Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230358 182 Excelsior Area Variance Public Comment (7)8/28/23, 1:09 PM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=18720&tz=America/New_York 1/2 From :noreply@civicplus.com Subject :Online Form Submittal: Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment To :julia destino <julia.destino@saratoga-springs.org>, aneisha samuels <aneisha.samuels@saratoga- springs.org>, susanna combs <susanna.combs@saratoga-springs.org> Zimbra julia.destino@saratoga-springs.org Online Form Submittal: Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment Mon, Aug 28, 2023 12:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated outside of the City network. Please contact IT Support if you need assistance determining if it's a threat before opening attachments or clicking any links. Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment SUBMIT COMMENTS REGARDING CITY PROJECTS Thank you for submitting your comments. Your feedback will be forwarded to the City's Planning Department and Land Use Board members. NOTE: Comments submitted later than 12:00 noon on the day before the Land Use Board meeting may not be reviewed prior to their meeting. All comments will be added to the project file in the Planning Department. Land Use Board Zoning Board of Appeals Name Daniel Berheide Email Address dberheide@gmail.com Business Name Field not completed. Address 19 Excelsior Spring Ave City Saratoga Springs State NY Zip Code 12866 Phone Number 5184613614 Project Name 182 Excelsior Project Number 20220031 Project Address 182 Excelsior 8/28/23, 1:09 PM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=18720&tz=America/New_York 2/2 Comments As a concerned resident along Excelsior Spring Avenue, I believe there is critical information missing from the traffic study submitted. That coupled with the applicant’s persistent argument that they be granted the variance based on perceived financial need all falls short of convincing. Further stormwater management information is needed and could be improved with a reduction in impervious space. The potential impacts to the larger neighborhood and public space far outweighs the desired profit. See attached document. Attach Photo (optional)Comments on the 182 Excelsior Traffic Study and Financials submitted to ZBA.pdf Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. Comments on the 182 Excelsior Traffic Study and Financials submitted to ZBA As a concerned resident along Excelsior Spring Avenue, I believe there is critical information missing from the traffic study submitted. That coupled with the applicant’s persistent argument that they be granted the variance based on perceived financial need all falls short of convincing. Further stormwater management information is needed and could be improved with a reduction in impervious space. The potential impacts to the larger neighborhood and public space far outweighs the desired profit. TRAFFIC- First, beginning on page one (1), the numbers are out of date. According to the NYS DOT Traffic Data Viewer, there is a station (156053) located on Excelsior Spring Ave which calculated an AADT (average daily traffic) of 1785 in 2019. That is over 200 more trips than reported in Table 1 for just that segment. How has traffic changed since 2014 (the base year of their study), 2019 (the latest NYS DOT data online), or 2020 (during the pandemic in which they conducted a traffic study for the Excelsior Park Apartments)? The 2020 Traffic study uses data (page 3) from counts taken for other projects in 2015 and 2018. When you look at the traffic worksheets to the GPI study, the counts were taken in March of 2018. We all know there is enormous seasonal variability to traffic in Saratoga. How is this taken in to consideration? “Proposed Pedestrian Accommodations” and providing “connectivity” to existing sidewalk and trail systems does not improve overall pedestrian or multi-modal safety. In fact, there will be a reduction where curb cuts (driveways) are proposed across the only 600 feet of sidewalk on a 2,300 foot road. Traffic calming measures, curbs, sidewalks and other safety features should be installed along Excelsior Spring Road as recommended in the submitted traffic analysis and the cost shared between the developers and city. Otherwise the impacts, burden, and risks are assumed by the residents and taxpayers of the neighborhood and city Additionally, nowhere in this analysis is there an examination of the impact on the intersection at the other end of Excelsior Spring Ave with Lake Avenue. As a resident, I can tell you first hand out traffic has changed and stressed this intersection as people use Excelsior Spring Avenue as an alternative to East Ave and a cut-through between Lake Ave and Route 50 or Excelsior Ave. This omission should be re- evaluated along with all of the other out of date analysis. All said, the study presents several findings where no action has been taken and the lack of improvements will only create worsening impacts to traffic, travel, and safety around this neighborhood. The conclusion of the study specifically points to the LOS F (level of service rating F – failing) at the westbound turn lane on Route 50 (page 16 of GPI study). On Page 5 of the MJ Engineering prologue, they state that “all approaches to the five study intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better except the westbound left-turn lane”, which as we know is operating at an F. D is not good either and will only become worse as growth continues. All recommendations found in this GPI study from page 12 to 17 should be implemented before construction of over 36 new units with the unnecessary 76 parking spaces to allow more cars to a worsening traffic issue. This impact has definitely not been addressed and cannot be resolved until infrastructure improvements are made to protect the safety of current and future residents. With improvements to the public infrastructure including trails and public transportation (buses) the developer should be encouraged to reduce the number of parking spaces (and equivalent cars) that already exceeds what is required by zoning. FINANCIALS I am pleased to see an interest in improving the site and welcoming new neighbors to the growing community, however, this needs to be done with care. The comprehensive plan and zoning requirements were thoughtfully planned and deviation from this for the sake of financial profit is unfair to the residents and sets a bad precedent for projects throughout Saratoga. First, using the word “attainable” for $2,500+/- rents on an average working class family is revealing. Building 36 units is not an altruistic enterprise and perhaps the developer seek alternative lenders, but these financial considerations are not in the purview of the ZBA. The finances of any project can change and there is no promise the developer wouldn’t raise their rents or rates to increase profit. Again, further discussion or consideration of this sets an extremely bad precedent that would inevitably result in all future applicants requesting financial relief. STORMWATER Due to the density of development including additional units and more impervious space to permit parking spaces above what is required in the zoning, the remainder of the property is essentially dedicated to stormwater mitigation features. These stormwater management areas are essential to the prevention of run-off and pollution into our public systems. Therefore, these should not be considered greenspace or used for recreation. How will these areas be protected from impacts? What are the designs of these stormwater management areas? Perhaps the whole site wouldn’t need engineered bioretention or stormwater mitigation systems if there were fewer units and less impervious surface dedicated to parking. In conclusion, there are many unanswered questions and the latest report and response only serves to highlight many of the traffic impacts and needed improvements already of pressing concern to residents. The applicant has not demonstrated that the benefit the applicant stands to receive from the variance will outweigh any burden to health, safety and welfare that may be suffered by the community. I would encourage the developer to scale back the project to what’s allowed as they have not provided any evidence of an “unnecessary hardship”. I appreciate the consideration of my (our) concerns and hope this information is helpful in making a determination. Please feel free to reach out with any questions or if I have made any errors in my responses that require further clarification of my own. Sincerely, Daniel and Catherine W. Berheide 19 Excelsior Spring Ave.