Save Report: October 3, 2017 Planning Board Meeting

There were 4 matters on the PB agenda.

PB members Austin and Milstein were not in attendance. PB member Heider recused himself from the PB review for the Huntington Medical Office Concept Acceptance . Supervisor Mahan and Town Board members Carey, Murphy and Rosano, and Building Department Paul Mahan Jr., Supervisor candidate Frank Mauriello and Town Board candidate Mark Mitchell were also in attendance.

Huntington Medical Office
123 Everett Road
Applicant BBL

Concept approval granted with 4 votes in favor; Heider recused himself. Brad Grant of Barton and LoGuidice provided the town designated engineer (TDE) review comments. Mr. Grant read extensively from written comments which he provided for this project. A copy of these comments had already been transmitted to the applicant and were in the PB members packets. However, written comments were not available for the public to review and follow along with during the TDE’s presentation. This project has also been referred to the Albany County Planning Department and they provided comments pertaining to the elimination of a second access road to Everett Road. The applicant is seeking several land use code waivers including parking and building set backs. Incentive zoning fees are also required as the project does not meet the 35% green space requirements. This office building will be built adjacent to an existing office building occupied by Ortho NY. Chairman Stuto raised a question regarding the building’s architecture as it differs from the Ortho NY building. The PB members stated that they really didn’t have any “architectural” expertise but the building looks nice. (It should be noted that the 2005 Comp Plan recommended that the Town create an architectural review board. This board has never been created.) The PB tasked the TDE with providing further analysis of the need for a secondary access point. The applicant’s representatives claimed that they would prefer the second access point as it will be needed by an EMT service which will occupy this building. The PB also asked the TDE to determine whether there are any endangered species on site (ie northern long-ear bat concerns). There was discussion about retaining mature trees located on the back of the site which serve to screen the property from Traditional Lane neighbors. Chairman Stuto noted that these neighbors have not had an opportunity to weigh in on this project as they were not noticed about tonight’s sketch plan review.

Giovanone office
37 Sparrowbush Road
Giovanone applicant

Extension of Final site plan approval (2009) granted, 5 votes in favor. Applicant’s representative explained that Mr. Giovanone has been trying to sell the property with the approval since last year’s PB final approval extension. Two contracts have fallen through. He is now speaking with the Upstate Vet Clinic which owns a facility adjacent to the property. Joe LaCivita mentioned that the Army Corps of Engineers extended its final approval until 2018.

The Summit at  Forts Ferry
33 and 45 Forts Ferry Road
Sketch Plan Review
Applicant Frank Nigro

Joe Grasso CHA TDE 3 story 47,000 square foot office building and 3 story 62 unit apartment building. Chairman Stuto began this agenda item by advising that no public comments were going to be allowed as it is a sketch plan and it is only for the PB members and the TDE to ask questions of the applicant. Members of the West Latham Neighborhood Association and their officers were in attendance, as well as SAVE. The applicant’s consultant VHB, Wendy Holsberger traffic engineer and attorney MaryBeth Slevin all addressed the PB. Frank Nigro, the applicant, was also present and addressed the PB from time to time. There were no introductory remarks from the PEDD director. Joe Grasso of Clough Harbor is the project’s town designated engineer. He advised the PB that he had an opportunity to attend the DCC meeting and review the project but he has not made any written comments. VHB began the presentation by pointing out that the current project proposal is “zoning compliant” and so there are no waivers necessary. VHB reviewed the locations for the two buildings, the two access points, location of stormwater retention basins, sidewalk to be constructed from the site to Omega Terrace, and a utility easement off of Catalina Drive. VHB also clarified that the site was field surveyed and the overall site acreage is confirmed to be greater than the tax assessment information (greater than 13 acres). Attorney MaryBeth Slevin advised the Board that the applicant had the neighborhood association’s most recent correspondence and wished to clarify that they in no way meant to mislead the Town officials that the neighborhood was in agreement with their plans. It was their impression, however, of the neighborhood’s position that they conveyed to the Town. Ms Holsberger’s traffic presentation centered on AM and PM trips (85 am and 87 pm) which she stated did not trigger further off-site analysis per DOT guidelines. She further noted that the former Summit Senior proposal was found to generate only 12 am and 17 pm trips. She stated that there were good levels for site driveway analysis and she found only a 15 second delay for traffic movement out of the 1 driveway access point. She stated that a left turn lane is therefore not needed per AASHTO standards. Joe Grasso clearly spent time reviewing this latest project iteration. He was also the TDE for the prior Summit Senior Living proposal.

TDE Grasso read extensively from his notes and focused on the following:
1. Neighborhood Character. TDE stated that the proposal was of a different scale and character for the Forts Ferry Road Neighborhood. This land use would be inconsistent with the land uses currently out there. A story office building right on the road is very inconsistent. The scale of the apartment building was very inconsistent with the CHP office building in the vicinity. It will be able to be seen from the road so it will also have an aesthetic impact. He asked the applicant whether he would consider shifting the office building further back into the site so there would be greater separation from the road. The PB and TDE asked the applicant to continue to investigate alternate site layouts. PB Chair Stuto noted that the applicant should not be put off by the current town regulations which promote the location of office buildings closer to roadways, as the PB has granted waivers in the past for deviations from this requirement. Shamlian advised that he did not like the location of the office building on Forts Ferry Road, as it looks like a “wall.” PB Members Mion and Heider did not like the location of the office building 20 feet from the street. He called the apartment building in the back “beautiful”. PB Member Dalton also advised that she and PB member Mion visited the Summit community in Saratoga and loved what they saw. She believes that this type of senior housing should be in Colonie. PB Stuto also stated “just because the zoning allows not sure this is a right to develop if the project cannot mitigate neighborhood impacts.”

2. Traffic TDE Grasso noted that while the “guidelines” quoted by Ms. Holsberger may hold true, there are going to be impacts felt by the neighborhood from the increased traffic generated by this project. He noted that he has not had an opportunity to review the applicant’s traffic engineering report. He will need to look at the character of Forts Ferry road. He questioned the need for 2 access drives. He noted that raising the traffic levels by 18% without a significant delay could be considered significant volume on the Forts Ferry character of the road. TDE Grasso further pointed out that even though this project site is outside the Airport Area GEIS study area, this project “is going to impact the study area and will need to evaluate the project impacts on Airport Area transportation projects.” He believes that there may need to be some form of mitigation fee payment. At this point PEDD director LaCivita suggested that the town utilize the CDTC transportation model to input the traffic information to see what fees would be appropriate. TDE Grasso also noted that he needs more information regarding site distance for the access points. He suggested the applicant line up the access with the CHP access point for traffic access management. PB Member Dalton wanted additional traffic information for midday, given the project’s close distance to the Forts Ferry elementary school. PB member Dalton further advised that she lives very near by and she has observed that there are lunch time delays and that from 3pm onwards there is at least an hour and a half of intersection backups at Wade Road and Route 7. It is her experience that people have been utilizing the adjacent neighborhoods to cut through from Route 7 to Forts Ferry Road to travel to the Target Plaza and Sparrowbush Road. She wants a comprehensive examination of the traffic impacts in that area of town. Chairman Stuto also remarked that there was traffic all day long including lunch time at the Route 7 Wade Road intersection. The applicant’s traffic engineer disputed the need for a mid day traffic analysis; in her professional experience this mid day analysis has never been done. She continued to emphasize that she is utilizing DOT guidelines for her transportation analysis. TDE Grasso also spoke to bus transit impacts and noted that there is no bus stop currently on Forts Ferry Road.

3. Green Space TDE Grasso asked the applicant to consider increasing the vegetative buffer area. His analysis, however, still looked only at a 100 foot buffer. He noted that during certain times of the year, the adjacent neighborhood may be able to see through this buffer. He also suggested that the garages may be moved to add to the buffered feel. PB Stuto asked whether the applicant would be willing to bank parking spaces or utilize the office building parking spaces to allow for more green space. He did not want to have “over parking” at the site. Frank Nigro stated that they needed 2 parking spaces per apartment unit to account for special day time events planned for the apartment complex. TDE Grasso also pointed out that the removal of mature trees and vegetation closer to Forts Ferry Road will have a significant visual impact for the neighborhood. The Catalina utility connection should minimize tree removal via a zigzag approach or directional drill. TDE Grasso requested that the applicant examine and understand what trees on the property are significant and should be preserved. PB Member Shamlian also wanted a more detailed landscape plan.

4. Sidewalks TDE Grasso noted that the limited sidewalk installation proposal offered by the applicant doesn’t go far enough; they need to extend the sidewalks at least beyond the site towards the Target Plaza. PB Member Dalton concurred and noted that Summit residents would want to walk to neighboring destinations such as Target, the medical offices, and Stewart’s. At the conclusion, PB Chairman Stuto stated that TDE Grasso made excellent points, the applicant should continue to work with Joe Grasso and consider the scale of the buildings and the traffic impacts. Rami edevelopment 1169 Central Avenue Waiver request Mixed use office building with 2 unit apartment No Action taken Mike Tengeler PEDD representative Applicant received a ZBA variance to allow removal of a 2 family home and replacement with a restaurant with upstairs apartments. The board took no action as there were issues with site access, driveways, and NYSDOT curb cut locations. PB Member Heider noted that the location of one of the curb cuts did not make any sense. Chairman Stuto suggested that there be a TDE to review the site access issues. Per Town Law, the applicant must pay for the TDE.