Loading...
20200864 Ballston Ave Townhomes Narrative Zimbra amanda.tucker@saratoga-springs.org FW: Email to City For review and changes From : Michael Ginley <mginley@stewartsshops.com> Fri, Feb 05, 2021 04:17 PM Subject : FW: Email to City For review and changes � � To :vincent deleonardis <vincent.deleonardis@sarato a- ���l4 attachments 9 springs.org>, amanda tucker <amanda.tucker@saratoga- spri ngs.org> Cc : Steven Gottmann <shg@gglawny.com>, Brian Osterhout <bosterhout@ed pl I p.com> CAUTION: Th is ema i I orig i nated 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. Hel lo Ama nda a nd Vi nce: We are hereby providing you with information that we believe will be helpful to the DRC for the 2/10/2021 meeting. As you know from our previous emails, we believe there is some confusion between the past PB approvals and the pending DRC approvals. To help understand the nature of the project and the events that have transpired, we are providing a summary of the details to date, and we'd ask this email be circulated to the DRC members. 1. Back in 2007, after we purchased it, 96 Ballston Ave underwent significant renovations that required DRC approval. The DRC visited the site. The improvements were approved by the DRC and thereafter made to the building. Non-historic elements such as a standing seam metal roof were added to porfions of the building. Historical concerns were not brought up by the DRC at that time. In addition, at this fime, we were before both the PB and ZBA for site plan approval and an area variance. SEQRA was done and neither Board raised historic concerns. (BAP-2007 documents attached). 2. In 2017,the property was then rezoned through the City Council, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Board. That rezoning process discussed and envisioned the full redevelopment of this property under a Transect-5 zoning designafion and again included SEQRA. Never once during that process was the property discussed in a historical context. (BAP-2017 documents attached). 3. When we submitted our applicafions for Special Use and Site Plan approvals for the townhome project, the DRC deferred lead agency status to the PB on 1/9/2019 (BAP-2019 documents attached). 4. On 1/10/2019, the PB approved the Special Use Permit applicafion, which had been pending for many months (BAP-2019 documents attached). During that lengthy approval process, the historic nature of exisfing buildings being demolished were discussed in detail. Kate Maynard had brought up the issue previously, and the Preservation Foundation had written a letter dated 1/18/2018 (BAP-2018 attached). As part of the SEQRA process and in response to the Preservafion Foundafion letter, we undertook OPRHP correspondence and an archaeological study and provided the reports to the PB for review. A letter of No Impact was issued by the OPRHP (BAP-2018 documents attached). These reports were discussed and the PB had no further concerns about the buildings. Reference is made to the Preservafion Foundafion in the 1/10/2019 approval that is attached. Further, during the 1/10/2019 Special Use Permit approval, SEQR was completed by the PB with specific discussion being given to the historic quesfions in the long form. The result of the SEQRA discussion was a negafive declarafion. Moreover, no conditions with the Special Use Permit or Site Plan approval were associated with obtaining approval from the DRC for the removal of the exisfing buildings. s. Since the DRC deferred lead agency status to the PB and did not segment SEQRA, we believe that SEQRA has been completed. 6. It seems to us that this is an administrafive acfion the DRC can and should make based on the prior review and approvals of this project by the City. 7. We'd ask that this chronology of events be circulated to all DRC members prior to the meefing so that they can be reviewed and a vote significance taken on 2/10/2021, if required. If possible, we'd ask that the DRC review the builder's pending applicafion on the colors, materials on 2/10/2021. We have been through an exhaustive process for this project through the various City Boards over many years and believed the project to be fully approved. We are not trying to circumvent any process, rather we're trying to avoid duplicative review of an issue that was clearly addressed and ruled on by the City. If you need anything further, please let us know. Thank you. Michael P. Ginley, Esq. General Counsel Stewa rt's Shops Corp. PO Box 43 5 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Ph 518-581-1201 x 4445 BAP-2007.pdf ��F 2 MB � BAP-2017.pdf I P�F 3 54 KB BAP-2018.pdf ��F 31 MB BAP-2019.pdf ���F 1 MB :,������c.-r�iw'ir"i,..� ���t���. )( ������ D ESIG N REVI EW CO M M ISSIO N v 1r1 j •`�` �. 4.. �.Z ` �: .�. i� �. �.\ `�1 � �� ��� ���' M I N UTE S Te '.,,{''•.• a .,<�f . ;',3�r�} � i�Y: �� ��' +��;: � ��� '�� � � ''` '�� THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1.5, 2007 � ��,;:r,r��4� „ +.'.� � ��� � .�,.r.:� f !.l.: F. ! �!� :; ., �' V::..��������� ��" 7:00 P.M. , .���: :�f:4.;,�:;:���:.� , �'`'� . `` CITY COURT ROOM ����'f`'�����t�u ��'` � PRESENT: Patrick Kane, Steven Rowland, Richard Martin, Susan Shafer, Gretchen Marcell ABSENT: Mark Hogan, Chris Bennett STAFF: Bradley Birge CALL TO ORDER Chair Patrick Kane called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. He stated that these minutes are not a verbatim record of the proceedings. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR There were no comments from the Chair. APPLICATIONS � 2007.117 BORNEMANN KITCHEN WINDOW REPLACEMENT , 39 George S et This was an application for historic reviewforthe replacement of a set of kitch indows in an Urban�Residential-3 District. The applicant was Geoff Bornemann. Appearing before the Commission was Geoff Bornemann, applic . SEQR: Patrick Kane noted that the application is identif' as a "Type II" action, because it is the construction of an appurtenant non-residential cture involving less than 4,000 sq.ft[6 NYCRR Part 617.5 (c) (7)] and therefore, exe from further SEQR review. ISSUES: Geoff Bornemann said that y are remodeling their kitchen and the existing window is not appropriate for the house. s a mid-1950s window and they will replace it with a more vertical Marvin windowthat ches most of the otherwindows in the house. PUBLIC COMME . There being no further comments from the Commission, Patrick Kane asked if anyon 'n the audience wished to comment on this application. No one spoke. - DEC ON: Steven Rowland moved and Richard Martin seconded the motion to approve the .� plication as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. � 2007.103 GINLEY AND GOTTMAN HANDICAP RAMP & REMODELING , 96 Ballston Avenue This was an application for architectural review for a new entry vestibule, landing, ramp, windows and sign in an Urban Residential-3 District. The applicants were Michael Ginley and Steve G ottm a n. Appearing before the Commission were Michael Ginley and Steve Gottman, applicants, and John Ginley, architect. SEQR: Patrick Kane noted that the application is identified as a "Type II" action, because it is the construction of an appurtenant non-residential structure involving less than 4,000 sq. ft[6 NYCRR Part 617.5 (c) (7)] and therefore, exempt from further SEQR review. ISSUES: Steve Gottman said that they are attorneys in town and they are under contract to purchase this property. It has been a residential use and they obtained a use variance for a law office. They are proposing to paint it and install new windows and a handicap ramp,which requires an additional entranceway to the front. Michael Ginley said that they have also submitted a sign that they feel is within the proposed code. Patrick Kane said that the commission made a site visit. Originally they were talking aboutthe handicap ramp to the side. Richard Martin said they would like to see the Locust tree say. He reviewed the elevations with the applicants and suggested extending the porch on the north elevation so the ramp could come straightfrom the parking lot right up onto the porch. He said they reviewed the floor plan and it did not iook like a problem. This would require less switch backs on the ramp. Steve Gottman said that would have been their desired way to do it and they wanted to keep the tree, but that would require an area variance for the front setback. They had to sue the Zoning Board of Appeals to get the use variance, so they are not confident they will get another variance. Steve Gottman said that there are Maple trees in the front. Bradley Birge said that it was a legal action and and that it was decided. The Design Review Commission could ask for an advisory opinion on this particular matter, even though this is a use variance for a commercial use in a residential neighborhood. The intent is to maintain the residential character and the Zoning Board of Appeals may weigh that information. Michael = Ginley said that the seller has been in contract for two years and they did not want to hold him up. Steve Gottman said there was 30" of rise and requires that switch back. Richard Martin said that it was 24-28" in the area he suggested. Patrick Kane said the switch back area would get a lot of rain, ice and snow. Richard Martin said thafi his suggestion would be pitched within the porch. Patrick Kane said the look and feel of the house would stay the same. Michael Ginley - said the prominent portion of the suggested ramp would stick out in the front. Richard Martin said it would balance the porch from one side to the other. Steve Gottman said it may require an extension of the porch and it would be a significant expense. Richard Martin said that would be less than the cost of railings and ramp for what they proposed. Richard Martin asked when the Zoning Board of Appeals could review it. Patrick Kane said that - he could go with the applicant. He felt this was a logical solution, because it costs less and keeps them out of the weather. Michael Ginley said they prefer this layout. Steve Gottman said - it should pitch to the edge of the pavement. Patrick Kane said they should have a decent roof and paint, and that would tie it all together. Steven Rowland said that the grade would need to be further evaluated to make sure it works. They need five feet for the landing to the pavement. Patrick Kane said there was twelve feet of sidewalk. John Ginley said that is existing. Steven Rowland said they might not need all of it. Richard Martin asked if there was an elevation showing the porch extended. John Ginley said the original drawing did not ramp up to the porch. Bradley Birge said that the key thing is to maintain the residential character instead of concrete and steel and losing a tree. Patrick Kane said that he felt this was a more spirited solution than their proposal. He reiterated that it was more cost effective. Steve Gottman said they are supposed to go before the Planning Board on November 28, 2007. City of Saratoga Springs Design Review Commission Minutes-Thursday,November 15,2007-Page 2 of 7 Patrick Kane said that he did not have any issues with the colors. Susan Shafer said she liked the sign because it was a normal size. John Ginley said that they need to keep the parking within the setback. Michael Ginley said that if the Chairwould be willing to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals with them, they would agree to it. He said they could measure it out tomorrow to determine what they can do. John Ginley said that he did not see how the root structure would work unless they built a wooden ramp. Richard Martin said it should be on columns and not necessarily solid footing. Michael Ginley asked if it would be a wood deck. Richard Martin said it does not necessarily need to be, but it would need to be on footings or piers. Patrick Kane said the commission would be willing to meet them on site again if need be. Bradley Birge said that if the submission were digital that would be best to scan to the Zoning Board members. It would need to show what exists and what they are proposing. The applicant agreed to meet the commission on site on November 16, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. Patrick Kane said that the commission could discuss the paint, sign and windows now. They will conclude the ramp later. Susan Shafer asked if the body of the house was tan and the trim was white. Michael Ginley said yes. Pa�rick Kane asked if the sign was lit. Michael Ginley said they had not talked about that yet. Steven Rowland said that he preferred crown lights shining up. It appears there is a fixture in the photo. They agreed to a ground lit sign, excluding high pressure sodium. Steven Rowland said that it should be a metal haylight fixture. John Ginley said that all the utilities for the building come in at the corner they are now proposing the ramp. Richard Martin said if they were on the piers it should not be an issue. John Ginley said he did not get an answer from National Grid about bridging it. He thought they might require a section that shou(d be removed. Richard Martin said it was a conduit or a sleeve, and he�did notthink it was an issue. John Ginley said he was still concerned if they had a problem and needed to dig the area up. PUBLIC COMMENT: There being no further comments from the Commission, Patrick Kane asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. No one spoke. DECISION: Steven Rowland moved and Richard Martin seconded the motion to approvethe application as submitted with the following conditions: 1) The applicant will return for administrative approval of potential revised ramp scheme following the Chair's attendance at a �future Zoning Board of Appeal's meeting to speak on behalf of the applicant in regards to the front setback requirement to keep with the residential character that the Design Review Commission is � - trying to maintain in that area by maintaining the mature trees that the Design Review Commission is in favor of and; 2)The sign is included and it shall be ground lit with white lighting. Motion carried 5-0. � 2007.118 LOBIONDO DEMOLITION AND SUBDIVISION , 172 Ballston Ave This was an application for architectural review for proposed demolition of ' ting structure to construct a 4 lot residential subdivision in an Urban Residential-2 ' ct. The applicant was Mr. LoBiondo. Appearing before the Board were Tom Frost itect, and Mike Brooks, surveyora SEQR: Patrick Kane noted tha application is identified as a SEQR "unlisted" action. Mike Brooks said it is an existing structure and it is not in the best of shape. He did get an appraisal a e thought the number would be higher. They are proposing a four lot subdivision in pl of the existing structure. They have received a favorable recommendation from the City of�Saratoga Springs Design Review Commission Minutes-Thursday,November 15,2007-Page 3 of 7 .1�����c�ctf•� I� -� ���-�T �.��I�� ���N����S�X�� ,� �.5;�.. .�'' wj� 1 ;} �,,r � �Y., : � �;�. �Y'I"Y' t��'SA�.ATC3GA SF'RiI�'GS � ;'�'.�' �;. � Cit�r�al�,�7�B�c��.dw�y Y• ►�; , ��: ..., ., 1�� •,�Y K•� .. . ��� ��� ;�;:w Sarato�a Spr�ngs,New Yc�rk �.28�fi . "'; �,i 1 :.,. � . p+"� ;i� _i��„ ��� � � r ��J �fI"�t �� ���'3�1���tY,.� t '� ► � •r��'�,+`����, ! ��rl�r V�L��4 V��7�VV/���VV . �;�i y. , '�'c�� �� �,���� Fa� 5�.�-a�8C�-9�so �p4�'�#�� • www,s arato ga-s�ri ngs.org N�}T��E��DE�ISION In tf�e matter af t�e applica�ion�'���7.I�3 of i�lichael G�nley&Steve Cottman 9b Ballston Av�nue 5aratc�ga S�r;ngs, f�Y I�8bb �nvolving the premis�s at 9b �ailstan Aven�� in the Ci�y o�' Saratoga Sp�ings, an an appli�at�or� for a new �n�ry vestibuf�,landing, ramp,windows and si,gn for�rchit�ctura! review with the�?es�gn R�view�ammjssion wha met on N�ve�ber I�,2047��d m�de the fc��fawing dec��ian: D A�proved as submitted or show�c�n the atta�hec�p�ans �] C�Esapproved as submitted, � � Approved w�th the fa��ow�ng�onditi�ons: I. �'he app��cant wilj return for approv�l of revised ramp scheme; 2. A�proval of submitted sign is in�luded;sigr�shalE b�ground Eit with whit�1�gFtting, As�result of t�i�de�is�on th�a�pii��nt: ■ may�raceed wi�th the re�uir�d permir apprav�l process ❑ rnay nat prac�ed wit�the required permit ap�raval�roc�ss The applic�r�t Es requir�d to Cont��t th�Suilding Ins�ector tt�obtain a: ■ Sign Perrnit � Buildin�Pe�rmit , D C)em�Iit�c��perrniC . ��� 1 � �� 0�7 [�ate Chakr cc: f�'�ichael E�iffer,�3uiading�nsp�c�c�r F�i� A�counts D��t. r.... "r:� � ��D � PLANNING O ���1p!(3C.x,..� ,.�;�.� �'� ��`* :�� `�� M I N UTES ,�. �.=j :�; :;i., ..�., ;`�::.. : :��; .,,r; `�" ``�`��`�� ` WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2007 „�,,v;�..,{: V� ;:�:; ':I`_ �, �� ��y �. ° ;�-.t�,�:,� t�,. � �•00 P M � =�� . _� � � � . . . . �,.N � � �.:� '�� 1t.�.�� t . �MN ' �� � CITY COUNCIL ROOM .r r. .�.,�,N. , �:..:..:,�,��.:.r.�.. . f�tf .. .�� , : �1��.�„��.��.� �� c, t PRESENT: Amy Durland; Chair, Jamin Totino; Vice-Chair, Lou Schneider, Michael Perkins, Laura Rappaport, L. Clifford Van Wagner, Mark Torpey ABSENT: No one STAFF: Bradley Birge, Director of Planning & Economic Development Jaclyn Hakes, Principal Planner CALL TO ORDER Amy Durland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. REPORT ON ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS BY THE CHAIR ' There were no administrative actions reported. ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING Amy Durland said the proceedings of this meeting are being taped for the benefit of e secretary. Because the minutes are not a verbatim record of the proceedings, th inutes are not a word-for-word transcript of the recording. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR Amy Durland presented a summary of the Planning Board's activ' ' s since she has had the privilege of being chairman. She said thatforthe pastfour mo s that she has been chairman, her focus has been on Board procedure and a lot has bee ccomplished in a short time. She said that they have managed to transition to a Imost totally new planning staff and they are terrific. A new Planning Board caravan has een initiated so the members of the Planning Board and staff can visit application sites t ther. She said that for those who are able to participate, it has been valuable and it y be worth exploring alternating caravan schedules to include more members. She thanke lifford Van Wagnerfor driving. She arranged for the Plannin oard to receive two hours of training in SEQRA matters and other issues from the Pla ing Board counsel. Because of the expertise of Planning Board member Mark Torpey iscussions have been initiated about the role of sustainability as a Planning Board fo and hopefully there will be more to come on this. Amy Durla said that together with the chairs of the other Boards, they are in the process of initiatin ial "joint review board meetings"for major projects for those applicants who may want the ortunity to present to all the city land use review boards at the same time. She said there ' be more details on this initiative in the future. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes-Wednesday,December 12,2007-Page 1 of 24 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Amy Durland asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on the application. No one spoke. Amy Durland asked if there has been any outreach to the neighbors. Mr. And Mrs. DiCar said that the neighbors have looked at the plans and have had no particular comments. Dave Carr said that the two street trees and one street light are required based per linear footage of frontage. Amy Durland asked how the parking spaces would be d ' eated. Dave Carr responded that the concrete could be painted in such a way that it lo s more grassy from a distance. He said they are interested in an environmentallyfriendly b ' ding as close to lead certification as possible. Clifford van Wagner asked if the builidng has to be sprinkled b ode. The DiCarlos said they are not sure and the architect is checking on this. Dave Carr aid the water service in the area is sufficient to install a sprinkler system. Mark Torpey asked what material the surface exter' is and Mr. DiCarlo said they are considering cement board but investigating differ t materials. Jaclyn Hakes said that the applicant is wor ' g on the stormwater issue, particularly the capping at respective mains on George Street. Michael Perkins said the Board sh Id make a decision on the parking, he thinks it might be a - good idea to have an extra par ' g space. The board and staff agreed to waive the parking requirements. DEPARTMENTAL CO ENTS: City Engineer: "Letter of credit revisions"; "Stormwater management report r visions"; "See plans for specific comments"; "Provide water connection detail"; Departme of Public Works: "Existing water and sewer service must be disconnected and capped at r spective mains at George Street."; Public Safety: None; Other: "Please add revision date o the cover of the stormwater management report."; "Please include project title and inform ion in the title block in the bottom right corner of the cover sheet." DEC ON: Michael Perkins moved and Cliff Van Wagner seconded the motion to approve the sit plan with the condition that the parking requirement of eight spaces is waived and changed nine parking spaces. � 07.096 GINLEY&GOTTMAN LAW OFFICE : 96 Ballston Avenue This was an application for site plan review for a law office in an Urban Residential-2 District. The applicant is Steve Gottman and Mike Ginley. Appearing before the Board was Steve Gottman and Mike Ginley, applicants; and Jack Ginley, Architect. BACKGROUND: It was noted that the Design Review Commission (DRC) has reviewed and requested a modification to the ramp which requires an area variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). The ZBA approval for area relief was granted on December 3, 2007. INTENT: Steve Gottman said they do not plan to make any major changes to the structure except the addition of a handicap ramp. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes-Wednesday,December 12,2007-Page 21 of 24 Handicap Ramp: The ramp was included in new drawings delivered to the planning office today. Steve Gottman said the drawings address additional technical details; they had to acquire an area variance to incorporate a handicap ramp because the ramp needed to be moved to the front of the building in order to save a very old tree. He said that the change resulted in the loss of some of the deck in orderto accommodate the ramp; they angled the ramp downward to get the required length without impacting the parking lot at the suggestion of Rich Martin, a member of the City's Design Review Commission. Lighting: Steve Gottman said that some of the lighting is already at the side entrance and they will add a post lamp in the parking lot. Motion detector lights are on the side of the building. Bradley Birge said that the exterior lighting forthis projectwas not discussed by the Design Review Commission (DRC). Steve Gottman said they could remove the spots since the handicap ramp has been moved; there is one residen�ce on the other side of the building. Amy Durland cautioned the applicants to try to minimize outside lighting for the sake of the neighbors and down face lights except the one which is an up face light at the suggestion of the DRC. Trees and grass: Steve Gottman said that the DRC wanted to preserve the locust trees and the maple tree on the parcel. Amy Durland suggested that the applicant consider the concrefie grass approach since the plan has a lot of concrete. The applicant and the architect are ok with that suggestion. Curbs and Sidewalks: Steve Gottman said that they are using the existing cu�rb cut. Amy Durland said that this is the Planning board's opportunity to require curbs and sidewalks. Steve Gottman said they are proposing sidewalks along the parking lot, but no curbs along Route 50. Catch basin: Steve Gottman said that they are tying in the existing drain and the catch basin and the infi(tration and percolation is just over one minute so it is all sand and there are no water problems in the basement. TECHNICAL; It was noted that a Letter of Credit amount and expiration date must be set prior to approval. A cost estimate is needed to determine the letter of credit amount. The applicant must address and complete the items on the checklist, submit a stormwater report and standard city details and show connections of the utilities and existing utilities on Ballston Avenue. A Building Permit is required for proposed interior alterations. Amy Durland encouraged the applicant to _ address all technical items as soon as possible. SEQR: It was noted that this is a type II action because it could be considered as an addition to a single-family house or it is an addition of less than a 4,000 square-feet for non-residential use. SARATOGA COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REFERRAL: "No significant County-wide or inter- community impact" Per the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the County Planning Board. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Amy Durland asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on the application. No �one spoke. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS: City Engineer: "Need items listed on the checklist-not complete."; "Need stormwater report"; "Need standard city details"; "Show connections of utilities and existing utilities on Ballston Avenue"; "See plans for specific comments"; Department of Public Works: "Sheet#2 indicates connecting existing catch basin (more likely a drywell) to the City's storm sewer. There is no city storm sewer on Ballston Avenue in proximity of the City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes-Wednesday,December�12,2007-Page 22 of 24 property." Department of Public Safety: Code Enforcement: "Building permit is required for proposed interior alterations." DECISION: Clifford Van Wagner moved and Lou Schneider seconded to approve the site plan as shown with no requirements for curbs and the following conditions: That the rear of the parking lot is filled with the grass permeable pavers and 2)That the light on the south side elevation be down-facing and 3) Compliance with ail requirements for the project listed by the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Design Review Commission. Ayes all, motion carried 7-0. Amy Durland said that ail technical items including those cited by the City Engineer under department comments should be addressed. Amendment: Clifford Van Wagner moved and Jamin Totino seconded to amend the motion of _ the site plan approval to include the condition that all of the comments made by the city engineer under"Departmental Comments" be addressed. Ayes all, motion carried 7-0. � 07.109 LOCAL LAW#10 MS4 STORMWATER PROGRAM ADVISORY OPINION TO THE CITY COUNCIL This is a request for an advisory opinion on a proposed Local Law#10 relating to e required MS4 Stormwater Program regulations. The applicant is Paul Male, City Engineer. The City Engineer discussed this advisory opinion with the Board ring the workshop. BACKGROUND: It was noted that the adoption of this law is quired to occur by January 8, 2008 by the New York State Department of Environmental onservation (NYSDEC) under Phase II Stormwater Regulations. This is an unfunded ndate by the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) and passed to NYSDEC and local mu 'cipalities. Jamin Totino said that part of what would be ill al is the tapping of a sump pump into the storm sewer. Clifford Van Wagner said that sump p ps cannot be discharged into the sanitary sewer. Mark Torpey said it seems that the umber of one-tenth of an acre is arbitrary, and he is _ concerned that it would require too muc work for either the applicant or the stormwater manager. Bradley Birge said that in an ar of greatest development, the City Engineerwould have the burden of the additional wor ut they must ensure that the urbanized area is encompassed. Amy Durland said she is ' ing to accept this based on the City Engineer's input. Michael Perkins said e does not like the number of one-tenth of an acre, and recommends going below one e because one-tenth is too far beyond the intent of the law of the Department of vironmental Conservation (DEC). Clifford Van Wagner said that the acreage is picked bec se of the issue with the Celtic Treasures store and the old Y. Bradley Birge said that those ' es are the reason that Paul Male picked the size. Michael Perkins said he would recomm d using one-quarter of an acre. Mar Torpey said that the Board's recommendation to the City Council could indicate the size of t, acreage. City of Saratoga Springs Planning Board Minutes-Wednesday,December 12,2007-Page 23 of 24 . � . � � ���� � Ar�r �u��Mo , � ����.� , � � ���.ATCC��A �P � ��.� . s� �.1� � � ��,�rR " � � ��r. 1.�.,11�J:V ll�f�'���..L\.t.J • JAM I N�QT)N�,7 � . ti.' �, �� +s,♦ . V! • C�CHA1 R � � � #'11�CHAEL. PERKII*iS '� 1� ��TY�ALL-47� BRoAt�wAY � - � Lau ScN►���o�� ""'' ';�'� �'� .-'► ,,r, . SAZATC�GA SS�RINGS, Pl�.'WYOR}C ��8�� � • f-� �'l'��. ��. 4 • • CI.iFFpRD VAI� WA�",N�R ,, '':,`,.�..�' � • PH) ��8��a7-���c� �x� �,�-�ea-�a�o . �A�x�o�� Y . www.5ARATC?GA-s���r��s.oa� � ��'�A4t{,��E� ,��� � . ' �..AL1R�0. RA�PAF+C7RT P'LAN?���E� $C�ARD . � � . � . � � � ��c��a �F�E�,s�o�� D�c�n���R�� 2oa7 .. . � . . � � . � � �e�nbers�'r�senf:Am}�Dur�an� t�#��ir}, ,l��r,;n Tc�tir�o�Vjce-Chair} {7:45 m�, ����1lan W� ner Mf�hael Perk�ns r p 9 ► , Ma k Torpey, ��u Sch��,��r, �.a�ra F��p��part. . . . � � . . . . . . � M�rr�bes�s�,bse�t: non� . � � . � �.e�f ers o���ed's�: � � � � �� �l3.�4��ARA'TQGA�I�D����DENT S�I��OL, 4�9 Lake Avenue � . . Acfsan: Moti�r��a appr�ve�xtension to ��c�rr►��r 3�,�Q�8-apprvued 7-� � � . � , , . . �3.�}28 V1I�01�l.ANDSfWAT�t�'s��p��PU D, Pnas El�ven, SA�}�a d��oss �ark Road . . �f Y . . . . Ac�. �at�on t�a�prove�xt�n��on to D��embf�r 3'�,���8-.��pfov�d 7-� .. � . , . . . . � . . . . . . . . � . . � . � � . QS.0�7�'w�W�s�Av�n�u�, 2 V11�st Avenu� �.: . � �� - � . � . A��: Mv#i�n�o apprave exf�nsio� �o,�un� 3�, �4�9-�pproved 7-� � � � 0�.�?� t�t�A�Gt�A�H�cS , 5� �}u��a�nviJle f�oad � � . . • � . � . . �.r..�..�,_.. . . . . . � Act�on; Mofion t�ap�r�ve ext�nsi�n tQ D�c�mber 3�, 2��8-a rov�d 7-0 . �. � . .�� � . r� . �� . . � � . � � , .. . � � � � � ��.�$"�, 85 &$7 HAM�LT�,t�STREET, $� �€arnilton Str��� � �� . � �� � .A��, tion: �c�tion �o app�-�ve�x#�nsion to De�emb�r 3�, 2��8 -.� �oved 7-� � . � . .� . . . . . . . . . . �A . . . � C}�.�9 49 G�YS�R Rt�Aa PARKtNG EXPANS���,.�49 ,.�,-�e Ser RO�� ' . .� • � . . : . Y A�t�on: �Vlat��ri t�ap�r�ve ex�ensi�n t� Dec�mber 31, �Q08-ap�rov�d��� . � �. � � - � - � . o�.o��Ynr�c�, 2�Q���sf Av�nu� . .� � � � . . . � = � � . � � _ Ac_,.. ��: N�ofE�n.�o�ppr�v�extensio�to Jurie 3�,2t��8 -approv�d 7-a � � � . � � � . . A�plica�ians. � . � . . . , . . . . . . . . . . � .�. . � . . �� 1. p7.�7� 24�V1r�s�,�v�t�u�,�4�Vllest Avenu�, pub(ic he���n for s ecial use ermit a [� � � � � , � p p �P cat���fo� . constr��tion of a�4-story. r�sides�tial�u��d�nc�w�th u�t��3�r�its ar�� r�and�ted p2���C�ng �f 35 spaces in an� � � . llfb�n �leE���o�-haod, T-� aistricf. � .. � . � • .� . �. . � , , � . : � . - �ctian:C�n�Enu�d��January�, �flU8.� . . . � � . ' � � � : � . . . � � � � . . � 2. 07.�9'� �WANG PA�N�IX�g US�BU�L�fNG, 3�CiCk RO�d Sit� a�r� ���I�W j , �. . . , � ap����tron far a r�rxed use bu�ld�ng �� T-4�,}rb�n Ne���b�rhaod �istrict. � ' . . � ' . . . Ac�ion: �vnti�ved tQ,1��ruary 9, ���8. � � . . � . 3. �7.08�4� �l��F��sot��u�Q�v�s�t�t�, 4� ,�e�e�san Str��t, publ�c hear�n��r� ��-lot su�d�visi�n a fi�ati�n in �n Urban �t� i n . . � . �� . s de ti��-2 �3istrE�t. . . . �c" t�: �on��nue� tQ J�nuary 9, 2���, . . � . . . . .� � 4. 47.fl58 LAN�S QF H�ARTNS7U�lE D�VELUPAr1�NTt 39�-4�2 Ch�r�h Sfr��� �i � . . . � . , , pub �hear��g for� �3 lot subdlv�s��n ���l�c��ion in a� Ur�a� �e��denti��-� Uis�r�ct, � . A�_�__ti�: C�r�tint�ed to Jan��ry 9, 2��$. � : � . . � �. . . . . ! . . � • . . � � City of Sar�toga Springs Pl�nning Be��rd � R��ard��Decision—December 12,2Q�7 � 1 . , . � a. a7.�8.;^,LAK�Av�t�uE P�, 3� �.ake Aven�e, $��� p��n r��v�ew�f a rr�ul�i-�se building in�Tr�nsect-6 t��strfct. Ac�on:Gont��ue� to J�nuary 9, �OUS. � � � . �. �7.10�VAr����t H�,r����.B��a��B��AKFAs�r, 94 Ge�rg�S�r���, rev�ew sit� la�a lica��on f�r bed anc� A �� �rea�Cfas��n an �1rb�n Res��ential-� �is�rict. � � .� �ct�on: Mc�t�o��o app�-av�t�e s�t� pl�n with conditjons-pass�d 7-�. � � 7. �7.095 G�N��Y� ,C".�QTT�AN�A1N CaFFECE, �6 $a��s�an Av�nu�, sit� plan rev�ew a������t�on to�� �aw o#�iC�ir� �n Ur��n F�es�d�ritiaj-2 D�strict. � .. Action: Mation�a�pprov�th�s�te p�ar�wit�candi��or�s-�ass�d 7-�. . . . . � � � 8. �7.1��ADV�St�RY C�PIt�IQN'ft`S TN��I�Y C�?UNClE.-�.�CAL LA�W##'f{3 �S4 STgRM WAl"ER �dVISC� � t� ini ry p c�n on L��al Law#'�� re�ardin� the MS�Sf�rrn 1lV�ter Pr�grarn. � � � . � � � . . � A��: Mat�on ta issue a f�vorable a�v�sary opin�on �p th��ity CQunc�!—p�ssed �w'�. . . .� � . . . Signatur�: � � Date:De�ember 13 2t}07 . . � . . ,� . . P1aRning Ba rd Chair � . � , . :. . . � � . � � . � . . � . . , . . . � D�t��i��d with City�le�-k � � . � . . . . . ,.. •• , •: . • • • ••• • . • _ ••, • ,• . . ' . . . . . . •,• . . .• '• Y t•. ' . ' . , � . . , • • � . • . • • .�����`�� • � 1•• , • • . • • . • . . . . . , . � � A�1i� � � �. � �� � � .� . . �� � . �'LAC�� C3�V � � � � . � � �� � � .� � � . , . . . . 1�.� . . . .. . . . . .. . . � . � . � . � � . � .� � .� . , � � � l�- ��-� '� �. .� : , . . � � � . ,� ��� .� � �. � . � . .. � . � . � at �:��' � .� � . � .. .. ... . � . : ♦ . . ., . . �.. ' - � ' , •. . . 1'`.�`,-;�,-:,►•,y:. .^. • • . . • ' . ' � • . . . • , • . • . ' • . • . ' , , . . , • ' , � ' . ' . . . .� . . ��� < <. � . �: .. . �, . � .. • � � �"''r � � .,� . .Nancy Gc�ldberg �, � � . ,i� ).�r1 ; . , . ��� ,�� ���c"' �� C�. � I l� � • .. . , • �,�.� • .��i , � � � � , . • , .� � � � �,�,�c► �' � � . �� �C}�IN� Bt�ARD �F AP�' . . GHa�a . ; � - ! ,� . . . , EALS . . . � �a�a�Ann Nl�gui�e � . . � �'� '�. ��� , • ,. . �♦. ' ..' � ��.` `.l� � .G': : �• , * ,.. , ' . . '. . •Vf G��HAI R . . . ;_, -_�� : �.,�...�� :l . . � . Cfty Hal�-474 �r�adway . � � . : . M��I��w Veit�� � �� �, ~-�:�,��'�';�; ���r '' �.� �� � . � .� ��� Sara�o�a Sp�ings, N�W Y�f�C �ZS�� . . - ,� • ' S��R�TARY� � v � ..' � k�'�"�,:',��t,�"s` .'` � � � � Ye�: 5Z 8-58?�3550 x.5�15 fax, �'l8-�$�-948� � � � �. � ��ric Schr�ck • 4�����ri�ti . , . � �. "� �, � . � � . �nrwvv.�ar�tog�-s�rings.or� Janin�S��ch�� �� • � � . `�'^� � � ��1�� � ,. .. . . . : � �. . , .. . , . • � . �. . . . � � . �e�i K�nne� � . � �: , ,. . �.. R��RA'x�c� , . . . • � . � � . . . , .. ,� � , . . . , . -� . • . . � . . .. . . Y . . �� � .� � . . .� � . . �� � � � � � � . , � . , � .Gab�Anderson �� . . . . . . . . . �. .. .�I� T�E N�A�E� �F TH� A�PEAL �F � � � . � . � � �� ��-� � �: .�� - � . � .�� � � . � � �� �� .� ��� .�. � �i n L�ey a�d ��tt�ar�, P.C. �.�� � � � �. �. � � . � .. - � . � � . � .. � '� � ��� � .� � :���� �ai�s�ar� Avenue � � � . . �. �� � .� ��� � �. �� �. � : :�. � . �. . . ���� �� . ���� �� � S�:r�fi�g� Sp�ir��s, N`� � �$�5 .� . �.� :� � � ��� � � : : . �� � . .:. .� : �..��. . � �.� , � . . -.���.� ,� � ��� �:. � �: . ' .� .�. �. �.�� :� ' � �-. . . � � �.�. � � � . . . � .�:� � . � �- . �.. �. �. . �. � .� ��.��ro�n th� d�r�r��r���E�on af the 8�i�ding ��sp���or �nvolvir�g t�e premE$�s �t 9� Bal�ston �iven�e, �r� t�e �i�y.- . � .� o�Sara�og�Sprj�gs, �ev�r Y�rk b��n� Se��ior� 178.��,�Block �, �at 4�, l�si�� D�stri��, on tf��Ass�ssm�nt � � .�. - �1�►� c�f$aid ��ty.� . � �. .,�_ � � � . .: . . .. . . . , � ,� . . . . : . � �� �� �. .: �. �.-�� � . � �.: � �� � �� � �:�. � �: .� .� � �� �. � �� � . . � � � , � . � � � .. � . � � � , �...: ��NNER�A�� the,appelEar�t.�av�ng ap�Ei�� for �n are� variar�ce un�er��� �anin� C�rd�n�nce a�saEd �ity, as : � . . . � �::��amen���r t� �permit ��n's�ructian of a���n�i��p�a�c�ssib�e r�mp and cove��d��or�� �ddition, in:�n Ur�an, ..�.� �. � � ::� Resi�ent��r--2 C3istri�t �nd du� ��ublic n��iG� having been duly giv�n ��a�he�s'Eng on s�id �.pp���a��on h�ld �:. , � � on th� 3{� �ay af aec�r���r 2��7. � � � �. �, .� � � �� � : � � � .� �� � � � ; � . � . � � � : .. .. � . ,, .: .. . :... .. . . . : . . . .. . . . . .. , ; . .. : , . .. . .� . . .. . �. . . . �.� .�� 1�U�ERE�S, in ��n�i��ration of the b�lar��� b��nreen k�e�efi���o �h� ap�Ii��nt with derrimen� �o �he hea�th: .: � . � �.� .�.saf�ty an� welfar� of�h� ��mrnunEty, th� B+�ard rr��k�s t�e f�llowi�g resofu�ia� artd fi�d�ng af fa�� ���t . . �. . � t�e�r�quested area var�anc� for th� foflowing �e�ief: . � .� �� . � �. ,�.� � �. : . � � . . � � . . -� ��. . ��:�. � .. �. . �. � , �. - � � : � : ..� �.� � ��: �,-.-. : , , . .� , . . . , . . .. . � . . . . . .. . .� . �REA VARI�I�CE ' .�� � � ..� . ' . . '.. . .. . ' '. . . . , . ' : . ' . . . .. . .. �. � ..�� � --i�in.f�ont yard set�aci�: . Require�: � . . Proposed: Totai relief requested: �� . � � � . � � . . ' � .� 1 t�-ft. � ' 4�f�. 8--ins. 5-ft.4-ins. � � � � . � . �s shov�rn on the su�mitt�� plans, be �pp�roWed fvr th� fo��owing reas�ns: . �. � . . . . . � . . �� � . . . . . . � . . � . � . . . . � . . . . . . . � . , . . . . a , � . � . . ., . . . � . . , . . . . �. . 6ecause t�e New Y.��k St��e Suprerne Caurt grant�d �he �ase vari�r�ce to ��rmi� a !�w offic� in . � � � thi5 resi�entia� zo�e, a ha�nd���p��d ���essi�le ramp is requir�d �y law. �'�e applicant �as � �. � � pres�nt�d �n alterr�ative to the �ropose� r�l��fi, �JU� thi5 W�U�� r��Ufr� t�i� r��1��1�1 c��� r�1�t�rQ . � � .�ree �nd the instailation of a�co��re�eJiror� r�mp �trUctur�to the si�e of�he existing �u�l�ing. � � . � � T�is 6aa�d al�r�� wit� the Design �,evievU Carr�mission �as ��t�rrnine� t�at the ��st way to � . r��intain th� residentiaE ck�ar��t�r af the n�i�hbo��oad is to continu� �o use ��� fr�nt e���ance . a�this bu�idir��,�in��rpora�ir�g th��ra�� i�ta th� ��r��. Th�s wiEi rr��i���in the rrcature tree ar�� . � .��r�sider�t�a! landscapi r�g.� Su�i� � d�s��r� r���essitates this variance. � � . � . � � � 2. .The appl�car�� �as ind�c�ted t��t �r�ntirtg ��is vari�nc� wi11 not create ar� �an���ira��e �h�r��e in , r��Egh�arhood ���r��ter or ��trimen� �o n�arby prop�rt��s. Sir��e t}�� �upr�me Court ov�rtur��� oUr I��se Varian�e �� the ��ntrary� th�s Soar� has conciud�d that this �rea va��ar,c� reE��f w�l� � prom��e th� r�s�de�t;�� �h�.ra���� of th�s st�ru�ture and assist in arr�eiia�'a���g r�� �r��act on ��e � � : nei��ba�hood of�I�is nQn--r�siden��a� us�. � � . � . � 3. ��e ���lEcan� h�s ir�dEcated this v�rian�e is n�t sub�tapt�aE. �'�e orig�nal resi�en�ial po�ch �s � . � being exrer�de� �a �cc�rnma��t� the h�nda�app�� ram� requt��d �y law. . �4. Thi� varia��e w�El na� have ar� �dv�rs� phy,si�ai or env�r�nr�erttaf effec� on t�� ne�ghb�rhoa�. . � �'he proposed reEief pr���rves a rn�tur� tr�� and �reatly �edu�es t�e non--perrrcea��e s�rface th�t th� �.�terna�e car�cte��/iron structure w�u1d requEre. � � . . . . . . �. , . • � � ' � �anc Ga��b�� ,��u�.� . . . . �tt �� ��r�t� � � �ir� S .. . . y . s . �.� . �S� � J � � � � :^�� �` ' � �'��' � ��t�l�� BOARI� t�F APP�ALS � : ��A�a ,� �"�,, :� `��. �: .�. � � . � . � . . . . � . . G�r��An n M�gui�� . . � ���,,_� ;� �. , . . . .. +�'� . • . . .� V�CE CNAtk � • _.�_ ;�. r1; • .. . . . . ' . . ... Cit}1 Ha�l -474 �roadw� . � . . �V1a�hew Ve�tch � � .` ��. ;�•-:�'� � �� . _ . � y . . . � r � . �, ..;�,p,�. ,- , ... , ��rataga Spr�n�s, New Yark �2866 . S�GRETAf�Y ��P �,yrA ��L -� u�,.-'�yl�,;�;r.•'V�. '•�' ', . ���. �J'��-.r7�7�3rJ'J�Q X.r'J'�rJ" �c3X. rJ''�$-rJ'$�-���� , '� , . ��"����f'ir�.'C�C • . � �I�V�'/�.�ti • . � • . � . ��^ ' �fy � . � .� . , . � : � .v�rww.sar�to��-s�rings.org . . , . . Jan�ne Stu�hEn -r � . � 5 .�. � dif��cuE� � is�se��-����a��d as fih.� d�si � re uErin t��� variance was rp ��� ���' � � . . Y .. � �l � � . �a ��r� ers�n . � : � .De � n �ev��w �ommissia�.. ...� .'� .. . . � � . .�� � � � � . � .. .�, �"�e fol�owi�� �����rior�s r�iust k�e met: . � �� �� �.�� �, . � � �,.1} �A��. pl�nting, grass ar�� ve�etat��r� must be ma�n��En�d and�ar i�sta�led as� er subrr�itted .� � R . .. : �. : .plans.ir���ud�.r�.g the �n,a�r�t�na�ce of mat�ar� tr�� and r�p�acerr�ent of iar�ds�aping in frQr�t of � � '� .,�hen�wra��.��. �� ��,��. � � �. �� ��� � �� . � � �� � � ����� � . : � � � � � � � �., � � � . , . . . . , . . . . . . � � � � �} �.�l�e applicar�t w's�I pu���n f�ur�datEon pEant�r�� al�r�g fihe front fer� �� �f the ar�h.� � � � � � . . . . . . . . . ,. . . � . , . , , � . . � p � �� �Ac�opte� by the fai�o�rin�:vote:���. �._. �. �.. � .� . . : , . : � ........ . . . : . �� . �� � � �� : .� -: � �� . �. ��. �� AY�S: . . � 7 . ..�N. �ol�b�rg,�C. M���uire; M. Veitch� E. Sch��eck,,�. S�uc�in,.�. Ker�r�e�y, � � . . . : �� .� . � � � � �. Anders,on}� � . .. . . � � � . � . � ; . . � � .� �. �� NAYS.�-��� . ,... Q . . . , : ; . . : : . . . . � � � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . D�ted: De�em�e� 1� 2��7 . � . . � . . � � . � � . . , � . . . . . . . � . . . �. . . � . � . �"h��s va�E��ee sha�� ex�ir����� �onths from t��s da�e ur�Eess the n�cessa�y buiEdir� �rm�it has been �$s�ed � � P .� ar�,d �ct�aa).�ar�szr���i�n �eg�rt as p�r.Art��i� �4�--��:S �. . : �. ...�, .� � �.. . �� �: : . . . � � . �� � � . � .. . , . . . . . . . . � . :. � �'. �, ��� � ��. � . ' :.- . �. . �� � � � ' �� - � � �� � . � � . � � � . . . �� . � . . . . � . , . . � �f� . � .. . � � � � � � � � � .. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . � . . . .� . . . � � ��t.C �.i�r� �-rc 1� J/�D'� � � � . � ♦ . . �' � � �w�w+w�+.�������.��������.�a+�-�-�� .M��.r.r�►.�r.� . ��.�����+w+�++.�rw ���a .. ' � � �►�wlr�����a�� ������r . .. � , . . � . . �. : Da�� .� . � .� . . � . � �� Cha�Er � � . � � � .�� �� .. � �. .,� . . . . � . � � �. . � .� �. . . �. , . .� . � .. . �� . - .. 1 her�by �erzi�fy t�� �abo�e to be a fuii, true �nd correc� c��y o�a resofutior� du! adop�e�d � t�e � . Y Y . Zoning 6o�rd of App�als af th� �ity of S�ratog� S�rin�s an rhe dat� �b�ve rnentiar�ec�, sever� � . � . . . . rr��mbers of�h� 8oarc� be�n�.present. . : � �� � � � � . . .. � � . . , . : � � . � � �� . . � � � � . . . �.�- �,. � � � . . � � �� � � i� �� . �� ��������►4�rF�.►ti��w����w��� ����� � w�M��www�+���rr�+��r+y�������rrrr���� �`W � � � � � �� � , . � � .. �� � � Date � � � . - � Se�re�ar . . . . . . Y . � ��Q�+ . . � � .. . . . �� . . . , . �'��� ������� � . � . � � ����� . PATRICK KANE 4 ,c.,,6 ,.., CITY OF SARATOGA. SPRINGS CHAIR STEVEN ROWLAND e' A, 7 .. , .: 1,. VICE CHAIR 0 / ,•• % rn DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION :: 711 RICHARD MARTIN >-. ..i::• • CHRIS BENNETT E-4 . , , z A '•, ,\ CITY HALL- 474 BROADWAY SUSAN SHAFER r....) .:',/ ..,.\ •4.,r .4;7' . ,.,.,"I'** • SARATOGA SPRINGSt NEW YORK 12,866 GRETCHEN MARCELL '''•!,i..--- • TEL: 518-587-3550 x.515 FAX: 518-580-9480 MARK HOGAN o ,\ jIPORATE0 \cWWW.SARATOOA-SPRINOS.ORO NOTICE OF • ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION In the matter of the request for administrative action relating to application #2007.103 Ginley&Gottman 96 Ballston Ave Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 to: approve final details including the front,pprch and ramp as shown on the drawings submitted to the Zoning Board of Appell§srLi2ap 07 and the Planning Bod on 1 Lain_ar . the Chairperson of the Design Review Commission finds that,in accordance with Section 8.3 of the Rules and Regulations of the Design Review Commission,the requested action is not substantive in nature and is not contrary to the intent of the original Commission decision. Therefore,the request for administrative action,as described above, is approved. The Chair shall report the result of this action at the Design Review Commission op January 27, 2008. 41111111(,t4e:4 V (9444— __j,.2-/ 1zi Jo 7 Date Chair cc: Michael Biffer, Building Inspector File July 5, 2017 r.. CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS City Council Meeting CityCouncil Room 7:00 OR A'Tt-P 6:40 PM P. H. —Amend Chapter 148 of the City Code 6:45 PM P. H. —Amend Capital Budget for Woodlawn Avenue Water Main Project 6:50 PM P. H. —Amend Capital Budget for Downtown Connector Project 6:55 PM P.H. — Ballston Avenue Zoning Amendment 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL SALUTE TO FLAG PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD / 15 MINUTES PRESENATIONS EXECUTIVE SESSION CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of 6/13/17 SPA Housing Inclusionary Zoning Amendment Minutes 2. Approval of 6/19/17 City Council Meeting Minutes 3. Approval of 6/19/17 Pre -Agenda Meeting Minutes 4. Approve Budget Transfers — Regular 5. Approve Budget Amendments — Regular (Increases) 6. Approve Payroll 6/23/17 $473,666.48 7. Approve Payroll 6/30/17 $497,908.55 8. Approve Warrant: 2017 Mid — 17MWJUN2 $11,471.82 9. Approve Warrant: 2017 —17J U L 1 $116001470.53 MAYOR'S DEPARTMENT 1. Discussion and Vote: Approval of 2017 — 2018 Housing Authority Salaries 2. Discussion and Vote: Authorization for the Mayor to Sign Change Order #1 with Kompan, Inc. for the West Side Rec Playground 3. Discussion and Vote: Authorization from City Council to Absolve the Square Footage Fee for Pitney Meadows Community Farm 4. Discussion and Vote: SEQRA Determination for Geyser Road Trail 5. Discussion and Vote: SEQRA Determination for Ballston Avenue Zoning Amendment 6. Discussion and Vote: Ballston Ave Zoning Amendment 7. Discussion and Vote: Approval to Pay Miller, Mannix Invoice City Council Meeting 7/5/17 No one spoke. Mayor Yepsen closed the public hearing at 6:50 p.m. Amend Capital Budget for Downtown Connect ro'ect Mayor Yepsen opened the public h ng at 6:50 p.m. Mayor Yepsen advised t ' is to add money to the capital budget for the downtown connector. The City will need to make a ribution of $983,238. No one spo M r Yepsen closed the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. Ballston Avenue Zoning Amendment Mayor Yepsen opened the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. Commissioner Franck recused himself and left the room as he owns property in the area being discussed. Susan Barden of the Planning Department explained the area in the proposal now consists of 14 parcels. Steve Gottman, applicant, advised the change is more compliant with the Comprehensive Plan. The area is no longer residential and is a truck route. The City and County Planning Boards recommended this change and will promote better land use at the core into the City. Mike Ginely, co -applicant, stated it is better to bring the more intensive dense use into town rather than go outside the town. No one spoke. Mayor Yepsen closed the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Yepsen called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. PUBLIC COMENT Mayor Yepsen said the public comment period is limited to a total of 15 minutes and individuals are limited to two minutes. Mayor Yepsen opened the public comment period at 7:05 p.m. Bonnie Sellers of Saratoga Springs stated in regards to #3 on the Mayor's Agenda and being a member of the Open Space Committee, her concern is where it is going to be placed behind the house and especially where it is going to go behind the farm. Sam Burton of Saratoga Springs thanked Commissioner Mathiesen for working on the ethics code. These adjustments are a good start. Page 4 of 14 City Council Meeting 7/5/17 Discussion and Vote: SEQRA Determination for Ballston Avenue Zoning Amendment (17-203) Commissioner Franck recused himself from this item and the next and left the room as he owns property in the area of the project being discussed. Susan Barden of the Planning Department reviewed Part 1 of the SEQRA short form (attached) with the Council and the Council provided their answers to each of the questions in Part 2. She reminded the Council they are looking at rezoning of an area, not reviewing a specific project. Commissioner Madigan advised she felt it is a good idea to recommend a T-4. Council engaged in much discussion regarding the answers to questions #2 & 3. Commissioner Madigan stated she is comfortable with the zoning change being recommended as it is in line with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Mathiesen read the definition of T-5 and T-4. The T-4 would work well here and T-5 would open it up to uses other than what traditionally has been there. Commissioner Madigan stated she is going to support the change in front of them as it is in line with the Comprehensive Plan. Susan Barden stated they are trying to align the zoning map to be in accordance with the complementary core. Brad Birge advised the Council needs to answer #s 2 & 3 before they can move to the motion. Commissioner Scirocco stated it is going to take Planning Board approval to do something in this district. To be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, T-5 is the way to go. Steve Gottman, applicant, stated there was a court decision that said the area is no longer a residential area and that is why the use variance was granted. Now, 4 of the 14 parcels are commercial uses. Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Madigan seconded that #2 is "No, or small impact may occur" and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Mathiesen stated he feels this could be a change in the use or intensity; there is a potential for a moderate or large impact. Ayes — 3 Nays —1 (Commissioner Mathiesen) Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Madigan seconded that #3 is "No, or small impact may occur" based upon our Comprehensive Plan calls for and based upon the proposal in front of us. Commissioner Mathiesen stated he has the same argument as previously. Ayes — 3 Nays —1 (Commissioner Mathiesen) Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Madigan seconded the City Council approve a negative SEQRA determination for the Ballston Avenue zoning amendment. Ayes - All Page 7 of 14 City Council Meeting 7/5/17 Discussion and Vote: Ballston Ave Zoning Amendment (17-204) Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Madigan seconded to approve the Ballston Avenue zoning amendment as presented. Commissioner Mathiesen stated he would rather see a T-4. Ayes — 3 Nays —1 (Commissioner Mathiesen) *Commissioner Franck returned to the meeting. Discussion and Vote: Approval to Pay Miller, Mannix Invoice (17-205) Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Mathiesen seconded to approve to pay Miller, Mannix invoice as listed with the agenda. Ayes - All Set Public Hearing: Donation of Land Utilizing Open Space Bond Hearing Mayor Yepsen set a public hearing for Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 6:55 p.m. Set Public Hearing: Capital Budget Amendment to Utilize Open Space Bond Funds for the Acquisition of Crown Oil Property Mayor Yepsen set a public hearing for Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 6:50 p.m. Discussion and Vote: Amend the Capital Budget — Saratoga Greenbelt Trail Downtown Connector (17- 206) Tina Carton, sustainability coordinator, advised this is to amend the capital budget for $3,800,292. The City received money from various grants, will need to bond some money, and will be using some funds from recreation funds. Mayor Yepsen moved and Commissioner Madigan seconded to amend the capital budget Saratoga Greenbelt Trail Downtown Connector. Ayes — All ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT Discussion and Vote: Authorization for Mayor to Sign Electric Contract with Engie Resources, LLC (17- 207) Commissioner Franck advised that each year our energy broker looks for the best rate per kilowatt hour for electric services. We have the option of a 12 months or 24 months contract. This year Engie Resources, LLC came in with the best rate. The rate per kilowatt hour for a 12 month contract is $0.04784/kWh and $0.04814/kWh for a 24 month contract. Commissioner Franck moved and Commissioner Madigan seconded to authorize the mayor to sign a 24 month contract with Engie Resources, LLC for $0.04814 per kilowatt hour. Ayes — All Page 8 of 14 P r e s e r v a t 1 o n Foundation January 18, 2018 Mr. Mark Torpey, Chair Planning Board F 0 R City Hall P PE S ERVAT I ON 474 Broadway F0 kE A. 11- 8 Sarato........................................ 9 a Springs, N*Y 12866 4. .......... RE: 96 Ballston Avenue Dear Mr. Torpey, The Saratoga Springs Preservation 10 n Foundation has reviewed the application for proposed town house development,at 96 and 116 Ballston Avenue. Board of Directors The Foundation has done preliminary research on the histofic house located at 96 Linda Harvev-Opiteck Ballston Avenue. The house is located on land that was fo-rinerly the Woodlea estate of Pnsidcnt John K. Beekman., In 1873 a map was drawn. to, subdivide the fernier Woodlea estate. At Bill Willard that time a few lots were sold .and houses were built. on Union, Perry, Aletta, South (now Vice. President Lincoln Avenue) streets, and on the corner of Ballston Avenue and Livingston Street. A neighborhood of modest hoin.es developed along Union, South, Finaly- and Perry streets Matthew VeItch, and on both sides o Treasurer f Ballston Avenue leading to Geyser Spring., More research is needed, ' but the house appears to have been constructed circa 1,90.6 based on the inforination. thus JessicaNiles fr and the architectural style of the house. The house may be eligibl . e for listingr on the Secretary National Register of "Historic Places, Caroline C-ar(lone ShaneCassidy The house may be eligible for listing on. the National. Register. of Historic Places. It ia Corbett I s n Alicia Czerwinski should be noted that the Design Review Commission may deem the house as Rowena Daly architecturally or historically significant, in which case the criteria -for. deniolition as Sedi D, Finkell fames Gold Outlined in the -Architectural Review Ordinance will. need to be net. The Foundation U7 bralfl- recommends that the Design Review Cornmiss*iion provide an advisory opinion regarding Douglas Ken- 2 Richard King the demolition of this historic structure. Michelle Paquette-Deuel Cbidy Spence. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration. Mereditli Wootford. Sincerely, James Kettleivell emeritus Matthew E. Veitch S mantha Bosshail President Executive Director Cc Kate Maynard, Principal. Planner EDP LLP, Agent Ballston Avenue Partners, LLC, Appliant Steve Rowland, Chair of the Design Review Commission Bradley Birge, Administrator of t1le, Office of Planninand Economic Development 1 12 S 1-s r I Yi go Stro et 1 Sti it c 2 (13 r a t NY 1286", S N Y E -W." VORK ST -7 :E Of ANDREW M. CUOMO Governor December 20, 2018 ROSE HARVEY Commissioner Ms. Kirsten Dymond Assistant Archaeologist Curtin Archaeological Consulting Inc 61 Rowland Street Ballston Spa, NY 12020 Re: DEC Ballston Avenue Townhouses Finely St & Ballston Ave, Saratoga Springs, Saratoga county, NY 18PRO8059 Dear Ms. Dymond: Thank you for requesting the comments of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the project in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the OPRHP and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. They do not include potential environmental impacts to New York State Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. Such impacts must be considered as part of the environmental review of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (New York Environmental Conservation Law Article 8) and its implementing regulations (6 NYCRR Part 617). Based upon this review, it is the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation's opinion that your project will have no impact on archaeological and/or historic resources listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places. If further correspondence is required regarding this project, please be sure to refer to the OPRHP Project Review (PR) number noted above. Sincerely, Michael F. Lynch, P.E., AIA Director, Division for Historic Preservation ---------------- ------- Division for Historic Preservation P.O. Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189 - (518) 237-8643 - www.nysparks.com PHASE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY BALLSTON AVENUE TOWNHOUSES 96-116 BALLSTON AVENUE CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS SARATOGA COUNTY, NEW YORK Prepared for Ballston Avenue Partners, LLC 96 Ballston Avenue Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 Prepared by Curtin Archaeological Consulting, Inc. 61 Rowland Street Ballston Spa, New York 12020 Report Authors: Edward V. Curtin, Ph.D. Kirsten Dymond, B.A. December 2018 MANAGEMENTSU01MARY SHPOProjest Review Number: Involved State and Federal Agencies: DEC Phase of Survey: Phase 1 Location Information Location: 08-118Ballston Avenue Minor Civil Division: Saratoga Springs County: Saratoga Survey Area Length: 11Om(3G1ft) Width: 98 m (315f) Number ofAcres Surveyed: 1.4a(58ha) USGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Map: Saratoga Springs Archaeological Survey Overview Number and Interval of Shovel Tests: 23 @ 7.5-15 meters Number and Size ofUnits: n/a Width ofPlowed Strips: n/o Surface Survey Transect Interval: n/o Results of Archaeological Survey Number and Name ofPrehistoric Sites: O Number and Name ofHistoric Sites: O Number and Name ofSites Recommended for Phase ||/Avoidenoe:O Results of Architectural Survey Number ofbu)/dingm/struotures/oemetehemwithin Project Area: U Number ofbui|dingm/struotureu/cemeterieaadjacent to Project Area: O Number ofpreviously determined NR Listed or Eligible build ingm/struotureo/cemetehos/diathcto: O Report Authors: Edward V. Curtin. Ph.D. and Kirshen Dymond, B.A. Report Date: December 2O18 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................1 Project Location and Description.............................................................................................. 1 Scopeof Work.......................................................................................................................... 1 ENVIRONMENTALSETTING..........................................................................................................1 SITEFILES RESEARCH..................................................................................................................2 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.............................................................................3 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH...............................................................................3 HISTORICMAP RESEARCH...........................................................................................................3 MAP DOCUMENTED STRUCTURES.............................................................................................4 PRIORDISTURBANCE...................................................................................................................4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY.................................................................................................5 PHASE 1A SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................5 PHASE 1 B ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS...........................................................5 PHASE 1B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS....................................................................5 ShovelTesting.......................................................................................................................... 5 SoilStratigraphy....................................................................................................................... 6 Artifacts..................................................................................................................................... 6 PHASE 1 B FIELD SURVEY SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION.............................................7 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................. 8 APPENDIXA: FIGURES..................................................................................................................9 APPENDIXB: PHOTOS.................................................................................................................24 APPENDIX C: SHOVEL TEST PIT RECORD................................................................................30 APPENDIX D: ARTIFACT CATALOG............................................................................................33 1U -tae --1D AD 110-1 LOU I Project Location and Description Ballston Avenue Partners, LLC has retained Curtin Archaeological Consulting, Inc. to conduct a Phase *1 archaeological survey of the proposed Ballston Avenue Townhouses project site at 96-116 Ballston Avenue in the City of Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, New York. The purpose of this Phase 1 archaeological survey is to evaluate the archaeological sensitivity of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) and identify whether it contains any archaeological sites. The general location of the survey is shown in Figure 1. The APE is shown in Figures 2-14. The report content and format are responsive to the standards adopted by the New York Archaeological Council (NYAC 1994) and the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP), which contains the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). SHPO issued written guidance in 2005. Scope of Work The purpose of the Phase 1 archaeological survey is to identify the presence or absence of archaeological sites within the APE. The scope of work for this undertaking includes: (1) assessment of the environmental setting and visible indications of prior disturbance; (2) compilation and interpretation of background information including a site file search and map research; (3) appropriate archaeological fieldwork; and (4) a report of findings with recommendations. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project area is located in the City of Saratoga Springs within a partly commercial, partly residential area. The most dominant environmental feature in the area is Geyser Brook located to the west across a broad sandy plain with low relief. The topography on site is level to gently sloping with a general elevation slightly above and below 320 ft above mean sea level. The project site stands out as a low knoll in the otherwise nearly featureless, generally level terrain that surrounds it (Figure 2). This knoll as mapped in the 1960s is shown extending to or slightly beyond the limits of the APE. It no longer does (as several photos in this report illustrate) because various street, building, and parking lot construction projects have removed parts of it. The core of the knoll is a wooded area in the central part of the APE. A more substantial hill is located to the east in the vicinity of Greenridge Cemetery, while the terrain to the west is marked by large depressions which have the general appearance on Figure 2 of sand borrow -pits. Table 1: Soil Description for USDA (1992) Soil Survey, Saratoqa County, New York Name (symbol) Soil Horizon Depth cm(in) Color Texture Slope % Drainage Landform 0-5(0-2) decomposed pine needles glacial Windsor 5-28(2-11) vy dk gy br lo sa excessively outwash loamy sand 28-53 (11-21) ye br lo sa 0-3 drained plains, (WnA) 53-63 (21-25) ye br sa kames and 63-180 (25-72) I It ye br I sa I I terraces Key: vy=very; dk=dark; lt=light; gy=grey; ye=yellow; br=brown; lo=loam; sa=sand Table 1 shows the soil type mapped within the APE and surrounding area. The soil within the APE is mapped as excessively drained Windsor loamy sand with 0-3% slopes. This soil is formed on glacial outwash plains, kames, and terraces. The spatial distribution of the soils is shown in Figure 3. The project location falls within the Oak -Northern Hardwood vegetation zone, a zone which is described primarily as a transition zone where oaks and northern hardwood species alternate or intermingle, particularly on the moister and deeper soils along the Hudson Valley (De Laubenfels 1977). This suggests that the precontact forested landscape of the project parcel would have been covered primarily with beech and sugar maple species, with considerable oaks, as well as associated ash, basswood, cherry, birch and white pine. SITE FILES RESEARCH The archaeological site files of the New York State Museum (NYSM) and OPRHP, both maintained at OPRHP, were reviewed to identify whether archaeological resources have been reported previously within or adjacent to the project boundaries. Table 2 lists the sites identified within a one -mile radius, along with their distances to the current APE. Table 2: Previously Recorded Archaeoloqical Sites in the New York State Site Inventory NYSOPRHP Site Additional Site # Distance to APE Time Period Site Type NR # m(ft) 09140.001512 Lake Avenue 1)367(4,485) Mid 19"' C. Historic Eligible Gasholder 09140.000338 Congress Spring 859(2,818) Early to mid- Historic Undetermined Bottling Plant Historic 19th C. Complex 09140.001508 Karner Habitat 1)039(3,409) Prehistoric Stray find Not Eligible Precontact Isolated Find #1 09140.001420 Marrin-Avenue of Pine 11006(3,301) Early to mid- Historic Undetermined Historic sites (NYSM 19th C. 10659) 09140.01419 J. Marvin House and 1)099(3,606) mid -19 C. Historic Not Eligible associated sites (NYSM 10658) 09140.001558 Saratoga Regional 877(2,877) Prehistoric Isolated find Undetermined YMCA Prehistoric Isolated Find 09140.001585 Pitney Farm 2 936(3,071) Prehistoric Isolated find Undetermined Precontact Site 09140.001586 Pitney Farm Historic 11014(3,327) Late 19 - Historic Undetermined Site 20th C. 09140.001584 Pitney Farm 1 11188(3,898) Prehistoric Isolated find Undetermined Precontact Site NYSM 4697 (Sara 3) 49 161) Prehistoric Village NYSM 4698 (Sara 4) 238(781) Woodland Village NYSM 6907 11266(4,154) Prehistoric Camps Twelve previously identified archaeological sites were found within a one -mile radius of the proposed project. Five of these are historic period sites. These sites reflect the rural, agricultural history of the area west of Saratoga Springs' earlier neighborhoods. The precontact (prehistoric) period sites include four documented occurrences of "stray" or isolated artifact finds. These sites were documented by modem cultural resource surveys and are confidently accepted as indications of broad, low -intensity Native American use of the local landscape for hunting, gathering, or camping during the period before contact with Europeans. Two other precontact period sites were described as village sites in the state-wide inventory of archaeological sites compiled by early 20th century archaeologist Arthur C. Parker (1922). However, Parker's information is often imprecise, vague, or contradictory. As he himself noted, much of Parker's information was provided by informants and correspondents rather than his own surveys, and thus in a very real sense was second-hand information. Parker (1922:689) described Saratoga County (Sara) 3 (NYSM 4697) as a village site "near" Saratoga Springs. No information has been recovered subsequently to verify this Saratoga Springs report as a precontact period village site in the vicinity of the current project site. As a result, this identification is somewhat doubtful from a present-day perspective. Saratoga County (Sara) 4 (NYSM 4698) is described as a village at the "Gravel hill" in Saratoga Springs. This location is obscure compared to present day landmarks, but may refer to a location east of Saratoga Springs. Its name ("Gravel hill") does not fit well with the soil types in the project vicinity as these are dominated by sand and loamy sand. This identification of a precontact village site in the project vicinity therefore also is doubtful. These two sites are the closest recoded precontact sites to the project APE, but for the reasons just mentioned, they are not considered to be reliable reports. The last of the previously recorded precontact period sites is NYSM 6907, described as camps and located nearly one mile away. NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES No sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP) are identified in the near -vicinity of the project APE. Two historic districts identified in Table 3 are approximately 1/3 mile away. Table 3: National Register Sites NR# Description Address Distance m(ft) 90NRO2850 Casino- Congress Park- Circular Roughly bounded by Spring and circular 497(1,631) street Historic District sts., park pl., and Broadway 90NRO2846 Saratoga Spa State Park District Vicinity of US Route 9 and New York 446(1,463) State Route 50 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH A large number of archaeological surveys have been conducted in Saratoga Springs. The following were conducted within Y4mile of the project site: • Historical Archaeological Zoological Explorations — H.A.Z.Ex. 2018 Phase I Archaeological Sensitivity Assessment and Survey of the Stonequist Housing Expansion Project within the City of Saratoga Springs in Saratoga County, New York. • Powers Archaeology LLC 2016 Phase I (1A and 1B) Cultural Resource Investigations for the Proposed 176 South Broadway Hotel Project, Town of Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, New York. areas. Neither of these archaeological surveys identified archaeological sites within their survey HISTORIC MAP RESEARCH The following maps, ordered chronologically, were consulted to identify possible historic sites. Where possible, maps were georeferenced using GIS software. Historic map coverage is inclusive for the years 1779 to 1949. These maps are presented as figures in this report, illustrating historic occupation and land use. Some spatial distortions in the underlying historic maps may be apparent in comparison to the APE outline when georeferenced. Table 4: Historic Maps Map Date Reference Name/Other in PA 1779 A Chronological Map of the Province of New York, Claude Joseph Sauthier (Figure 5) none Map Date Reference Name/Other in PA - 1829 Map of the County of Saratoga, David H. Burr (Figure 6) none 1866 Georeferenced Map of Saratoga Springs, Beers (Figure 7) none 1876 Georeferenced Map of Saratoga and Ballston with none Surroundings, Beers (Figure 8) 1879 Georeferenced Map of the town of Saratoga Springs, none Cramer & Mott (Figure 9) 1890 Georeferenced Map of Saratoga County, New York, Lant none and Silvernail (Figure 10) 1902 Georeferenced Saratoga USGS 15' minute quadrangle none (Figure 11) 1942 Georeferenced Saratoga USGS 15" minute quadrangle Two buildings (Figure 12) 1949 Georeferenced Saratoga USGS 15' minute quadrangle Three buildings (Figure 13) MAP DOCUMENTED STRUCTURES No structures are shown in or adjacent to the APE on historic maps until 1942-1949 (Figures 12 and 13). The sequence of maps dated 1866-1879 shows the progression of development in the vicinity of the project site from open, undeveloped terrain in 1866 to inclusion in the growing Saratoga Springs street plan in 1876 and 1879, at least as it was envisioned for this area (Figures 7-9). Ballston Avenue is shown on the 1866 map, but the closest structure is the J. Finley house well to the south. A street grid was at least planned in this area by 1876- 1879, as shown on those maps, although the map convention apparently was not to show most buildings within the urban street grid. Later maps, however, indicate that the settlement of this part of the city was slow to develop. The 1890 Lant and Silvernail map is associated with a directory of farmsteads; none are shown in this area. The 1902 USGS 15' quad is not restricted to farmsteads, but similarly, it shows no buildings in this area. Importantly, neither of these maps how the side streets depicted on the 1870s maps, suggesting that these earlier depictions show paper streets. Since the two later maps are in agreement, it is assumed that they are accurate, the side streets in the area (such as Finley) were not yet constructed ca. 1890-1902, and the project location was on the edge of the urban part of Saratoga Springs at the turn of the 20th century. The first buildings in the APE appear to have been built in the time between publication of the 1902 and 1942 maps. The 1942 USGS 15' quad shows a structure in each of the corners of the APE fronting on Ballston Avenue, while the structure behind the 116 Ballston Avenue front building is not shown on this map. The 1949 map provides the same depiction with the addition of the structure behind the front (corner) 116 Ballston Avenue building (the address of both buildings is 116 Ballston Avenue). Photos of the extant buildings are provided in this report. PRIOR DISTURBANCE Prior disturbances within the APE include the construction of the residential and commercial structures, the parking lots, and the landscaping along Ballston Avenue. This has generally involved cutting and leveling. This is particularly obvious when comparing the ground level of the undeveloped wooded area between the buildings at 96 and 116 Ballston Avenue to the adjoining parking lots, street -side, and mapped alley space behind these lots (alley spaces were designed public spaces used for service support at the backs of private properties; Corbett 2001). The differences the disturbed and undisturbed landscapes are visible in various of the photographs in Appendix B. The historic map data reviewed suggests that this wooded area has never been developed, and its core appears not to have been cut down, although its surface is marked with several wide, shallow pits (that are much smaller than cellar holes-- these may have been for borrowing sand or perhaps were dug as forts for children's play). 4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY The project site is within an area of precontact period archaeological sensitivity. It is particularly sensitive for the occurrence of small precontact period camps and activity areas where small numbers of precontact artifacts may occur. The project site is not considered sensitive for the occurrence of historic period archaeological sites predating the 20th century. Evidence of early to middle 20th century artifacts may occur, as indicated by the historic map data. PHASE 1A SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS A complete and comprehensive Phase 1A archaeological survey has been conducted. Much of the project site has been disturbed by prior construction, although areas that do not appear to be substantially disturbed also occur. The project site is considered sensitive for the occurrence of small precontact period camp or activity sites. The historic period sensitivity is limited to the 20th century. As a result of these findings, a Phase 1 B archaeological survey is recommended for the undisturbed portions of the project site. PHASE 113 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS The Phase 1 B field survey was conducted in sunny dry weather on December 6, 2018. The survey transects were laid out by the principal investigator within the APE. Transects 1 was placed along the north side of the APE farthest from the obvious disturbance to the knoll visible along the parking lot. It was set back from the street in accordance with disturbance from the street area eastward to a point where topography suggested a lack of prior disturbance. Transect .2 was set up 15 m (50 feet) south of Transect 1, avoiding the parking lot. Transect 3-5 were set up on the wooded knoll avoiding the parking lots cut banks, and steep slopes on both sides. Transect 5-7 also avoided a cut bank on the east side of the knoll adjacent to the alley space. These Transects were 15 m (50 ft) apart, except for STP 4/1, where a 7.5 m (25 ft) interval to Transect 3 was used to avoid a cut area associated with the 116 Ballston Ave. parking lot. Transects 6 and 7 were set up 15 and 30 m (50 and 100 ft) south of Transect 5 in the potentially undisturbed areas behind the 116 Ballston Ave. back structure. STPs 2/1, 7/1, and 8/1 were placed in locations to confirm apparent prior disturbance. The shovel testing was conducted by the principal investigator and assistant archaeologist. The Phase 1 B field methodology was guided by Section 2.3 of the New York Archaeological Council Standards (NYAC 1994), as well as guidelines provided by the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO 2005). All soils were screened through %-inch mesh hardware cloth. Following the completion of fieldwork, all field data were brought to the Curtin Archaeology office and lab for processing and analysis. PHASE 1 B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS Shovel Testing A total of 23 STPs was deployed as summarized in Table 1. The STP locations are shown on Figure 14. The shovel test pit records are presented in Appendix C. Table 5: Phase 1B STIR Summary STPs n= no digs 0 Total 23 Soil Stratigraphy The soil stratigraphy showed several patterns indicating either little ornoprior disturbance orextensive prior disturbance, depending upon location. Apparently undisturbed soil profiles were found on the knoll, usually well away from its edges at 8TPa 3/2, 4M, 4/3. 4/4. and 6/1. These soils profiles had A-13 sequences with a dark to medium brown loamy fine sand over yellow brown todark yellow brown loamy fine sand. Traces ofgravel occurred frequently. An apparent variation of this appeared at STP 1/1 on the northern edge of the APE in a reasonably expected location, although this pattern was not repeated along Transect 1. Here, etSTP 1/1. redeposited soil appears to have differentiated into an A -B sequence above an intact A -B sequence. Elsewhere varying evidence of disturbance occurred on the knoll, around its edges, and inmore level terrain beyond the elevation. Two main patterns are evident inthe stratigraphic data. In one of these there is mixed A and B soil in a transition between the present-day A horizon and the remnant ofthe original B. |nthese cases, the present-day Asoil imconsidered to have been redeposited (or perhaps only recently formed) as it caps a mixed, disturbed soil. The Bhorizon isconsidered tohave been truncated byprior disturbance. This pattern occurs atGTPa 4/2. 5/276/2 7 7/2. 7/3. and 8/1. Except for STP 8/1, which was placed just south of the 88 Ballston Ave. structure to confirm apparent prior disturbance, this type of evidence clusters in several adjacent 8TPsinthe southeast section ofthe APE. The other pattern ioone inwhich there ianopresent-day Ahorizon and mixed soil lies directly ontop ofthe B. This also is considered toindicate redeposited soil ontop cf atruncated Bhorizon. This pattern clusters spatially on the knoll near the 96 Ballston Ave parking lot and extends south to STP 4/2. The landscape immarked byshallow pits near these 8TPa. Another apparent indication ofprior disturbance includes rocky soil atSTP 2Y1 aawell 000tSTP 1/2where arock impasse was encountered. It seems possible that the rocks are part of deeper stratigraphy that could occur below the sandy horizons, and so they are consistent with topographic evidence that the upper stratigraphy was removed inthese locations. Afill deposit contain cinder and slag was found et STP 1/3. It overlay the B horizon where cinder, slag and charcoal extended into the subsoil. Artifacts No precontact period artifacts were found. A small assemblage of 35 historic period artifacts was recovered. They occurred in low density innumerous of the shovel test pits and appear to represent miscellaneous trash that accumulated in these locations over time. None of these artifacts are considered indicative ofthe early settlement ofSaratoga Springs during the late 18~ -early 19th century. This assemblage includes items such ossalt-glazed stoneware with interior Albany Slip, vvhiteware, ironatone, vessel g|aoo. flet (window) g|esm, wire nai|m, and other miscellaneous items. Most ofthe artifacts that can be associated with manufacture ranges provide terminus post quem (TPC>)ages ofpomt-184O.post-1850.orpost-18O5.While weuse a date of post -1 850 for wire nails, they rarely if ever were available in the northeastern United States that early and are generally considered tobe 2nmcentury artifacts. Some artifact classes with long manufacture ranges such as whiteware (1 820 -present) and Albany Slipped salt -glazed stoneware (1805-1920) have age ranges that are entirely consistent with being contemporary with the other dated items in the assemblage, and with the documented 20th century history of the APE. Ne PHASE 1BFIELD SURVEY SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION Aoomplete and comprehensive Phase 1Barchaeological survey has been conducted. Areas identified as previously disturbed based upon analysis of topographic maps, the built environment, and the locations ufcut banks were not shovel tested . but visual evidence ofprior disturbance was photo -documented (Appendix B). The Phase 1Bshovel testing program resulted inthe excavation of23shovel test pits inareas that appeared tobepotentially undisturbed orwhere confirmation ofprior disturbance was sought. Additional evidence ofprior disturbance was encountered, as well as an undisturbed area generally associated with a core location ofthe wooded knoll. This archaeological survey has found noevidence ofarchaeological sites indicated by archaeological features or concentrations of artifacts in undisturbed areas. The artifact assemblage recovered is small and consistent with the map -documented 20th century history ofthe project site. Aoaresult, noadditional archaeological investigation isrecommended. 7 REFERENCES Corbett, Theodore 2001 The Making of American Resorts: Saratoga Springs, Ballston Spa, Lake George. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey. De Laubenfels, David J. 1977 Vegetation. In Geography of New York State, John H. Thompson, editor. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, New York. New York Archaeological Council (NYAC) 1994 Standards for Cultural Resource Investigations and the Curation of Archaeological Collections in New York State. hftp://nyarchaeology.org/assests/standards/ NYACStandards.pdf New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (SHPO) 2005 Phase I Archaeological Report Format Requirements. http://nysparks.com/shpo/ environmental-review/documents/PhaseiReportStandards.pdf Parker, Arthur C. 1922 The Archeological History of New York. New York State Museum Bulletins 235-238, Albany. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1992 Soil Survey of Saratoga County, New York. APPENDIX A: FIGURES 1 , , , , S ti Will I ral IBM OR �N� ML 'Y :c V ax e: 'y h _ a :r "az - t , °` ''• � i �=` �r ' '`�. circ rev � - "r z x r ,� .c m^� +. t 3 .G s Figure 4: 2017 Orthoimagery showing e)asting conditions 4 �f. w'k 'i S4 bo., c »s S 4 Figure 5: 1779 A chronological map of the province of New York by Claude Joseph Sauthier ( Project Vicinity Figure 6: 1829 Map of the county of Saratoga by David H. Burr :f \ Project Vicinity w f tr : y qct x c Ynd .r - x ' ¢ p } a d nc bby . x \\ \ /�\ y]y. : . . •« > - - - . t. - � ','MR :§; §\. ,., �y . y. � . -° .. .a < 2° - � Figure 8. Geo[eferenced 1876 Map of Saratoga and Ballston with Surroundings by Beers APE 250 0 250 500 750 1000 KKK i u r , ... ... .. . : s ..... ^may W �{ , r.rr. Xy Figure 9: Georeferenced 1879 Map of the village of Saratoga by Cramer and Mott I'"-- APE Figure 10: Georeferenced 1890 Map of Saratoga county, New York by Lant and Silvernail I Lj APE I 0,0� 250 0 250 500 750 1000 I Figure 11: Georeferenced 1902 Saratoga U SG S 15' minute quadrangle am 250 0 250 500 750 1000 Figure 12: Georef-erenced 1942 Saratoga USGS 15' minute quadrangle 250 0 . ' 250 500 7 50 100 \ � . . \ � > .. . . ..: . .. ........ �. SRI- qq:� . � ., 6"-- Of CIT`' OF SARATOGA SPRINGS: Tam ie&4,�.Qgg,(, Chair Karenvice Chair .y DESIGN EVIEW M R COMNISSIO cy nith.-Corbet t P Chris Bennett City Hall* - 474 Broadwmay Sara -toga Springs, New York 12 366 Leslie �vghq-M Tell. -5-87-3550 x..25.15 fax. Rob qff teven Rowland Alter S t7ate Meeting: R * ey " e * w .... Q , q , m m " s - s p " n , Q **e ' s " ign ---- *e 7:00 P.M., Wednesday, January 9, 2019 Note Location: Recreation Qpnter, 15 Vanderbilt Ave Agenda Salute to the Flag A. Approve Meeting Minutes: 12/5/18 B. Possible Consent Agenda Items: Note: The intent of a consent agenda is to identify any applications that appear to be `approvable` without need for further evaluation or discussion. If anyone wishes to further discuss any proposed consent agenda item, then that item would be pulled from the `consent agenda' and dealt with individually, 1. 2018.111 Raymond Watkin, Apts. Sjqn 57 Ballston Ave, Architectural Review of proposed monument sign within the Urban Residential -5 District. PROJECI'DOCUMENTS 2. 20118.112 Adirondack Trust Sig-nacie 315 Church Street, Architectural Review of signage within the theTransect-5 Neighborhood Center District. PROJECT DOCUMENTS 4- 2918.14a Whole 1--lapoe-at Go. VI III Ij 5 earoline Street, His-ILV-11C Review of aw muhlin the tlieTranseto-11.t-6 Urban eore District. FIR6dE&F* 88GHM EH*Hc-; C. DRC Applications under Consideration 1. 2018,114 96 Ballston Ave Iownbomes 96 Ballston Ave, consideration of SEQRA lead agency (Architectural Review) for 18 proposed townhouse units within theTransect-5 Neighborhood Center District. PROJECT DOCUMENTS 2. 2018.110 PaIrnateer Residence 303 West Ave, Architectural Review of a new single-famill sidence within the Urban Residential -5 District. PROJECT DOCUMENTS 3. 2018.096 Brant Carriage House 695 North Broadway, Historic iew of exterior modifications to an existing accessory structure within the Urban Residential -1 District. PROJECT DOCUME S 4. 2018.191 ls[ael Eagade ModifiQation 184 ring Street, Historic Review of fagade modifications (front/rear porches, windows, etc.) within the Urban ,Rdsidential-3 District PROJECT DO"3UMENTS Ehinger, Chairman made a motionin the matter of the Ra:mond WaWn--Apartnient Sign, 57 Ballston Avenue Y and Salvation Army signage, 27 Woodlawn Avenuethat these too ations be approved at -submitted, Steven Rowland, Alternate seconded- the motion. Tamle Ehinger, Chairman asked if there was urther discussip"n. None heard YOTE; Leslie 1 Chris Benneft, in favor, Tamie Ehing'er, Chairma favor, Steven Rowland, Alternate,in favor; Lesli D.Oarlo, in favor, Cynthia CorbeftY 1** r, MO ..... PAS -SES: 5WO C, QRC APP4!9ATIONS UNOER CONSIDERATION 14 96 BALL STON AVENUE TO H -ME$* M .0 4 96' allston' Avenue, consideration of -SEORA. Lead Agency, (Architectural Review) for proposed -townhouse, units within the Transect -5 Neighborhood:Center District, Tamle Ehinger, Chairman stated we norm8lly defer. Lead, AgencyStatus to the Planning Board in these matters, Are there any objections from the members of the Commission?* None heard. Tamife Ehinger, Chairman made a motion in the matter of the.Ballston Avenue Townhomes, 96 Ballston Avenue that the. Design Review Commission defe*r Lead Agency St'atus to -the P16-nning Boatd should they wish -to seek it. LesliebiCadoseconded the motion, L C 4 0 1E )Carlo, in favorGhrls'Benneft, " favor; Tamie Ehinger, Chairman, n favor'. Steven. Rowland* Alternate,. iii -favor, Cynthia Corbett, 'in favor' Leslie Di 1. Un wrION PASSES: 5-o- 20 �,01.'$J_1_0 'PAL IAT EER RESIDENCE, 303 West Avenue Architectural Re for a new single- family residence Within the Urban Residenti�1-5 district DISCLOSURE, Cynthia Corbett *disclosed that Mr, Perry is working'On a pro'ect f er. She has.no -financial into restift this applicatio, n, i ' and she can evaluate this proposa] without bias. J Applicant: Mr. Palmateer, Owner & Contractor Agent: Midhael Perry, Architect Mr. Perry Stated Mr, Palmateer wishes t onstruct a new si ingl :'family bome with a two -:car garage on this site, Mr. Perry provided an -visual presen n of the project -noting. peropo sled materials, grey asphalt shingles, blacR Pella window�, Vinyl siding with. e Azak trim. This I's a pretty simple hoose but will add to the neighborhood, an.. that this Project is before the ORC for' architectural. iew - 6 nd Tam' EhJnge' te I r, Chairman minded the Commission revf is located in the UR -5 trlct, The Chair asked the Commi$ision to review the proposed use of " yl as -wel.] as -to review the mass and scale of garae doors, Vfn Af, Chris SenneKtated West Avenue is becoming a gateway to the City, and the, neighborhood is changing. LesliLeslie 1 i Carlo stated she also , has an issue with the vinyl Siding., There are a lot of IntOesting thin *s happening e ' on estAvenue-with a lot of oppQfthity. I do not feel we should loci the bar to meet what is there -we should holt to the e 0 1 Vre f , r City of Saratoga Springs — Design Rvt jev# Commission* Min, 'jfes --japLlary 9, 2019 - Page 2 of 8 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES (FINAL) THURSDAY,JANUARY 10, 2019 6:,400 PWA: RECREATION CENTER CALL TO ORDIEISR Mark Tpey, Chairman called the meeting to order at 6:06 P,M., 4 ��ALUT,E TO THE FLAG... PRESENT: Mark Torpey, Chairman, Jamin Totino, Vice Chairman, Ruth Horton, Bob Bristol, Janet Casey LATE ARRIVAL: Todd Fabozz'f arrived at 6,105 PM 4 STAFFA Kate Maynard, PrimCity ipai Planner, of Saratoga Spri 01 1 n- ngs Vince DeLeori ardis, City Attorney, City of Saratoga Springs ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING F. PROCEEDING, The proceedings of this meeting are it recorded for the be*nefit of the secretary, Because the minutes, are not. a verbatim record of the proceedings, the minuteare not a word0or-word transcript of the recording. A. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES* Approval of meeting minutes was deferred to the January 24, 2,019 meeting, B. POSSIBLE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: NOTE: The intent of a consent agenda 'is toidentify anyapplic *; in that appear to be "approvable"without need for r further evaluation of dis-cuss"Ion., If anyone wished: rt discuss any proposed consent agenda item, da�� wit in i then that item would be Pulled from the "conse genda" and dealt h ' d'vidually. None at this time. C,, APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSI.D��TION: 1. 17.061 STATION LANE AP 'e-f-MENTStat'on Lane, Permanent Special Use JAS S e Permitfor 27 multi -family residential uXs Within the Transect -5 Neighborhood Center District. BACKGROUND- The ACKGROUNDi The Planning Boa - issued: a SE RA. Negative Declaration on November 1, 2018. The proposed proectis located on the northern si of Station Lane., between the train station on the west and the Fallen, proposed mixed-use project to 'h e,,rannin a 0 ' " P' t - ' B f e no hern S' 0 the east,, a consists of two -3 stor� 12 unit buildings and three 2 story row house -structures conta4n*n a total of 27 g e w r 'den.' units. The ZBA has issued variances for front build out. The site features ACOS and DEC designated si i I I retl area. 0 ' gif Wetl d areas, Original proposal featured greater disturbanceJnto thiD- w-etland and adjacent buffer area,,: The applicant modified h- since modified the project, i the buildings, Two residences on the third floor with two garages. No dump ster simply roll off receptacles, more residential type appeal, Arbovitae hedge to, the property to th6 north, Permeable pavement will be used for p'ng and driveway to the garages, We need the number of parking spaces we have proposed, We have tried ryase the amount of pavement on the site, Parking spaces number 25 and we need 25, Handicap spaces will provided, Architectural plans were reviewed along with the lighting plan. Discussion ensued among the Board with regards to the trail, isidewalks, connectivity,a -parking. Mr, re stn reviewed utility connections and placement. Lighting plans we discussed,, There is some lighting spi 411age onto adjacent properties to the north and south, Light shI'elds to In t fled on the fixtures to the northern property boundary to prevent spill over, ADA compliant pedestrian nection shall be 'Installed to the West Avenue entrance, One additional street lights shall be: added to the site ntage. Mark Torpey., Chairman stated we will now discuss th- . onditions for the final Site Plan. Lig talled on fixtures northern: property bound to prevent lighting spillover,hting shields shall be ins ary I ti n q be constructed to the West Avenue frontage sidewalk. '-fion s ADA compliant pede-stdan connere I One additional streetlight shall be 1 died along the street frontage., Jamin Totino made a motion in matter of the Alros-mith Mixed -Use Development, 318 West Avenue,. Final Site Plan that the application be app'' ** d with the conditions as noted by the Chair. Todd Fabozzl seconded the motion, Mark Torpey, air- an asked if there was any further discussion, None heard. VOTE: Jan asey, in favor, Jarnin Totino, Vice Chairman in favor; Bob Bristol., in favor- Ruth Horton in favor,, d Fabozzi, in favor, Mark Torpey, Chairmanin favor MOTION PASSES: 6,0 1 18.059 96,11-6 BALLSTON AVENGE" OWNHOMES,,.Permfam i -anent Special Use Permit for 1:6 multi-ily +r% residences it the Transect -5 Neighborhood Center Distr]'US,.. 4. 18,059 96*116 BALLSTON AVENUE TOWE HOMES, Final Site Plan Review for 16 multi,4amily residences within the Transect -5 Neighborhood Center Districts., Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the appiticant is before the BoOrd this evening for a Permanent Speolal Use Permit and Final Site Plan Approval. This is in the T-5 District in the City.", This is an application for 18 multi -family residences. Across 3 lots. This project has been before the Board several tines in 2018. A quick overview of thePro) Ject would be helpful. BACKGROUND: Planning Board issued a favorable advisory opinion for zoning amendment for overall area to T-5. Council approved a portion of the original defined area; the proposed projectis within the rezoned area. T- Neighborhood Center is a commercial district,, Planning Board saw first sketch review in January 20184 and againin May 2018 to request specific guidance on. Ballston Avenue access points, The project has evolved largely in complement to guidance from the Board, Action appears to be an unlisted action with Planning Board And DRC asinvolved agencies, pianninq Board DlKamtv 6. 2018.- page4o;f 7 Kate Maynard, Principal Planner, City of Saratoga Springs stated just for an update the Board has received some correspondence from the Saratoga Springs Preservation lou dation and there was a question on the SEQRA form submitted by the applicant. DISCLOSURE, Jamin Totino, Vice Chairman disclosed that he has done business with Ginley and.Gottman for a real estate transaction. He has no financial Interest in this project and can therefore render an impartial decision. Mark Torpey, Chairman disclosed that he has done business with Ginlet' and Goftman for a real estate transaction, He has no financial interest in this project, and can therefore render an impar ttal decision, Applicant: Ginley and Gottman Agent: Brian Osterhout, EDP Mr. Osterhout provided a brief project history, The property was rezoned to T-5 district. We have been before the Board twice in 2018 in which the project was presented to the Board,. There were two iterations and concepts, We returned before the Board with VHB Traffic Consultants in May of 2018, We confirmed limited access to Ballston Avenue with a right turn only. The applicants had architectural floor plans completed along with engineering studies which were completed. We are in an archeologically sensitive area so the- applicants engaged an archeologist to do an investigation. Nothing was found and no effect determination, was received from SHP O noting no archeological or historic resources, The site Is 1.3 acres including 3 parcels. Area photographs were provided, Initially 20 units were proposed and since that time the density was reduced to 18 Units. These will be two story units with full basements on the eastern side. Infiltration tests were done, Good soil coed tions exist on the site. Forty four parking spaces are proposed 'Including an ADA parking space. Additional visitor parking is provided. Some units have garages, Porous pavementi's also proposed, Sidewalks are proposed along Ballston and Finley. We have a paper street alley. We thought to make this a multi -use path — sidewalk possibly,. The eastern unit will front here. These townhouses will be offered for sale and will have an HOA which will maintain the l roperty, A detailed planting plan will also be provided. Design concepts and architectural plans will be reviewed and we will provide design renderings at the next meeting. This is more of a brownstone type look. There is a slight encroachment, less than 2 feet and the applicants are addressing that. Mr. Osterhout stated the applicant will also do an enhancement to the. current bus stop. Several trees will need to be removed during construction, Street lights and street trees will be added per the City's standards. Mark Torpey, Chairman questioned where the additional parkin ill be provided, The applicant is providing 70% over gw pi providing the parking requirement. Discussion ensued regarding onsite parking, access and egress from the site, Mr, Osterhout provided information concerning parking and the proposed mitigations for access and egress on the site, City Engineer, Tim Wales spoke regarding the ownership of the- alley and the potential to take over the street by the City, PUBLIC HEARING: Mark Torpey, Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:03 RR Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if anyone in theaudience wished to comment on this applicafton. Kevin Door, 92 Ballston Avenue, He requested some buffer n:g from the parking area due to the proximity of his home,, Mark Torpey, Chairman stated -this will be further discussed a,t final site plan. C,i4 -of Saratoga Sp6pp- R a pning Sovci December` 6.. 2 '118 -Page 5 of 7 Mark Torpey, Chairman closed the public hearing at &07 P,M, SEORA REVIEW: Mark Torpey, Chairman stated the applicant has provided Part I of the SEAR EAF Long Form which is accurate and complete, This application has had correspondence from SH,PO and the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation with no archeological or historical resources noted, The Board reviewed Part 11 of SEQRA Long EAF. No large or important areas of concern were noted. SEQR DECISION: Jamin Totino, Vice Chairman stated that based upon the infb-oration provided by the applicant in Part I of the SEAR Short Environmental Assessment Form, and analysis of the information provided and presented 'in Part 11 of the SEOR Short Environmental Assessment Form, I make a motion for a: SEAR negative declaration since the project will not result in any large and impoftant impacts and, therefore, is one thaf,will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, Bob Bristol seconded the motion, Mark Torpey, Chairman seconded the motion, VOTE* '- Janet Casey, in favor, Jamin Totino, Vice Chairman, in favor; :Bob Bristol,, in favor; -Ruth Horton, n favor Todd Fabozzi, in favor-, Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor MOTION PASSES: 6WO Mark Torpey, Chairman stated we will now move onto: the Spe:cial Use Permit portion of the ap lication. We have some p work to do on the Site Plan, The following conditions and specific requirements for 18 multi -family townhomes aro as follows, -Lot line adjustment application is inferred with current Special Use. Permit application,, will be completed as a separate action. -CDTA bus shelter details shall be finalized prior to site plan review. -Buffer shall be provided along the northern prope I rtybounda; y , to be finalized at site plan review. r -Details related to any proposed use and maintenance of exisfihg alleyway will be finalized at site plan in consideration with the HOA. -Egress point from site shall be narrowed to discourage entrance at Ballston Avenue. -Water shall be looped through site to be reviewed in detail at: site plan review. -Porches are noted as a required element, details to be fi hafiz6d at site plan review, Todd Fabozzi made a motion in the matter of 96-116 Ballston i Avenue Townhomes permanent Special Use Permit application be approved with the conditions as noted by the: C:hair. Ruth Horton seconded the motion. Mark Torpey, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion, None heard*, VOTE* C4 of Saratoga springs -- Planning Bopp December 6, 2018 - Page 6 of 7 Janet Casey, In favor; Jamin Totino, Vice Chairman, in favor; Bob Bristol, in favor; Ruth Horton, in favor; Todd Fabozzi, in fever, Mark Torpey, Chairman, in favor I MOTION PASSES: 6.0 MOTION TO ADJOURN: There being no further business to discuss Mark Torpey, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:26 PN, APPROVED 2-7-19 Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary City of Saratoga Sprj�i,,Ip- — Planning Go rd December 6, 2018 - Page 7 of 7