residential uses exist on the parcels adjacent to the Parcel. The adjacent
uses include an industrial warehouse related use to the north, a
commercial retail plaza to the east, a large-scale solar array and landfill
to the south, and I-87 to the west.
B. The use variance is the best path to maintain the character of the
neighborhood;
C. The Applicant will take the necessary steps to maintain the character
of the neighborhood;
D. For the above reasons, the essential character of the neighborhood
will remain commercial and industrial in nature.
Self-Created Hardship
Applicant became owner of the property in a non-arms-length transaction from his
immediate family. It is only the change in zoning due to the “sunset provision” being
applied in 2012 which has restricted the uses of the Parcel such that a use variance is
required. Therefore, this hardship is not self-created.
4
In light of the above, the Applicant respectfully requests that the Board grant the
relief requested in the application for a use variance.
B
Revised 01/2021
APPLICATION FOR:
INTERPRETATION, USE VARIANCE,
AREA VARIANCE AND/OR VARIANCE EXTENSION
APPLICANT(S)* OWNER(S) (If not applicant) ATTORNEY/AGENT
Name
Address
Phone / / /
Email
*An applicant must be the property owner, lessee, or one with an option to lease or purchase the property in question.
Applicant’s interest in the premises: Owner Lessee Under option to lease or purchase
PROPERTY INFORMATION
1.Property Address/Location: Tax Parcel No.: ________.______ - ______ - ______
(for example: 165.52 – 4 – 37 )
2. Date acquired by current owner:3.Zoning District when purchased:
4. Present use of property:5.Current Zoning District:
6. Has a previous ZBA application/appeal been filed for this property?
Yes (when? For what? )
No
7. Is property located within (check all that apply)?: Historic District Architectural Review District
500’ of a State Park, city boundary, or county/state highway?
8. Brief description of proposed action:
Yes No
Yes No
9.Is there an active written violation for this parcel?
10.Has the work, use or occupancy to which this appeal relates already begun?
11.Identify the type of appeal you are requesting (check all that apply):
INTERPRETATION (p. 2) VARIANCE EXTENSION (p. 2) USE VARIANCE (pp. 3-6) AREA VARIANCE (pp. 6-7)
Applicant Owner Attorney/AgentPrimary Contact Person:
**HANDWRITTEN APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED** [FOR OFFICE USE]
_______________
(Application #)
____________
(Date received)
__________________________
(Project Title)
Check if PH Required
Staff Review _______________
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY HALL - 474 BROADWAY
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866-2296
TEL: 518-587-3550 X2533
www.saratoga-springs.org
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FORM PAGE 2
INTERPRETATION – PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING (add additional information as necessary):
1.Identify the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance for which you are seeking an interpretation:
Section(s)
2.How do you request that this section be interpreted?
3.If interpretation is denied, do you wish to request alternative zoning relief? Yes No
4.If the answer to #3 is “yes,” what alternative relief do you request? Use Variance Area Variance
EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE – PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING (add additional information as necessary):
1.Date original variance was granted: ________________2. Type of variance granted? Use Area
3.Date original variance expired: ____________________
5.Explain why the extension is necessary. Why wasn’t the original timeframe sufficient?
When requesting an extension of time for an existing variance, the applicant must prove that the circumstances upon which the original
variance was granted have not changed. Specifically demonstrate that there have been no significant changes on the site, in the
neighborhood, or within the circumstances upon which the original variance was granted:
Appraisal Assumptions:
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FORM PAGE 3
USE VARIANCE – PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING (add additional information as necessary):
A use variance is requested to permit the following:
For the Zoning Board to grant a request for a use variance, an applicant must prove that the zoning regulations create an unnecessary
hardship in relation to that property. In seeking a use variance, New York State law requires an applicant to prove all four of the following
“tests”.
1.That the applicant cannot realize a reasonable financial return on initial investment for any currently permitted use on the property.
“Dollars & cents” proof must be submitted as evidence. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return for the following
reasons:
A.Submit the following financial evidence relating to this property (attach additional evidence as needed):
1) Date of purchase:Purchase amount: $
2) Indicate dates and costs of any improvements made to property after purchase:
Date Improvement Cost
3) Annual maintenance expenses: $4) Annual taxes: $
5) Annual income generated from property: $
6) City assessed value: $ Equalization rate: Estimated Market Value: $
7) Appraised Value: $ Appraiser: Date:
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FORM PAGE 4
B.Has property been listed for sale with Yes If “yes”, for how long? _______________________________
the Multiple Listing Service (MLS)?No
1) Original listing date(s): Original listing price: $
If listing price was reduced, describe when and to what extent:
2) Has the property been advertised in the newspapers or other publications?Yes No
If yes, describe frequency and name of publications:
3) Has the property had a “For Sale” sign posted on it? Yes No
If yes, list dates when sign was posted:
4) How many times has the property been shown and with what results?
2.That the financial hardship relating to this property is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the neighborhood.
Difficulties shared with numerous other properties in the same neighborhood or district would not satisfy this requirement. This
previously identified financial hardship is unique for the following reasons:
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FORM PAGE 5
3.That the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Changes that will alter the character of a
neighborhood or district would be at odds with the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. The requested variance will not alter the
character of the neighborhood for the following reasons:
4.That the alleged hardship has not been self-created. An applicant (whether the property owner or one acting on behalf of the property
owner) cannot claim “unnecessary hardship” if that hardship was created by the applicant, or if the applicant acquired the property
knowing (or was in a position to know) the conditions for which the applicant is seeking relief. The hardship has not been self-created
for the following reasons:
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FORM PAGE 6
AREA VARIANCE – PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING (add additional information as necessary):
The applicant requests relief from the following Zoning Ordinance article(s)
Dimensional Requirements District Requirement Requested
Other:
To grant an area variance, the ZBA must balance the benefits to the applicant and the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood and
community, taking into consideration the following:
1.Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by other feasible means. Identify what alternatives to the variance have
been explored (alternative designs, attempts to purchase land, etc.) and why they are not feasible.
2.Whether granting the variance will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby
properties. Granting the variance will not create a detriment to nearby properties or an undesirable change in the neighborhood
character for the following reasons:
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FORM PAGE 7
3.Whether the variance is substantial. The requested variance is not substantial for the following reasons:
4.Whether the variance will have adverse physical or environmental effects on neighborhood or district. The requested variance will not
have an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district for the following reasons:
5.Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created (although this does not necessarily preclude the granting of an area variance). Explain
whether the alleged difficulty was or was not self-created:
Revised 01/2021
INSTRUCTIONS
APPEAL TO THE ZONING BOARD FOR AN
INTERPRETATION, USE VARIANCE, AREA VARIANCE AND/OR VARIANCE EXTENSION
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
1.ELIGIBILITY: To apply for relief from the City’s Zoning Ordinance, an applicant must be the property owner(s)
or lessee, or have an option to lease or purchase the property in question. The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)
shall not accept any application for appeal that includes a parcel which has a written violation from the Zoning
and Building Inspector that is not the subject of the application.
2.COMPLETE SUBMISSIONS: Applicants are encouraged to work with City staff to ensure a complete application.
The ZBA will only consider properly completed applications that contain 1 original and 1 digital version of the
following:
Completed application pages 1 and 8, the pages relating to the requested relief (p. 2 for interpretation or
extension, pp. 3-5 for use variance, pp. 6-7 for area variance), and any additional supporting materials/
documentation. **HANDWRITTEN APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED**
Completed SEQR Environmental Assessment Form – short or long form as required by action.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/permits_ej_operations_pdf/seafpartone.pdf
Detailed “to scale” drawings of the proposed project – folded and no larger than 24”x 36”. Identify all
existing and proposed structures, lot boundaries and dimensions, and the relationship of structures to
the lot dimensions. Also, include any natural or manmade features that might affect your property (e.g.,
drains, ponds, easements, etc.).
Photographs showing the site and subject of your appeal, and its relationship to adjacent properties.
3.APPLICATION FEE (NON-REFUNDABLE): Make checks payable to the "Commissioner of Finance”.
REFER TO THE CURRENT FEE WORKSHEET INCLUDED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
Check City’s website (www.saratoga-springs.org) for meeting dates.
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
City Hall - 474 Broadway
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
Tel: 518-587-3550 X2533www.saratoga-springs.org
Revised 01/2021
ZONING BOARD APPEAL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 2
PUBLIC HEARING ADVERTISEMENT
The Zoning Board of Appeals is required to hold a public hearing on each submitted application within ninety (90)
days from when it is determined to be properly complete by City staff.
City staff will prepare a legal notice for the public hearing and arrange to have the public hearing
announcement printed in the legal notice section of a local publication at least 5 days before the hearing.
PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION
Applicants are required to mail a copy of the public hearing legal notice to all property owners within the following
distances from the boundaries of the land in question:
Type of variance Distance for property owner notification
Use variance 250 feet
Area variance & Interpretation 100 feet
This notice must be sent at least 7 days but not more than 20 days before the date of the public hearing.
City staff will email a copy of the “property owner notification letter” to the applicant. The applicant must then send
the notification letter to the nearby property owners. Applicants may not include any other materials in this mailing.
The mailing must be certified by the U.S. Post Office. Prior to the public hearing, applicants must present the Post
Office “certificates of mailing” to the ZBA. If “certificates of mailing” are not presented prior to the hearing, the
hearing will be cancelled.
C
REAL PROPERTY CONSULTATION
VACANT LAND
WEIBEL AVENUE REAR
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
SARATOGA COUNTY, NEW YORK
REAL PROPERTY CONSULTATION
VACANT LAND
WEIBEL AVENUE REAR
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
SARATOGA COUNTY, NEW YORK
PREPARED FOR
MR. BEN ARONSON
PROPUP GROUP
PREPARED BY
JACQUELINE R. CONTI, MAI
MANAGING MEMBER
NYS CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER #46-661
OF
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC
Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants
614 ROUTE 9W
GLENMONT, NEW YORK 12077
AS OF
MAY 18, 2023
614 Route 9W • Glenmont, NY 12077 • 518-434-4440 • Fax: 866-218-5370 • www.contiappraisal.com
i
June 22, 2023
Mr. Ben Aronson
PropUp Group
Re: Real Property Consultation
Vacant Land
Weibel Avenue Rear [SBL: 153.-1-18]
Town of Saratoga Springs
Saratoga County, NY
Dear Mr. Aronson,
In accordance with your request, I have prepared the attached real property consultation of the
above referenced property.
The subject is a ±15.99 acre site located off the south line of Weibel Avenue in the Town of
Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, New York. According to the City of Saratoga Springs zoning
code, incorporated by reference herein, the site was located within a PUD; however, this district
zoning approval terminated on July 1, 2012, and the zoning for the site has reverted to the prior
zoning (Rural Residential-2 or RR-2) which no longer exists within the current zoning ordinance.
As such, the subject property is not located within a current zoning district within the city of
Saratoga Zoning code for compliance issues.
The analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed in conformance with our interpretation
of the guidelines and recommendations set forth in the 2020-2021 Uniform Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) effective January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023.
Supporting documentation concerning the data, reasoning, and analyses is retained in the appraisal
file. Your attention is directed to the following real property consultation which in part, forms the
basis of my opinion. This report is subject to the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions which are
an integral part of the report.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC ii 238138
I appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you in the preparation of the following report.
Very truly yours,
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC
Jacqueline R. Conti, MAI
Managing Member
NYS Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #46-661
238138 – Weibel Avenue Rear, Town of Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, NY
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 1 238138
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATION ...................................................................................................................................... 2
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................. 4
PROPERTY SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 5
SCOPE OF WORK ..................................................................................................................................... 5
COMPETENCY RULE .............................................................................................................................. 6
SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................. 6
REQUIREMENTS FOR RELIEF .......................................................................................................... 12
UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS ........................................................ 16
ADDENDA................................................................................................................................................. 18
GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................................................... 19
DEED/LEGAL DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 23
SURVEY ................................................................................................................................................ 29
TAX MAP .............................................................................................................................................. 30
AERIAL ................................................................................................................................................. 31
FEMA FLOOD MAP ........................................................................................................................... 32
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY ......................................................................................... 33
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS .............................................................................................................. 34
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPRAISER ..................................................................................... 35
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 2 238138
CERTIFICATION
I inspected the subject property.
I prepared the analyses, conclusions and opinions concerning real estate set forth in this
consultation.
My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and
limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions,
and conclusions.
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no
personal interest with respect to the parties involved.
The statements contained in this report upon which the opinions are based are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge and belief.
All limiting conditions imposed by the terms of this assignment or by the undersigned, which
affect the analyses, opinions, and conclusions in this report are contained herein.
Employment in and compensation for making this consultation are in no way contingent upon the
value reported.
I have no personal bias with respect to the subject matter of this consultation report or the parties
involved.
This real property consultation has not been based on approval of the loan and/or reporting of a
minimum or specific value conclusion.
My compensation is not contingent upon a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or
the approval of a loan, nor is it contingent upon a predetermined value or direction in value that
favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result,
or the occurrence of a subsequent event.
The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been
prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by
its
duly authorized representatives.
In compliance with the Ethics Rule of USPAP, I hereby certify that I have no current or prospective
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 3 238138
interest in the subject property or parties involved, and that I have not performed any services
regarding the subject property within the 3 year period immediately preceding acceptance of the
assignment, as appraisers, or in any other capacity.
As of the date of this report, I have completed the continuing education program of the Appraisal
Institute.
Very truly yours,
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC
Jacqueline R. Conti, MAI
Managing Member
NYS Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #46-661
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 4 238138
SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Effective Date of Consultation
Owner of Record
Land Area
Municipal Utilities Available
Zoning
May 18, 2023
Baruch Aronson
±15.99 acres
All Municipal
None
CONCLUSION
It is my opinion that all the elements to justify the requested use variance are present and the failure
to issue such a variance will result in an unnecessary hardship to the property owner.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 5 238138
PROPERTY SUMMARY
Property
Identification
±15.99 acre site located off the south line of Weibel Avenue, identified on
the Town of Saratoga Springs tax maps as 153.-1-18.
Effective Date
The effective date of this consultation is May 18, 2023. General
assumptions and limiting conditions applicable are attached to this
report.
Terms and
Definitions See Glossary of Terms and Definitions included in the addenda.
Intended Use
and Intended
User
The intended use of this report is for a use variance request, for the
intended users: Baruch Aronson, (the property owner), his attorney’s
and the Town of Saratoga Springs ZBA.
Sales History
According to deed book 2019, page 3905, dated October 3, 2018, the
subject property last transferred from Joel Aronson and Eileen Aronson
to Baruch Aronson in a non-arm’s length transaction, as recorded in the
Saratoga County clerk’s office, see addenda.
To the best of my knowledge, there are no active listing agreements,
offers, or contracts for sale concerning the subject properties. No sales
have occurred within a reasonable time period immediately preceding
the effective date of this appraisal. No other property history was
available.
SCOPE OF WORK
The appraiser inspected the property and surrounding area, referred to public records regarding the
subject property, analyzed various sources of economic data, and researched the immediate and
surrounding areas of the subject property as well as other competing and comparable sub-markets.
Research included the utilization of all pertinent public records and discussions with local officials
and various real estate professionals.
Jacqueline R. Conti inspected the subject property unaccompanied. Justin M. Grassi, Esq., with
Jones Steves Grassi LLP, provided the survey, Planning Board recommendations and ZBA
application. Jacqueline R. Conti performed the analysis and formed the final opinion of value set
forth herein including property inspections, photographs, data collection, and report exhibits and
presentation.
REAL PROPERTY CONSULTING
Real Property Consulting is defined by the Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Appraisal
Institute, 5th ed.1 as follows: “The act or process of developing and reporting an analysis,
recommendation, or opinion concerning real property, where an opinion of value is not a
component of the analysis, recommendation, or opinion. (Code of Professional Ethics and
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.”
1 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 5th ed., Appraisal Institute, Chicago, 2010, p.161.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 6 238138
COMPETENCY RULE
The competency rule requires recognition of, and compliance with, laws and regulations that apply
to the appraiser or to the assignment. Conti Appraisal & Consulting has accepted this assignment
having the knowledge and experience necessary to complete the assignment competently.
SITE DESCRIPTION
Land Area: ±15.99 acres; see legal description in the addenda.
Utilities: All municipal utilities are available.
Zoning: Rural Residential 2 (RR-2).
Traffic Count: Average daily traffic count in the subject vicinity along Route 50 <75,000 cars
daily, Weibel Avenue is <25,000 cars daily and where the site is bound by I-87 <75,000and the
Exit 15 off ramp the traffic count is <25,000 cars daily, see traffic count map provided by NYS
DOT following.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 7 238138
Property Description
Topography and Surrounding Land Uses: The subject site is an irregular shaped, wooded site
with a topography having steep slopes that border commercial, industrial and solar farm uses and
Interstate-87. The sites only access is limited to an easement which traverses the neighborhood
shopping center to the east, across a steep ravine containing wetland. See survey, tax map, aerial
and subject photographs in addenda.
The site is bound to the north by lands owner by the State of New York, operating as NYS DOT
and to the east by a site owned by Saratoga Retail Partners improved as a neighborhood shopping
center as well as a National Grid transmission substation. To the south is large scale solar array
owned by the city of Saratoga Springs and to the subject’s western boundary abuts the east line of
I-87, having +863’ of frontage, in the vicinity of the Exit 15 off ramp.
As discussed, the subject’s western property boundary is the off ramp from Interstate 87, at Exit
15, with minimal distance from the highway. According to the US Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, levels of highway traffic noise typically range from 70 to 80
dB(A) at a distance of 15 meters (50 feet) from the highway. These levels affect a majority of
people, interrupting concentration, increasing heart rates, or limiting the ability to carry on a
conversation.2
As discussed, the surrounding properties are of varied uses, as follows (see following page map):
To the north [SBL: 153.-1-3], owned by New York State and operating as a NYS DOT location,
containing office, warehouse, storage and trucking terminal, is zoned Transect Zone 5
Neighborhood Center. Indicated in the prior map in red.
To the east, [SBLs: 153.-1-21.1 and 153.-1-21.2], owned by Saratoga Retail Partners, LLC and
operating as a neighborhood shopping center, is zoned PUD: Planned Unit Development, having
been developed prior to the zoning expiring. [SBL: 153.-1-17], owned by National Grid improved
with an electric substation, is zoned Transect Zone 5 Neighborhood Center. Indicated in the prior
map in blue, light blue and orange respectfully.
To the south, [SBL: 166.-2-1], owned by the city of Saratoga Springs, operating as a large scale
solar array, is zoned Institutional Municipal Purpose. Indicated in the prior map in green.
2 https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/julyaugust-2003/living-
noise#:~:text=Levels%20of%20highway%20traffic%20noise,to%20carry%20on%20a%20conversation.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 8 238138
Easements and Encroachments: A 77.03’ National Grid permanent easement containing
overhead transmission lines bisects the site. Ingress/egress is exclusively via easement across
153.-1-21.1 as recorded in the Saratoga County Clerk’s Office on January 16, 1990 in Book 1281,
page 206. See legal description and survey in the addenda. No other easements or encroachments
are identified.
Flood Zone: According to the flood map #36091C0451E provided by Federal Emergency
Management Agency (http://www.fema.com), dated August 16, 1995, the subject is located within
Zone X, an area of low flood risk (see map in addenda). This is NOT a flood zone determination
or warranty of the location of the flood zone. This information is not to be relied upon, but to serve
only as preliminary information in advance of a qualified, professional flood zone determination.
Further, for the reader’s interest, the NYSDEC and NWI Wetland maps have been included
following.
Nuisances/Hazards: The subject site is impacted by NWI wetlands, located within areas
classified as riverine and freshwater forested/shrub wetland, which may have a negative impact on
marketability. See available mapping in addenda.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 9 238138
Zoning
Historically, the subject was zoned PUD, identified as (zone B) of the Weibel Plaza Commercial
PUD, see sketch plan provided below. Per the Appendix C: 5. Weibel Plaza Commercial Planned
Unit Development (formerly Chapter 241.5) of the city of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance, zone B was
to be developed with a maximum of three buildings, containing a maximum of 200,000 SF of
office and hotel space. While zone A was to be developed with a maximum of nine buildings,
containing a maximum of 300,000 SF of commercial space, which was developed per the
ordinance. Zone B (subject site), remained undeveloped due to physical limitations and the cost
of infrastructure scope of work for the planned use was too costly to develop, making the plan not
financially feasible, and then the PUD ultimately expired.
Weibel Plaza Commercial PUD
See ordinance excerpt Section XI. EXPIRATIONS, below from page 73, Appendix C: 5. Weibel
Plaza Commercial Planned Unit Development.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 10 238138
The below illustrated zoning map is available on the city of Saratoga Springs website,5 and as
5 saratoga-springs.org
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 11 238138
discussed, has a latest revision date of December 23, 2019 by amendment per council. According
to the zoning map, the subject is located within the PUD zone, which conflicts with the Zoning
Ordinance which states that the subject site has reverted to the prior Rural Residential-2 (RR-2)
zoning district, however this zoning district no longer exists in the code, leaving the subject site
without a zoning district in the Town of Saratoga Springs zoning code. The lack of zoning has a
negative impact on the subject’s marketability.
Zoning Map: Subject Vicinity
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 12 238138
ZONING ANALYSIS
REQUIREMENTS FOR RELIEF
In order to be granted a use variance, an applicant must satisfy certain standards that guide the
municipality in deciding such applications, as set forth in Sec. 267-b (2) of the New York State
Town Law. To the extent relevant to this assignment, those standards are as follows:
Use variances. (a) The board of appeals, on appeal from the decision or determination of the
administrative official charged with the enforcement of such ordinance or local law, shall have
the power to grant use variances, as defined herein.(b) No such use variance shall be granted by
a board of appeals without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and
restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. In order to prove such unnecessary hardship the
applicant shall demonstrate to the board of appeals that for each and every permitted use under
the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located, (1) the applicant
cannot realize a reasonable return, provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by
competent financial evidence; (2) that the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is
unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood; (3) that the
requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and
(4) that the alleged hardship has not been self-created. Each of these specific standards will be
considered below.
1. Under applicable zoning regulations, the applicant cannot realize a reasonable
return, provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent
financial evidence.
The property is located in an area which has reverted to the prior Rural Residential 2 – RR2 district,
which no longer exists within the current zoning ordinance and as such no permitted uses exist by
right or otherwise.
Uses permitted by right:
None.
Uses permitted by Special Use Permit (SUP), generally:
None.
It is important to note that, in analyzing whether the owner could realize a reasonable return on the
property, most of the uses would require the owner to invest a considerable amount of money to
develop the site, as there are wetlands and topography issues, which need to be crossed in order to
access the site. Ownership needs to be able to develop the site based on the highest demand of
property uses, and not on speculation due to the extensive costs for infrastructure.
Thus, the owner can not realize a reasonable return on the property under the constraints of the
existing zoning, supporting an “unnecessary hardship.”
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 13 238138
Currently, within the market, specifically Saratoga County, vacancy among industrial properties
is the lowest among all other commercial property types with the highest area (square feet)
delivered in the last 12 months, which saw nearly no impact from the COVID-19 Pandemic. The
following data presented is from CoStar, dated June 2023 (latest available):
Industrial:
Office:
Retail:
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 14 238138
Analysis of the permitted uses within the RR-2 district
None.
2. The alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to
a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood.
The hardship is unique to the subject property, as it lacks a current zoning district within the city
ordinance. The adjacent parcels, which together with the subject parcel, per the Weibel Plaza
Commercial PUD, were developed per the ordinance and therefore have not reverted zoning. As
discussed, the subject site was too costly to develop and remained undeveloped while the zone
expired.
3. The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood.
As discussed, the surrounding uses within the immediate subject area are retail and industrial. The
subject site has historically remained vacant, while zoned for retail use, with no demand to develop
the site based on costs and feasiblility. The prior zoning district “Rural Residential – 2” implies
that the site is (a) rural in nature, rural (adjective) being characteristic of the countryside rather
than the town, which does not apply to the subject surroundings and (b) residential, there are no
adjacent residential uses to the site. The subject is cut off from residential uses in the neighborhood
by large tracts of varied use land, ie. solar array, neighborhood shopping center, electric substation,
industrial and the interstate.
To the north, [SBL: 153.-1-3], owned by New York State and operating as a NYS DOT location,
containing office, warehouse, storage and trucking terminal, is currently zoned Transect Zone 5
Neighborhood Center.
To the east, [SBLs: 153.-1-21.1 and 153.-1-21.2], owned by Saratoga Retail Partners, LLC and
operating as a neighborhood shopping center, is currently zoned PUD: Planned Unit Development,
having been developed prior to the zoning expiring and reverting. Also, SBL: 153.-1-17, owned
by National Grid containing an electric substation is zoned Transect Zone 5 Neighborhood Center.
To the south, [SBL: 166.-2-1], owned by the city of Saratoga Springs, operating as a large scale
solar array, is zoned Institutional Municipal Purpose.
4. The alleged hardship has not been self-created.
The alleged hardship has not been self-created. The property is located in an area which has
reverted to the prior Rural Residential 2 – RR2 district, which is no longer a zoning district within
with the current zoning ordinance and as such no permitted uses exist by right or otherwise.
While the current zoning map, indicates the subject is located within the PUD zone, the Zoning
Ordinance, which predates the hardship, states that the subject if undeveloped would revert to the
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 15 238138
prior zoning district, which at that time existed; however, has since been abolished from the
ordinance.
Conclusion
The subject property is a vacant +15.99 acre parcel with no permitted uses based on the current
zoning, either by right (BR), subject to site plan approval (SP) or by special use permit (SUP).
As such, the owner has an “unnecessary hardship” and cannot realize a reasonable return on the
property under the constraints of the existing zoning.
Considering all factors, including surrounding land uses: solar array, industrial, neighborhood
shopping center, substation, and the noise pollution caused by the abutting interstate combined
with the site topography including steep slopes with costly/prohibitive development, limited access
via easement only, and lack of zoning causing an adverse impact on marketability, the subject’s
overall marketability is poor and is arguably unmarketable.
Due to numerous limitations of the site, allowing the site to be improved with an industrial use
appears to be the most feasible use based on surrounding uses, noise pollution, interstate access
and development costs, and will prevent unnecessary hardship to the owner.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 16 238138
UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS
This report has been made with the following assumptions and limiting conditions:
1. It is assumed that the legal description as obtained from public records is correct. No
responsibility is assumed for matters legal in nature, and title to the property is assumed to
be good and marketable unless otherwise stated.
2. Unless otherwise stated, the property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or
encumbrances.
3. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable but we assume no
responsibility for its accuracy. Responsible ownership and competent property
management is assumed.
4. No opinion is intended to be expressed on matters which require legal expertise or
specialized investigation or knowledge beyond that customarily employed by real estate
appraisers.
5. The plot plans and exhibits in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing
the property. We have made no engineering survey of the property.
6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not carry with it the right of publication
nor may it be used for any purpose by any but the client without the previous written
consent of the appraiser of the client and then only with proper qualification.
7. The appraiser herein by reason of this appraisal is not required to give future consultation,
testimony, or be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless
arrangements have been previously made therefore.
8. The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements
applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate valuations for land and
buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so
used.
9. Unless otherwise stated, personal property has not been included in this report.
10. Disclosure of the contents of this report is governed by the By-laws and Regulations of the
Appraisal Institute. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any
conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser or the firm with which she is
connected, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute or to the MAI designation) shall be
disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media
without the prior written consent and approval of the author.
11. We assume no responsibility for economic or physical factors which may affect the
opinions herein stated which may occur at some date after the date of value.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 17 238138
12. We reserve the right to make such adjustments to the valuation herein reported, as may be
required by the consideration of additional data or more reliable data that may become
available.
13. Where discounted cash flow analyses have been undertaken, the discount rates utilized to
bring forecast future revenues back to opinions of present value, reflect both our market
investigations of yield anticipations from other building purchases and our judgment as to
risks and uncertainties in the subject property and the consequential rates of return required
to attract an investor under such risk conditions.
14. Our forecasts of future events which influence the valuation process are predicated on the
continuation of historic and current trends in the market.
15. No opinion is expressed as to the value of sub-surface oil, gas, or mineral rights, or whether
the property is subject to surface entry for the exploration or removal of such materials
except, as is expressly stated.
16. We assume that after a visual inspection there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of
the property, including the mechanical equipment, subsoil or structures which would render
the property more or less valuable. We assume no responsibility for such conditions or for
engineering which might be required to discover such factors.
17. No representation as to the likelihood of asbestos or existence of radon gas has been made.
18. No representation as to the evidence and or condition of underground petroleum tanks has
been made.
19. No representation as to the existence of hazardous material is made.
20. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. We have
not made a specific survey or analysis of this property to determine whether the physical
aspects of the improvements meet the ADA accessibility guidelines.
Since compliance matches each owner’s financial ability with the cost to cure the
property’s potential physical characteristics, the real estate appraiser cannot comment on
compliance to ADA.
A brief summary of physical aspects is included in this report. It in no way suggests ADA
compliance by the current owner.
Given that compliance can change with each owner’s financial ability to cure non-
accessibility, the value of the subject does not consider possible non-compliance.
Specific study of both the owner’s financial ability and the cost to cure any deficiencies
would be needed for the Department of Justice to determine compliance.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 18 238138
ADDENDA
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
DEED/LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SURVEY
TAX MAP
AERIAL
FLOOD MAP
WETLANDS MAP
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPRAISER
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 19 238138
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
The following definitions of pertinent terms are taken from The Dictionary of Real Estate
Appraisal, Fifth Edition (2010), published by the Appraisal Institute, Chicago, IL.
AD VALOREM TAX: A tax levied in proportion to the value of the thing(s) being taxed.
ACCRUED DEPRECIATION: In appraising, a loss in property value from any cause; the
difference between the cost of an improvement on the effective date of the appraisal and the market
value of the improvement on the same date.
APPRAISAL REPORT: Summarizes the appraiser’s analysis and the rationale for the
conclusions.
AS IS MARKET VALUE: The estimate of the market value of real property in its current
physical condition, use, and zoning as of the appraisal date. (Proposed Interagency Appraisal and
Evaluation Guidelines, OCC-4810-33-P 20%).
ASSESSED VALUE: The value of a property according to the tax rolls in ad valorem taxation;
may be higher or lower than market value, or based on an assessment ratio that is a percentage of
market value.
BAND OF INVESTMENT: A technique in which the capitalization rates attributes to
components of a capital investment are weighted and combined to derive a weighted-average rate
attributable to the total investment.
CASH EQUIVALENCY: An analytical process in which the sale price of a transaction with
nonmarket financing or financing with unusual conditions of incentives is converted into a price
expressed in terms of cash.
CERTIORARI: 1) A writ from a superior to an inferior court officer, board, or tribunal directing
that a certified record of its proceedings in a designated case be reviewed. 2) A means of obtaining
a judicial review, e.g., of an alleged illegal or erroneous tax assessment of real estate.
CONTRACT RENT: The actual rental income specified in a lease.
EFFECTIVE RENT: The rental rate net of financial concessions such as periods of no rent
during the lease term and above-or below-market tenant improvements.
EXCESS LAND: Land that is not needed to serve or support the existing improvement. The
highest and best use of the excess land may or may not be the same as the highest and best use of
the improved parcel. Excess land may have the potential to be sold separately and is valued
separately.
EXPOSURE TIME: The time a property remains on the market. The estimated length of time
the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 20 238138
hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal; a
retrospective estimate based on analysis of past events assuming a competitive and open market.
EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION: These are assignment-specific assumptions as of the
effective date regarding uncertain information used in this analysis which, if found to be false,
could alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions.
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE: Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate,
subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain,
police power, and escheat.
FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR): The relationship between the above-ground floor area of a
building, as described by the building code, and the area of the plot on which it stands; in planning
and zoning, often expressed as a decimal, e.g., a ratio of 2.0 indicates that the permissible floor
area of a building is twice the total land area.
GOING CONCERN VALUE: The market value of all the tangible and intangible assets of an
established and operating business with an indefinite life, as if sold in aggregate; more accurately
termed the market value of the going concern.
GROSS LEASE: A lease in which the landlord receives stipulated rent and is obligated to pay
all of the property’s operating and fixed expenses; also called full-service lease.
GROSS LEASABLE AREA (GLA): Total floor area designed for the occupancy and exclusive
use of tenants, including basements and mezzanines; measured from the center of joint partitioning
to the outside wall surfaces.
GROSS BUILDING AREA (GBA): Total floor area of a building, excluding unenclosed areas,
measured from the exterior of the walls of the above-grade area. This includes mezzanines and
basements if and when typically included in the region.
HYPOTHETICAL CONDITION: That which is contrary to what exists but is supposed for the
purpose of analysis. Hypothetical conditions assume conditions contrary to known facts about
physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external to
the property, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis.
INSURABLE VALUE: A type of value for insurance purposes.
INVESTMENT VALUE: The value of a property interest to a particular investor or class of
investors based on the investor’s specific requirements. Investment value may be different from
market value because it depends on a set of investment criteria that are not necessarily typical of
the market.
LEASED FEE INTEREST: A freehold (ownership interest) where the possessory interest has
been granted to another party by creation of a contractual landlord-tenant relationship (i.e., a lease).
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 21 238138
LEASEHOLD INTEREST: The tenant’s possessory interest created by a lease.
LIQUIDATION VALUE: The most probable price that a specified interest in real property
should bring under the following conditions:
1. Consummation of a sale within a short time period.
2. The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of the date of valuation.
3. Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and knowledgeably.
4. The seller is under extreme compulsion to sell.
5. The buyer is typically motivated
6. Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best interests.
7. A normal marketing effort is not possible due to the brief exposure time.
8. Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto.
9. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold, unaffected by
special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with
the sale.
MARKET RENT: The most probable rent that a property should bring in a competitive and open
market reflecting all conditions and restrictions of the lease agreement, including permitted uses,
use restrictions, expense obligations, term, concessions, renewal and purchase options, and tenant
improvements.
MARKET VALUE: The major focus of most real property appraisal assignments. Both
economic and legal definitions of market value have been developed and refined. The most widely
accepted components of market value are incorporated in the following definition: The most
probable price that the specified property interest should sell for in a competitive market after a
reasonable exposure time, as of a specific date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash, under all
conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably,
for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under duress.
MARKETING TIME: An opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a real or personal
property interest at the concluded market value level during the period immediately after the
effective date of an appraisal.
MORTGAGE-EQUITY ANALYSIS: Capitalization and investment analysis procedures that
recognize how mortgage terms and equity requirements affect the value of income-producing
property.
TRIPLE NET LEASE: A lease in which the tenant assumes all expenses (fixed and variable) of
operating a property except that the landlord is responsible for structural maintenance, building
reserves, and management.
OCCUPANCY RATE: The relationship or ratio between the income received from the rental
units in a property and the income that would be received if all the units were occupied. The ratio
of occupied space to total rentable space in a building.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 22 238138
OPERATING EXPENSES: The periodic expenditures necessary to maintain the real property
and continue production of the effective gross income, assuming prudent and competent
management.
PROSPECTIVE OPINION OF VALUE: A value opinion effective as of a specified future date.
The term does not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a value opinion as being effective
at some specific future date. An opinion of value as of a prospective date is frequently sought in
connection with projects that are proposed, under construction, or under conversion to a new use,
or those that have not yet achieved sellout or a stabilized level of long-term occupancy.
RENT: See net lease
market rent
contract rent
effective rent
RESTRICTED APPRAISAL REPORT: A written report which does not include detailed
documentation.
SURPLUS LAND: Land that is not currently needed to support the existing improvement but
cannot be separated from the property and sold off. Surplus land does not have and independent
highest and best use and may or may not contribute value to the improved parcel.
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 23 238138
DEED/LEGAL DESCRIPTION
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 24 238138
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 25 238138
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 26 238138
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 27 238138
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 28 238138
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 29 238138
SURVEY
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 30 238138
TAX MAP
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 31 238138
AERIAL
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 32 238138
FEMA FLOOD MAP
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 33 238138
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY6
6 www.fws.gov
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 34 238138
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
Western portion of subject, frontage along Interstate 87
Eastern portion of subject, from adjacent parcel to the east
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 35 238138
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPRAISER
Jacqueline R. Conti, MAI
Conti Appraisal & Consulting, LLC
614 Route 9W
Glenmont, New York 12077
Tel.: 518-434-4440
E-fax: 866-218-5370
www.contiappraisal.com
Jackie@contiappraisal.com
EDUCATION
Juris Doctor: Albany Law School
(2001)
Bachelor of Science Degree: State University of New York (1987)
PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATIONS, LICENSES AND MEMBERSHIPS
MAI: Member Appraisal Institute, #10,168
Appraiser: NY Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #46-
661
VT Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
#80-236
MA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
#102110
FL Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
#RZ3903
FHA Qualified Residential Real Estate
Appraiser
Attorney: Admitted in New York State and Florida
Bar Associations: New York State and Florida
Licensed Broker: National Association of Realtors
Realtor Member: Greater Capital Association of Realtors
Commercial Industrial Real Estate Brokers
Warren County Association of Realtors
Vermont Association of Realtors
Approved Consultant: New York State Department of Transportation
Past Chairwoman: Albany Branch of the Upstate Chapter of the Appraisal
Institute
Past Director: Upstate New York Chapter of the Appraisal
Institute
Past Regional Rep.: Appraisal Institute
Chamber Member: Town of Bethlehem
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 36 238138
Past Appointment: Town of Bethlehem Board of Assessment Review
MWBE: Certified Minority Woman Owned Business Enterprise7
Expert Witness: NYS Court of Claims
NYS Supreme Court
Federal Bankruptcy Court
Appointee: NYS USC Part 36
7 New York State Department of Economic Development (www.empire.state.ny.us)
CONTI APPRAISAL & CONSULTING, LLC 37 238138
PAST EMPLOYMENT
Conti Appraisal & Consulting, LLC Jan. 2003 – Present
Managing Member
Hiscock & Barclay, LLP Nov. 2001 – May 2003
Attorney
Columbia County District Attorney’s Office Aug. 2001 – Nov. 2001
Assistant District Attorney
Columbia County Attorney’s Office June 2001 – Aug. 2001
Assistant County Attorney
Conti & Peatfield Appraisal, LLC January 1994 – June 2001
Majority Owner
Jacqueline Conti Appraisal 1988-1994
Founding Member
Gary Brown, MAI & Associates, Houston TX 1987-1988
Staff Appraiser
ACTIVITIES
Ms. Conti has actively been involved in appraising real estate since 1987. She is a Capital District
property owner and investor and has completed appraisals of various types of real property,
including: proposed and completed: office buildings, residential and commercial condominiums,
restaurants, retail shopping centers, parking garages, parking lots, industrial property, vacant land,
subdivisions, warehouses, truck stops, condominiums, attached and detached townhouses,
single/multi-family residences, hotels, motels, assisted living centers, specialized property,
easements and property for condemnation.
She has appraised commercial real estate in New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Florida and Texas.
Clients served include banks, law firms, governmental agencies, corporate firms, individuals and
numerous financial institutions.
The Appraisal Institute conducts a mandatory program of continuing education for its designated members. MAI’s who
meet minimum standards of this program are awarded periodic educational certification. Ms. Conti is currently certified
under the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute.
D
Page 1 of 3
Short Environmental Assessment Form
Part 1 - Project Information
Instructions for Completing
Part 1 – Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the
application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on
information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as
thoroughly as possible based on current information.
Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the
lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item.
Part 1 – Project and Sponsor Information
Name of Action or Project:
Project Location (describe, and attach a location map):
Brief Description of Proposed Action:
Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone:
E-Mail:
Address:
City/PO: State: Zip Code:
1.Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordinance,
administrative rule, or regulation?
If Yes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that
may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2.
NO YES
2.Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other government Agency?
If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit or approval:NO YES
3.a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? __________ acres
b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? __________ acres
c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned
or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? __________ acres
4.Check all land uses that occur on, are adjoining or near the proposed action:
Rural (non-agriculture) Industrial Commercial Residential (suburban)
Aquatic Other(Specify):Agriculture
□ Urban
□ Forest
SEAF 2019
Parkland
Page 2 of 3
5.Is the proposed action,
a.A permitted use under the zoning regulations?
b.Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan?
NO YES N/A
6.Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural landscape?NO YES
7.Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area?
If Yes, identify: ________________________________________________________________________________
NO YES
8.a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels?
b.Are public transportation services available at or near the site of the proposed action?
c.Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near the site of the proposed
action?
NO YES
9.Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements?
If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
NO YES
10.Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply?
If No, describe method for providing potable water: _________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
NO YES
11.Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities?
If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: ______________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
NO YES
archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory?
NO YES
13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain
wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal, state or local agency?
b.Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody?
If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: _____________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
NO YES
12.a. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district
which is listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places, or that has been determined by the
Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the
State Register of Historic Places?
b.Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for
E