TOWN OF SARATOGA
MINUTES - DRAFT
May 25, 2005 - 7:30 PM
Chairman Ian Murray called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Clerk Catherine Cicero called the roll. Chairman Ian Murray – present, Susan Cummings – present, Ralph Pascucci – present, Albert Baker – present, Paul Griffen – present, Robert Park – present, Laurie Griffen – absent, and alternate Patrick Hanehan – present. Chairman Ian Murray noted for the record that Laurie Griffen joined the Board at 7:59 p.m.
Approval of Minutes: All board members present had read the minutes of the April 27, 2005 meeting. A motion was made by Robert Park to accept the minutes of April 27, 2005 as written, and Susan Cummings seconded it. Chairman Ian Murray – aye, Susan Cummings – aye, Ralph Pascucci – aye, Albert Baker – aye, Robert Park – aye, Paul Griffin – aye. Carried 6– 0.
Order of Business:
Saratoga Builders, LLC Peter & Sue Grassi, Owners
8 Campion Lane 394 Burgoyne Rd.
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
S/B/L 168.-2- 24 & 25 Rural District
Dan Barber spoke to the Board regarding a conventional subdivision of 38 +/- acres into 13 building lots on a new road off of Burgoyne Road. The returning Applicant submitted additional information in the form of a topographic map of the property and wetland areas. Mr. Barber reported that will be meeting with John Connell of the US Army Corps of Engineers to review the proposal. He did not believe that the proposed road would be affected, but was not sure if lots 2 and 12 would be affected. Lot 13 does collect standing water. There is no drainage report yet.
Chairman Ian Murray had several comments and questions. First, he stated that the Applicant would be unable to move forward without a storm water protection plan. That plan is necessary for the Board to take lead agency action on the SEQR for the project and must be sent to the County as well. A separate storm water protection is necessary for some of the lots because of their elevation and because of the cuts and fills. He noted that, in some instances, more than one acre of land could be disturbed, which is the threshold for storm water management.
Chairman Murray also asked to see neighboring properties and the placement of their driveways, particularly on the southern part of the road. He asked whether a document search had ever occurred regarding an easement on the Naret property. Mr. Barber responded that no easement was ever found from any document search. Chairman Murray asked whether Mr. Barber would be willing to give an easement to the Narets from lot 13. Mr. Barber was uncertain about the final layout of the property which was dependent on the findings of the Army Corps of Engineers; however, he said that they would be willing to work with everyone involved in the process.
Chairman Murray next addressed the issue of the buffers surrounding the property. He referred to the Neilson Landing project, which had clearing limits imposed on it. Each lot would have to have a building envelope restricting cutting. There would be a 75’ no-cut buffer in the back, which is mandatory for conservation subdivisions; however, that might have to be reworked, again depending on the findings of the Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Barber said the map did have proposed buildable envelopes.
Chairman Murray pointed out the septic separation distances on the map, stating the separation distances from the proposed well-sites must be at least 200’, especially since the soil is comprised of grainy sand and the site slopes downhill. The perk could actually be too fast. He reminded Mr. Barber that this project would have DOH review. Also, Lot 13 did not have a well plotted on the submitted map.
He noted that there was nothing indicated on the map for drainage easements for the Town, with regard to the Stormwater Management Plan. If the road is eventually dedicated to the Town, its employees must have access to the property, mainly with regard to the proposed retention areas.
He requested that the proposal be presented to NiMo for review since some of the proposed drainage pipes and catch basins are shown crossing the utility’s easements.
Finally, Chairman Murray referred to the traffic study that had been submitted. It was not clear from the wording of the study whether sufficient sight distances would be met. The study also appeared to depend on the clearing of vegetation on private property in order to meet sight distance requirements.
He suggested that further traffic studies be undertaken. The current study was based on a design speed of 34 mph, while the document reflected an average speed of 48 mph, even though the road is posted at 40 mph.
A discussion followed on the placement of the new bridge and its effects on the proposed development.
Town Engineer Kenneth Martin noted that the plan layout and profiles are not in sequence and do not show the stations on the profiles. He said that both roads connecting to Burgoyne appear to slope towards the road and that the Neilson road was required to be banked away from the main road so that stormwater did not run out into it. Mr. Barber thought that affected only the northern entrance. Engineer Martin said that both should be pitched away from Burgoyne.
Mr. Barber clarified that the Board did not want to see any watershed into any existing swales on Burgoyne. Everything must be contained within the development property.
Sam Palazzole reported that as soon as they could meet with the Army Corps of Engineers regarding the wetlands, they would move forward with finalizing their plans.
Chairman Murray said that he would like to do another walk through the property with the Board, but that it was premature to make such arrangements at this time. That might possibly be accomplished at the next meeting.
Finally, Engineer Martin stated that not all the involved agencies had been listed on the SEQR form, an example being the Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Palozzole said that letters had gone out to the Federal agency regarding endangered species; however, that agency had not been listed on the form.
Engineer Martin stated that SHPO as well as DEC should also be listed. He explained what SHPO was.
Finally, Robert Park wanted to confirm that the development would result in $10 million worth of improvements to the property. Mr. Palazzole responded that the figure includes the infrastructure and 13 homes, and that it could potentially be even higher. RETURNING
Kenneth A. Yager, Applicant
124 County Rt 67
Schuylerville, NY 12871
S/B/L 194-2-24 Rural
Mr. Yager explained to the Board that his property lies on two sides of Route 67. He would like to divide the parcel into two lots along the roadway. Each side has 220’ of road frontage. Paul Griffen stated that one side is very low and wet, but has high ground behind it. Chairman Murray said that the owner would have to obtain a permit to cross the wetlands; however, Engineer Martin stated that he didn’t think that would be a problem because not much wetland would be disturbed. This would only be a problem on the east, or lower, side of the road.
Chairman Murray said that the Applicant meets both the frontage and area requirements to make the subdivision. He requested that the Applicant make his test pits, do a perc test, and submit a survey of the properties.
The Applicant said that the County, because of the road, has already subdivided the road and done a survey of both sides. He said that the property is residential, not agricultural.
Ralph Pascucci stated that the Board is really acknowledging that the road has already divided the property.
Chairman Murray instructed the Applicant to have the two deeds rewritten and sent to the Planning Clerk. The Board would then have them reviewed by Town Attorney William Reynolds. The deeds should include a notation regarding the septic system. Engineer Martin will provide the Applicant with the specific language necessary. The legal requirements might be met without having to make a determination on the subdivision. The Applicant would then submit his final plans to the County for filing. NO ACTION NECESSARY
Thomas Carringi, Applicant
1236B Rt 9P
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
S/B/L 193.06-1-46.11 Lake Commercial
Thomas Carringi addressed the Board, stating that he would like to erect a third building for storage on his 2.93 acre parcel. The resulting building coverage on the lot would be 17%.
Chairman Murray stated that, because the proposed building site had not been drawn to scale, it was difficult to make an accurate judgment of the proposal. He stated that Mr. Carringi would have to submit a depiction of how the final building would be situated on the property.
Mr. Carringi asked whether the proposed placement of the building was acceptable. He stated that when he had appeared before the Board previously, he had to keep changing the layout of the building on the property. He said he owns 7 acres right behind the property that he would be building on.
Chairman Murray said that the Board would first require that the proposed building be moved further back from the road. He said that Mr. Carringi would have to submit a stormwater management plan because there is more than one acre of land that would be disturbed, the nature of the land is bare, and Mr. Carringi already has existing buildings on the property. He said that Mr. Carringi also would have to enhance the deciduous tree line with evergreen trees for screening. A blacktop apron would be required at the entrance way even though the Applicant plans to use his existing driveway. Nonetheless, Chairman Murray said that the increased traffic along that roadway raises safety considerations. The Board has been requiring property owners to place a 40’ apron into the property for ingress and egress.
A discussion followed on whether Mr. Carringi’s current permit allows for outdoor storage. Mr. Carringi stated that he has had to do some outside storage lately because of the low water level of the lake, and that there have been several extenuating circumstances requiring temporary outside storage just in the past month. Regardless, Chairman Murray stated that the perimeters of the initial permit would have to be enforced.
A discussion followed regarding the placement of the building to the other buildings and the ability to access it. The proposed building will be a lot longer than the other two; however, the Board would not want it to jut out any farther than the other two. Ralph Pascucci noted that, because the Applicant owns the property directly behind the affected property, the rear setback might be waived. RETURNING
Marc & Rose Mikkelson, Applicant
142 Hanehan Rd.
Schuylerville, NY 12871
S/B/L 195-1-16.2 Rural
Mr. Mikkelson addressed the Board regarding the proposed subdivision of his property. He plans to square off his own property and sell the remaining triangular-shaped parcel. Mr. Mikkelson reported that the surveyor had set up a building envelope on the triangle that would provide sufficient room for a house, well, and septic. Mr. Mikkelson said that he could provide information regarding his own well and septic which would show that there was sufficient room to fit everything on the adjacent properties.
Engineer Martin stated that there could be a potential problem if the property is not 200’ wide where the house would be situated, in order to make all side setback requirements. Mr. Mikkelson stated that the lot goes 300’ back before it narrows to 200’, giving plenty of room on which to build.
Chairman Murray instructed the Applicant to submit a deep hole test, perc test, and survey to the Planning Clerk so the application could move forward. RETURNING
Albert Baker, Applicant
84 Sweet Road
Stillwater, NY 12170
S/B/L 194-1-17 Rural
Mr. Baker addressed the Board regarding his proposal to subdivide a 3-4 acre parcel from his 109 acre parcel for a family member. A discussion followed concerning the sight distances from the proposed driveway, which were very good from both directions. A second discussion followed regarding the necessary road frontage which, because of the layout of his land, would require Mr. Baker to subdivide 340’ along his property line. There was a possibility of asking the ZBA for a variance on the road frontage. Since the Planning Board meets before the ZBA in June, Mr. Baker decided to let the proposed 340’ line stand. Mr. Baker will return next month with the deep hole test, the perc test, and his survey. RETURNING
James & Nancy Ciccolella, Applicants Paul Murray, Owner
112 Brown Point Lane 105 Brown Point Lane
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
S/B/L 168.-3-60.1 Conservancy District
Applicants propose to subdivide the property of Paul Murray to convey .494+/- acres of his 2.6+/- acre parcel to the applicants, James and Nancy Ciccolella. The Board determined that this application should be treated as a lot line adjustment, and therefore would not need a public hearing. Previously, the Board had directed the Ciccolellas to provide a copy of a deed combining the original two properties. Nancy Ciccolella addressed the Board, also providing a letter from Mr. Paul Murray allowing her to speak on his behalf. Chairman Murray explained that the Board was acting strictly to enforce the zoning regulations, and if there were any issues among the neighbors, they might have to be settled in court. Ms. Ciccolella stated that all stipulations and restrictions from the prior two deeds were incorporated in the final deed. Chairman Murray stated that Town Attorney William Reynolds would review the document, and then a new map would be filed with the County. Ms. Ciccolella stated that she would discuss the situation with Armond Brown and his daughter to resolve any issues. NO ACTION NECESSARY
John Hall, Applicant
295 Fitch Road
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
S/B/L 193-1-5.1 Rural
Applicant proposes to build a second home on an undivided 62.95+/- acre parcel of land. The property straddles Fitch Road with the first home located on the west side of the road, and the proposed new home on the east side of the road. Chairman Murray explained that Mr. Hall’s situation predates the 1981 zoning regulations, therefore he is allowed to build up to 4 residential homes on his property without subdividing it. A brief discussion followed on the placement of the driveway, and the Applicant was instructed to see Town Zoning Officer Robert Hathaway for a building permit. NO ACTION NECESSARY
James M. DeGregory John & Josie DeGregory
31 ½ Hudson St. 378 Co. Rt. 68
South Glens Falls, NY 12803 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
S/B/L 168-2-59.1 Rural
Applicant proposes to build a second home on an undivided 224.83+/- acre parcel of land, which straddles County Rt. 68. After the Board reviewed Mr. DeGregory’s sketch plan, the Applicant was instructed to return with a deep hole test, perc test, and survey in order to move forward with the application. RETURNING
Special Use Permit
929 Rt 29E
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
S/B/L 156.-1-1 Rural Residential
Ralph Pascucci is seeking a Special Use Permit to utilize approximately a 400 ft. square piece of property in the northeast corner of his 40 acre parcel as a “green cemetery.” The proposed use of the property will enable Mr. Pascucci to preserve the integrity of the property, while permitting multiple uses. His current plans include a long drive that will loop through the affected property to give funeral processions access. No additional driveways, parking areas, or buildings are proposed at this time.
Town Engineer Kenneth Martin reported that he had spoken with NYS Dept. of Parks and Recreation concerning SHPO, the Cemetery Board, and the NY Dept. of State. Since the Applicant needs only a certification from the State, rather than a license, the State’s role is advisory only, and the local planning board becomes the lead agency. Mr. Pascucci’s property has been designated a sensitive area for artifacts, so Mr. Martin reviewed the potential for disturbance of the land. He determined that only the road, which would remove a layer of topsoil, and the gravesites, would create such a potential disturbance. No permanent structures are planned. Therefore, Mr. Martin recommended that the short form SEQR would be sufficient for review by the Board. The Board then went through the short form SEQR item by item and deemed that the review was complete. Laurie Griffen made a motion, seconded by Robert Park, to approve the short form SEQR review. Chairman Ian Murray – aye, Susan Cummings – aye, Albert Baker – aye, Robert Park – aye, Laurie Griffen – aye, and Paul Griffen—aye. Carried 6-0.
Chairman Murray then suggested that the special use permit should be conditioned on Mr. Pascucci obtaining certification from New York State; that he obtain the necessary permits for road cuts from DOT; that he include a 40’ apron for ingress and egress from the site; and, that Mr. Pascucci subdivide the cemetery parcel from the rest of his property. Laurie Griffin made a motion, seconded by Robert Park, to grant the Special Use Permit with the conditions specified by Chairman Ian Murray, and to review the permit in one year to check on Mr. Pascucci’s progress. Chairman Ian Murray – aye, Susan Cummings – aye, Albert Baker – aye, Robert Park – aye, Laurie Griffen – aye, and Paul Griffen—aye. Carried 6-0.
Pember Dupras, Applicant Michael & Shawna Bannon, Owners
175 Louden Road 366 Puritan Road
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Gansevoort, NY 12831
S/B/L 156-1-38.32 Rural Residential
Applicant is seeking a special use permit to move his business, Rain or Shine Tent Co., Inc., to a new location on property located 600’ west of Beaver Street on the south side of Rt 29 because he has outgrown the existing location at 1061 Rt 29 in Grangerville. The proposed parcel consists of 5.44+/-acres.
The Board noted that Mr. Dupras does not have a Special Use Permit at his current location.
Mr. Dupras explained his plans to the Board, noting that he has provided for a driveway off Rt. 29, keeping his driveway beside that of his neighbor. He proposes to set his building back far enough on the property so that his neighbor on the east will not see it.
Chairman Murray directed the Applicant to perform a storm water management plan as soon as possible, noting that he might be at risk now for violations. He then explained the mandates of SHPO. Town Engineer Kenneth Martin stated that DEC and DOH might also be involved in this project.
Chairman Murray stated that Applicant would have to submit a survey with elevation contours for the next meeting. The map should plot the contours of the creek and floodplain as well.
A discussion followed regarding proposed handicap parking, which is a state requirement, lights, signage, and the septic area. The Board had questions concerning any noise problems and Mr. Dupras’ hours of operation. Mr. Dupras responded that his employees would rarely be there outside of normal business hours and that there is little noise related to his type of business. Mr. Dupras has several large trucks that contain inventory. He said that all these trucks are registered and would be parked on his property.
Chairman Murray also had questions related to proposed landscaping and screening. Mr. Dupras will submit a rendering of the proposed building and landscaping.
Chairman Murray concluded that the application could move forward to the public hearing stage at the next meeting; then finalize the SEQR later in order to provide the 30 day review period for the lead agency. RETURNING
Old Business: Referring to the planned codification of Town regulations, Paul Griffen reported that the laws would have to be written before the contracted editor can deal with them. He had no new information to report.
New Business: Robert Park requested that Applicants be required to identify adjacent roads on their applications and point out where any buildings would be situated. Town Engineer Kenneth Martin noted that most Towns require a location map. A comment was made that it is not clear in the regulations whether Applicants are required to notify landowners 500’ from the proposed building site, or 500’ from the property line.
The next meeting is scheduled for June 22, 2005.
A motion to adjourn was made at 9:39 p.m. by Paul Griffen and seconded by Ralph Pascucci. Chairman Ian Murray – aye, Susan Cummings – aye, Ralph Pascucci – aye, Albert Baker – aye, Robert Park – aye, Laurie Griffen – aye, and Paul Griffen—aye. Carried 7-0.
Catherine E. Cicero
Return to home page