The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20220202 31-33 Marion Area Variance Public Comment (9)3/13/24, 10:23 AM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=27174&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> Zimbra julia.destino@saratoga-springs.org Online Form Submittal: Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment Wed, Mar 13, 2024 09:56 AM 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 Deborah LaCombe and Girard Garrelts Email Address dgarrelts1@gmail.com Business Name Field not completed. Address 11 Marion Avenue City Saratoga Springs State NY Zip Code 12866 Phone Number 518 584 5447 Project Name 31-33 Marion Avenue Variance Request Project Number 20220202 Project Address 33 Marion Avenue 3/13/24, 10:23 AM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=27174&tz=America/New_York 2/2 Comments In opposition to this variance and project Attach Photo (optional)Carwash Permit Objections - Google Docs.pdf Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. 3/13/24, 10:28 AM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=27175&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>, susan barden <susan.barden@saratoga-springs.org> Zimbra julia.destino@saratoga-springs.org Online Form Submittal: Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment Wed, Mar 13, 2024 10:01 AM 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 Planning Board Name Deborah LaCombe and Girard Garrelts Email Address dgarrelts1@gmail.com Business Name Field not completed. Address 11 Marion Avenue City Saratoga Springs State NY Zip Code 12866 Phone Number 518 584 5447 Project Name 31-33 Marion Avenue Variance Request Project Number 20220202 Project Address 33 Marion Avenue Comments We have asked the ZBA to refer back to the planning department for Special Use Permit for their proposed 3/13/24, 10:28 AM Zimbra https://m.saratoga-springs.org/h/printmessage?id=27175&tz=America/New_York 2/2 demolition of car wash within the watershed of Loughberry Lake. Understanding that this board has the authority to issue said Special Use Permit in a TRB. Attach Photo (optional)Carwash Permit Objections - Google Docs.pdf Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. 03/09/2024 Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals Cc: Aneisha Samuels-Sanford, Senior Planner Patrick Cogan, Zoning Officer City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Re: Project #20220202 33 Marion Ave In further protest to Stewart’s proposal to demolish and rebuild/expand commercial business on Marion Avenue: Specifically a Special Permit for Car Wash in TRB, need for further variance requests, and Environmental impacts of this project. REFERENCE: 2012 Zoning Ordinance TABLE 2: USE SCHEDULE: USES PERMITTED WITH SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL Brew Pubs, Movie Theater, Outdoor Storage/Display, Outdoor Recreational Facilities, Bus Depot, Drive-in Facility, Car Washes, Vehicle Fueling Stations, Motor Vehicle Repair Establishments, Permitted on 2nd story & above only: Residential Uses, Senior Housing, Senior Assisted Care Facility HISTORY of CAR WASH: The present car wash was provided a SPECIAL USE PERMIT in 1976, by the Zoning Board of Appeals, after denial by the building inspector, and over objections by John Armstrong and D. Woodcock, neighbors of said property. “The Special Use Permit was granted with the following conditions: 1. Wash Water Recycled, and limited to that type of use. 2. Granted on the assurance that the installation will be in compliance with with plans and booklet - Exhibit #2 and that the waste water be piped into the City Sanitary Sewer completion of the project. 3. That the business will not operate after 9 pm. “ The board determined that “That the proposed use is not out of character with the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare. The board points out that the balance of the Congress Gas & Oil property to the north is considered residential in character, and the board at this time disapproves further expansion north of the subject property.” COMMENTS: My husband and I are members of the Maple Avenue, Marion Avenue, Maple Dell Neighborhood Association. We live at 11 Marion Avenue, and are the adjacent neighbors to Stewart’s residentially zoned lot and the TRB zoned proposed businesses. Because a car wash requires a special use permit in the TRB district, and because it is not only adjacent to residential district, and conservation zone, and is entirely within the watershed of Loughberry Lake. We ask the Planning Officer to make a determination on the following 3 points: I. Special Use Permit: 1. That the original Special Use Permit should be considered nullified by Stewart’s demolishing and rebuilding the car wash further north against the admonition of the previous ZBA decision in 1976. 2. That the Planning Officer deny a New Special Use Permit (which to our knowledge has not been requested) for the following reasons: a. It will produce adverse physical and environmental effects on the neighborhood and the district. Specifically, we and our neighbors assert that a car wash does now produce noise that is a detriment to our neighborhood. b. There is the distinct possibility of chemical contamination of the groundwater in the Loughberry Lake watershed. II. Variances: 1. That the Planning Officer require a separate variance for each variance they are showing in their plans. It is only in this manner that each variance can be either allowed or rejected by the Zoning Board of Appeals and the public be allowed to specifically comment. 2. The variance application submitted by Libby Coreno, is poorly written and incomplete: It does not specifically ask to reduce the side setback for the proposed car wash building of 40 feet as it abuts the residential district immediately to the north and is required by zoning ordinance; it does not specifically ask for the expansion of the gas station canopy closer to the city’s chief water supply. 3. Stewart’s plans show the car wash sitting on the newly created boundary which Stewart’s specifically appealed for - a 100 foot expansion of their TRB north into their residential property. That property has now been included in the parcel in question. 4. The proposed project which would likely include UHaul truck rentals, in and out of Marion Avenue, large truck suppliers to the varied businesses, and increased traffic in and out of 2 outlets onto Marion Avenue the expansion of commercial entities on this small lot includes serious impacts on the traffic pattern, safety, and congestion. III. Environmental Impacts - Past Performance as a bad neighbor: 1. Stewart’s UHaul Business was expanded into a residentially zoned lot by clear cutting the trees and gravel topping the lot against the code for years before the Saratoga County Court of Appeals ruled in January 2024. We did object to this to the Zoning department several times. 2. Pollution in the form of abandoned furniture, rugs, mattresses, chairs and at least one top carrier by UHaul customers is currently littering the lot since the UHaul trucks have parked on that graveled lot. Stewart’s did not respond at all when this pollution was brought to their attention last year, specifically, Charles Marshall. Past performance predicts future actions with regard to pollution. 3. Require a new SEQR review of the project. In closing, my husband and I also refer to my previous letter dated 3/3/2024 for further comments, arguments and objections to Stewart’s variance request(s). Additionally, we seek to require a privacy fence be erected on the newly created boundary perimeter to prevent Stewart’s and other business customers and vagrants from accessing and polluting the treed lot, and prevent Stewart’s from clear cutting and paving the residual residential property as a parking lot for UHAULs or other commercial uses. A privacy fence requirement would also prevent garbage from blowing/spreading north into the treed lot and poisoning the environment. Respectfully, Deb LaCombe-Garrelts Girard Garrelts 11 Marion Avenue Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Furthermore, the submitted traffic study makes the assumption that the existing commercial businesses on Maple Dell go away. Regardless of whether Stewarts moves their own store to Marion Ave, there is nothing in the proposal about any allowed use changes on Maple Dell. As seen in many other locations across upstate NY, where Stewart’s builds a new store, the old store continues to be commercial/retail and will continue to draw traffic. For these reasons, we object to the Variance Request submitted by Stewart’s Corporation because they have not provided any evidence that Question 2 has been answered accurately. Question 3: Whether the requested variance is substantial. Stewart’s states that the variance is not substantial based on simultaneous consideration of the Gateway 2 Overlay, the current location of the building and the deviation of proposed and current as directed to Code Enforcement Officer. Our response is: Of course an 80% variance is substantial! In his letter to Stewarts from January 2022, the zoning officer Patrick Cogan states that even under the UDO, which was intended to harmonize the inconsistencies of the zoning ordinance, the required front setback is 25’, which he states is reasonable, thus implying that a front setback less than 25’ is not reasonable. Stewart’s reply uses a strategy of stating it is trying to conform to Gateway Overlay guidelines, rather than adhering to the Zoning Ordinance front setback rules. The zoning ordinance rules are a must , the Gateway overlay 50% build out not. Zoning regulations for setbacks where a commercial entity abuts a residential district is 40 feet front setback from the road. Question 4: Whether the variance will have adverse physical or environmental impacts on the neighborhood or district. Stewart’s answer: “Scaling the project down, provides less intensity which should be favorable to maintaining elements of the surrounding neighborhood. As an example of the current intensity for the neighborhood, the latest NYSDOT traffic data report shows that Marion Ave in this section has an AADT tra c volume of 12, 279 as of 2019.” Stewarts answers by comparing the present site plan as a scaled down project with less intensity than their failed PUD, previously submitted and denied, rather than addressing the question as their current project impacts the neighborhood or district. They cite numbers from traffic data from 2019 NYS DOT at the intersection of Route 50 and Marion Avenue, which has nothing to do with answering Question 4. Litter: Our neighborhood can expect much more paper garbage, plastic and glass bottles thrown from cars by customers of Stewart’s and the Liquor Store to end up on the street and in our yards. These buildings and the car wash are all abutting the conservation zone and all within the Loughberry Lake watershed. We argue negative impacts of litter in the area will be an adverse environmental impact. Past performance by Stewart’s indicates that there will be no effort to prevent or clean up this pollution. When a complaint was made to Chuck Marshall about mattresses, rugs, chairs, and a top carrier left by U Haul renters in the treed lot, nothing was cleaned up by Stewart’s. Location of Car Wash: The new location for the car wash in the conservation zone and abutting a residential district without set side setback not only requires a special permit in the TRB , but the location does not abide by the side setback rules in the zoning ordinance. This question requires a determination from the zoning officer, and makes a separate variance application to the ZBA necessary. For these reasons, we object to the Variance Request by Stewart’s Corporation because they have not provided any evidence that Question 4 has been answered accurately. Question 5: Whether the alleged difficulty is self created. Stewarts answers it is not self created because of “discrepancy between Section 2.3 requirements, overlay guidelines, and nonconforming structure.” Our response is Cause and Effect: As stated in his January 2022 letter to Stewarts, the zoning officer Patrick Cogan: “The area and bulk requirements of the TRB zoning district would control over a recommended design guideline of the Gateway Overlay. Other requirements of the Gateway Design Districts are identified as mandatory. The 50% build out is not.” The difficulty was created when Stewart’s chose to use overlay build out guidelines (not mandatory) in order to justify building a group of (>7,000 sq. ft.) large commercial structures which could only be done by building close to the road. They are choosing to build these large commercial entities on this lot, rather than keeping modest commercial buildings in keeping with the neighborhood character. We argue that is a self-created hardship. Non-Conformance: Stewarts also cites non-conformance of the existing gas station structure is creating a hardship for them but does not say how. We do know that the zoning regulation Section 5.3.4 is very clear that if a non-conforming structure is demolished and rebuilt, it may not be expanded in size and volume, which includes expanding into newly created space. The new gas station/convenience store is that newly created and enlarged space. For these reasons, we object to the Variance Request - 80% relief from the front set back that has been submitted by Stewart’s Corporation because they have not provided any evidence that Question 5 has been answered accurately. We ask the Zoning Board to reject this Area Variance request outright. Thank you, Deborah LaCombe-Garrelts Girard Garrelts 11 Marion Avenue, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866