Times Union editorializes on ethics issue raised by SAVE Colonie

Today's Times Union editorial mentions the recent concerns raised by SAVE Colonie regarding the proposed appointment of a local engineer to the Town of Colonie planning board. Our letter to the supervisor and town board called attention to the ethical concerns his appointment would raise. As a consequence of our work, Mr Bianchini withdrew.

Let's be clear. We do not know this planning board candidate, and by all reports he is an excellent engineer and a smart fellow. It is his connection to companies doing business before the town that rings unpleasantly. Divided loyalty, the same issue for Town Designated Engineers, who represent the planning department today - reviewing Builder A's project, and tomorrow represent Builder B - appearing on his behalf before the planning department. Divided loyalty is ethically problematic. It must end.

Susan W
for SAVE Colonie

Linked article: What makes a city a good place to get old?

Thanks to our members, we have a very active Facebook page that is often a great spot for posting articles of interest related to planning, smart growth, open space conservation and other issues important to SAVE Colonie.

Every once in a while we come across a blog, article our journal that we think is very good, and we want to start using our blog to highlight these works so that they are archived here on our website also where they may be easier to find.

Below is a fine piece on planning for communities so that they are more friendly for “aging in place.” There is such a glut of “senior” construction taking place and proposed in Colonie now, this article is especially relevant to the discussion about planning in our town.

Happy reading:

https://www.mnn.com/health/healthy-spaces/blogs/how-do-we-create-places-age-well

SAVE Report: December 4, 2018 Planning Board Meeting

SAVE Colonie
Planning Board Meeting Notes
December 4, 2018

This is an unofficial description for use of SAVE members.  When it is ready, the town posts a transcript of planning board meetings on the PEDD site.  Meanwhile, here’s what went on: 

Prior to the meeting, Chairman Stuto announced that Kathleen Dalton would be leaving the Planning Board after many years. He thanked her and wished her well. She stated that she wanted to spend time with her family. Joe LaCivita reminded all that there would be a Comprehensive Plan meeting next week (Dec 13th, 6 PM). All members were present except Craig Shamlian. 

1. Starbucks on Wolf Road (Sketch) This ‘redevelopment’ (TDE) project is planned for the part of Colonie Center parking lot closest to Central Avenue. A number of waivers will be needed but the most interest surrounded the desire to decrease the size of the parking spaces in the Starbucks ‘lot’ from 9 to 8.5 feet. It was unpopular with most board members. Heider was concerned with the piles of snow that will surround the building and the safety issues of people coming from the neighboring bus stop to the restaurant. There is no direct access proposed to the mall road; rather, access will be through the parking lot. They would actually be increasing green space by installing landscaping where there is only asphalt now. Stuto thought the attorney should recommend whether there is a need for an ODA since there is no direct access to the street. He summarized the PB reaction by saying ‘It’s a good project, but we have some concerns.’

2. Cold Spring (Foeglti Farms) (Sketch) 499-507 Albany Shaker Road. LaCivita noted that this is a 39 lot proposal as opposed to the 80 lot PDD previously submitted to the PB for this same property, and involves a new developer. There is no PDD request for this one. Frank Barbera is the developer and he was in attendance. Hershberg is the engineering firm. They have not updated the traffic study yet, waiting for the A/S traffic study to be completed (I thought that it had been.) They claim that the peak pm will be 32 vehicles/hr. Hershberg claimed that about 2/3 of the lots will be in the field portion, the rest in the section currently wooded. He said that trees will be cleared in the back but that Frank Barbera wants to keep as many as possible. He said that a neighbor requested that they remove as many dead and dying trees on the property as possible and stated that they would comply with that, with Town approval. Barbera spoke about the types of homes and said that homes & lots will be smaller than usual, on .2 to .35 acres, similar to Meadowdale. He said that smaller lots mean less maintenance, and that’s what people want. TDE Skip Francis from B&L said that positives about the proposal include: 39 rather than 80 lots, and that they are clustered to avoid the environmentally sensitive areas. Cons include the stormwater management area in the front may need to be fenced which may be unattractive, and no sidewalks are proposed. Something like an HOA will be set up to maintain the property. Heider pointed out that there is lots of concern about walkers on A/S. All acknowledged that the big issue will be left turns out of the development onto A/S, particularly the pm peak. Hershberg actually suggested that people will buy the homes knowing the traffic situation and may just turn right and navigate back using another means. Barbera has already reserved a location for a public meeting for neighbors on January 16. He also said that he will be meeting with SAVE Colonie and representatives of Green Meadows Association. Even though it was sketch review with no vote, Stuto allowed Patrick Quinn to speak. Quinn had walked the property and took issue with Hershberg’s statement that less than half the site is wooded. Although he is pleased to see the density drop he stated that the narrow no cut buffer zone is a problem. Hundreds of the trees are at least 2 feet in diameter (he noted the 3 inch reg) and said that the 25 foot buffer proposed by the project is not adequate. He suggested a revision to a 50’ buffer, 100’ on the east side and that the area toward the bottom, no trees be cut. He handed out another plan to the PB with that buffer zone and said if some of the project was shifted toward the conservation area more trees could be saved. They seemed receptive to this idea, so we’ll see. 

3. Serio Subdivision on Dunsbach Ferry Rd. Board Update. This is a revision to a submission made last summer. The project is being shifted slightly and the lots are smaller, except one where Serio may live. This would help to preserve the wooded area. Because there are substandard lots (smallest is 12,000 rather than 18,000 sq ft) it is a conservation subdivision. The wooded area will be a deed restricted, no cut buffer. 

4. Shelter Cove (Stuto apparently recused himself by leaving the room, citing no reason for the recusal.) 45 Nantucket Street. Requested the PB recommend to the TB that a shorter setback from the road be allowed for one property. Under the PDD, front setback should be 15 ft and side 5 ft. This one home being built on the corner of Nantucket and Cove can’t accommodate the 15 ft due to the fact that the road is not straight. They want the one to be 12 ft from the street. This is an internal, private road. JLC supports, PB voted to send to the TB. 

Thanks to all who contributed to this report and all who care enough about our town to participate in these meetings.

SAVE Report: November 27, 2018 Planning Board Meeting

Members present: Dalton, Mion, Austin, Stuto, Heider, Shamlian, Milstein, PB Attorney Marinelli
Town : PEDD LaCivita, Town Bd members Paul Rosano & Chris Carey, Town Attny  Magguilli

This is an unofficial rendition of what occurred during and reactions to this planning board meeting, with an attempt to put these matters in context for SAVE members.  It  reflects only the personal views and observations of members.  Note that the Planning Board meeting minutes are posted on the PEDD’s site, and are now up to date through September.  

7:00 PM     J Luke Office  Owner: J Luke Construction Co. LLC (Hodorowski); 767 Troy Schenectady Road  
Sketch Plan 
3 story 50,000 sq foot office with parking
Luigi Palleschi ABD Engineering, Victor Caponera Attorney                         
TDE: Joe Grasso,  Clough Harbour.

A 3 story 50,000 square foot office building is proposed to consolidate the Northwestern Mutual Insurance Company offices and provide for future growth. This will be a single tenant use. The applicant has an option to purchase a home at 5 Whitney for vehicle access. Approximately 110 employees and 180 parking spots generating 78 more vehicles per hour. Green space waivers will be required. The applicant received a ZBA variance November 2018.  Board comments addressed concerns with overparking, access to Route 7 via the neighborhoods, impact to adjacent residential properties and project too large for the lot size.  Applicant did not discount the possibility of another tenant occupying the property in the future if Northwestern Mutual Insurance relocates. Board reminded the applicant that the PB had concerns with a prior Crisafulli medical office building project for the site. The Crisafulli project was subsequently withdrawn. No neighbors spoke.
                  
7:10 PM    Mixed Use Retail/Residential  Twelve Acre Realty/ Andy Brenner owner; 922 Troy Schenectady Road Sketch Plan 
4,100 sq ft 2 story 8 unit apartment building with parking 
Luigi Palleschi ABD Engineering
TDE: Joe Grasso, Clough Harbour  TDE LETTER

The applicant owns 922 Troy Schenectady Road where the Aesthetic Science institute is located. According to the applicant, their business has been very successful and so needs more parking spaces. They purchased the adjoining former APEX parcel at 928 Troy Schenectady Road and will be purchasing a small parcel from Grassland.  Shaker Creek and federally regulated wetlands are located on site. Approximately 1/10 acre of federal wetlands disturbance is proposed. The new building will have 8 apartments targeted to millenials and students.  DCC met on September 26, 2018.  The Town TDE noted the following concerns: access to Troy Schenectady Road, 2 curb cuts for a small parcel; no amenities (including school bus stop) for apartment tenants; difficult slopes on site; wetland impacts and the need for applicant to receive NYSDOT curb cut approval.  Chairman Stuto noted that the board is concerned with projects which attempt to locate apartments next to commercial offices. He referenced the Rosetti project on New Karner Rd as an example. Board members Shamlian, Milstein and Dalton stated that they were not in favor of this concept. Austin wondered aloud why the applicant didn’t assemble these parcels at the time of the Aesthetic Institute application. Board members also noted that the Aesthetic Science Institute site required a lot of effort to fit the project into such a small parcel. Waivers will be required for front yard parking, façade and green space.         

7:20 PM   Stewart's Shop 19 Fuller Road;  Stewart’s Corp, owner        
Final Site Plan Approval 
3,726 square foot mini market with 3 gas pumps.
Chris Potter Stewarts Corporation, Paul Goldman Attorney 
TDE: Joe Grasso, Clough Harbour  TDE letter 11/22/18 not available

PEDD Director Lacivita provided the project review history. Chris Potter of Stewarts outlined changes to the project since the last board meeting. Petroleum storage tank was moved from 40 feet to 80 feet from the nearby residential property; landscaping plan modified to provide a 8 foot vinyl fence with arborvitae to screen Catherine Road neighbors; lighting plan provided with no lights on residences, 16-21 parking spaced were banked; hours of operation changed to 4:30 am to 10 pm. Deliveries will be restricted to 7 am to 7 pm. Fuel truck deliveries will occur 3 times per week. Chris Potter also noted that a truck circulation demonstration was conducted at the old Kmart on Route 2 which showed that delivery trucks will be able to access thru the property.  Attorney Paul Goldman argued that the SEQRA designation should be Type 2 as the size of the project is under 4,000 square feet. He also stated that any challenge to the ZBA area variance decision was time barred. He further argued that the FHA regulation does not preclude insurance for the neighboring properties. 

TDE Grasso referenced his November 22, 2018 TDE letter which had 16 comment items. Not all of these comment items were addressed by TDE Grasso. The TDE noted that he was pleased with the landscaping plan, he noted that the vehicle access to the site was acceptable; he liked the new location for the fuel tank; Albany County DPW will need to approve any curb cuts and they have recommended that there be two curb cuts one which will utilize Catherine Street. He thought the 8 foot vinyl fence can be imposing. He concurred with the Type II SEQRA designation.

Several neighbors spoke in opposition to the proposal. They reiterated their concern with the FHA regulations which do not allow FHA insured loans to be issued for parcels within 300 feet of an underground fuel storage tank. They disagreed with Attorney Paul Goldman’s interpretation of the FHA regulation and asked the board to take into account the economic hardship the gas station will cause to the neighboring homeowners.  One resident asked how the banked parking spaces will be handled- will Stewart’s be required to come back before the PB to install the parking spaces. There was some discussion between Chairman Stuto, TDE and PB Counsel Marinelli about how this issue should be addressed. Based upon their discussions, it did not appear that there was a clear PB policy on this issue. They finally settled on conditioning the final site plan approval to require Stewart’s to come back to the PB to utilize the banked parking spaces.  One resident asked the Board to consider why the neighbors did not receive required notice of the ZBA variance hearing. A letter signed by 36 neighbors opposing the project and the lack of  ZBA notice was read into the record. There was back and forth discussions between the PB, PB Counsel and the resident about the ZBA notice. PB members and counsel took the position that the ZBA variance notice was of no concern to the PB.  Three town residents spoke in favor of the new Stewart’s project, citing the need to improve the neighborhood with a good safe neighborhood business. Town Attorney Magguilli spoke on behalf of the “Town”. He stated that the applicant and the PB has worked to minimize impacts to the neighborhood so that the project fit in the neighborhood. Nevertheless, he said the “Town” has some concern about impact of the intensity of the use on the neighborhood, 3 gas pumps was too much, difficulty with enforcement of all the project conditions. PB Member Milstein asked Stewart’s to consider no gas pumps. PEDD Director LaCivita confirmed that Stewart’s has always wanted a gas station and mini market project at this site. Member Austin pointed out that there are already 3 other gas stations in the neighborhood, implying that this should not be objectionable to residents. Board member Dalton counseled the residents and stated that she saw compelling arguments on both sides but there are problems with the existing situation in the neighborhood and the neighbors have not proven that the gas station is unsafe. 
Final Site Plan Approved 4-3 vote.

7:45 PM   Lecce office/retail owner Lecce Real Estate LLC; 1209 Troy Schenectady Road
3 story 17,949 sq foot office building 80 parking spaces
MJ Engineering for the Applicant
Louis Lecce and Shawn Mahar for the applicant, TDE:   Chuck Voss Barton and LoGuidice 
Application for Final Site Plan Approval

PEDD Director LaCivita stated that the project is in the Airport Area GEIS study area. Project will be required to pay $64,830 in mitigation fees (note- GEIS mitigation fee worksheets have not been updated since 2015). 

The project narrative stated that the applicant is proposing office retail. The project narrative uploaded onto the PEDD website was missing two attachments-A Town of Niskayuna project comment letter and a NYSPHP letter. 

The applicant advised that there is currently no tenant so the type of retail use cannot be considered by the Board. Green space will be 35.2%; however, a recorded green space permanent easement on this property was not taken into account when calculating the green space, as this green space was already credited to the adjacent Rite Aid development. The project plans did not provide a final architectural rendering. PB member Milstein asked whether the 3 story building was consistent with the surrounding office buildings. Mr. Lecce stated that it was as there was a new 3 story building directly across Route 7 (note this building is actually 2 stories). The Board asked the applicant why there was not full access from the back of the property to Rosendale Road and via the Bette office park. They believed that a restricted access as a right out only access was not practicable. During this questioning, the applicant and PEDD Director LaCivita did not disclose that the Town of Niskayuna requested a right only rear access and the reason for the Town of Niskayuna request. During public comment, a town resident advised the Board that the Town of Niskayuna sent comments to the TOC via the NYS General Municipal Law.  Restricted access was based upon the Town of Niskayuna’s concern with the significant traffic issues at the intersection of Route 7 and Rosendale Road. The town resident pointed out that the Town of  Niskayuna had requested Lecce to conduct a traffic study as part of their review of his now withdrawn apartment complex project on another parcel at the rear of the 1209 Troy Schenectady Road parcel. There was confusion among the Board members, Chairman and Counsel regarding whether the Town of Colonie was required to adhere to the Town of Niskayuna's traffic review pursuant to the NYS General Municipal Law. A separate vote was then taken of the PB members and all voted in favor of allowing the left turn out. (!!!!)
 
The Lecce retail/office project received final site plan approval, with Board member Milstein opposed.

8:00 pm   Cumberland Farms  owner Cumberland Farms Inc. 1893 Central Avenue 
5,275 sq foot convenience store with 6 gas pumps 
Bohler Engineering for the Applicant
TDE:   Chuck Voss Barton and LoGuidice 
Application for Final Site Plan Approval
Approved. 
SAVE members were not present for this agenda item.   

SAVE Report: Colonie Planning Board October 30, 2018 meeting

(What follows is not an official report on the planning board meeting, but rather impressions of
what took place at this public meeting. We encourage everyone to read the transcript when it
comes out. The times listed are when the discussions of each project commenced, not the
agenda’s times. There were six major projects reviewed and the meeting did not end until after
10 PM, again.)

7:00 PM
Rosetti Apartment Complex - Richard Rosetti Sr., Owner; 54 Vly Road
Application for Concept Acceptance
2 Two story 8 unit buildings and 1 Duplex
TDE: Chuck Voss, Barton & Loguidice (TDE letter 9/6/18)

There was much discussion concerning lack of amenities for prospective residents, need for
waiver of road frontage requirement, lack of appropriate landscape screening, excessive density, apparent counting of green space on other Rosetti group owned parcels to satisfy this parcel’s green space requirements, and the question of whether contiguous parcels (with apparently different listed owners ***) have actually been legally merged.

Six neighbors spoke in opposition: unsavory history with Rosetti developments; question about
validity of the green space estimate since they are apparently utilizing the already developed
office park parcels’ square footage toward that calculation; neighbors requested the Board to
consider only the instant 1.38 acre parcel’s green space requirement and its density of
development; challenges to proposed Vly Rd emergency access: why not another New Karner
access from this property for emergency use?

Board comments include: lack of amenities for apt residents (why was dumpster located in the
Office parcel and a patio located across a parking lot and closer to the Office buildings); Vly Rd access concern for future and how property owned by Rosetti would be developed, perhaps in future allowing the proposed apartments to obtain access via busy Vly road; duplex should go & use that space instead for amenities; move dumpster away from neighbors and consider an emergency access directly onto New Karner Road. No mention of any recommendations of the Albany County Planning Commission. Developer’s rep stated they’d come back with issues addressed.

What do you think about how the town is dealing with these Rosetti projects? We have
more information if you are interested in this project. Be in touch.
Determination: Tabled

8:00 PM
Entertainment Complex - Keith Ferraro, owner; 941 Albany Shaker Road
Application for Concept Acceptance
26,250 sq.ft. indoor amusement building w/ 10,000 sq.ft. outdoor use
TDE: Chuck Voss, Barton & Loguidice TDE letter 8/3/18

No neighbors spoke. Board in favor. Questions about architectural enhancements and adequacy of parking for sports complex. (Too bad Colonie has no design/architectural expert.)
Determination: Approved

8:30 PM
Ridgeview Meadows Subdivision – Benjamin Avery, owner; 1126 Loudon Road
Sketch Plan review
23 lot subdivision, formerly a Conservation subdivision with commercial/retail
component and access to Rt. 9
TDE: Chuck Voss, Barton & Loguidice, no TDE letter issued yet

Twenty-one houses with 2 lots reserved for stormwater etc. TDE will be looking at wetlands,
interconnection with neighboring subdivision, now that there is no planned access to Rt 9.
Neighbors spoke about loss of wildlife habitat, loss of mature buffering trees in southern-most
lot.

Board: Emergency access needed; suggested eliminating southern-most house to save mature
buffering trees.

8:45 PM
Tasaddaq Mixed Use – Muhammad Tasaddaq, owner; 363 Troy Schenectady Road
Sketch Plan Review
One story retail/office building and a two story 10 unit apartment building
TDE: Joe Grasso, CHA Companies
Engineer’s comments: Developer must show trees on site at Concept Review; save trees to
separate front bldgs from rear buildings; Add amenities for apt. residents including connections to Rt 7 bus stop, landscape islands to break up large parking area.

9:00 PM
Stewart’s Shop – Stewart’s Shop Corp, owner; 406 Albany Shaker Road
Board Update
3,336 sq.ft. convenience store & 6 pump fuel canopy
TDE: Joe Grasso, CHA
Engineer’s comments: Project improved in response to Bd comments and Albany-Shaker Rd
corridor study report, including smaller store footprint, pushing both site entrances further from intersection, dropping one fueling station (8 pumps to 6 pumps). Noted Corridor Study proposal to reconfigure Everett/Albany Shaker intersection to eliminate second westbound lane and add eastbound turn lane into Crisafulli complex. Stewart’s could contribute to cost (we will see…) as there is no GEIS for this area and consequently no established mitigation fees. About ten neighbors in attendance were not invited to speak, even though we had all waited till 9:30 PM!! Sad.

9:30 PM
Lanthier’s Village PDD – Charles Rosenstein, owner; 4 & 6 Dunsbach Ferry Road
Sketch Plan review
Two 4-5-story senior and market rate apartment complexes with a total of 208 units. Senior and non-senior eligible housing. 7,262 sf clubhouse and six garage structures
TDE: Joe Grasso, CHA Companies (TDE letter not provided)

Engineer’s comments: Only one access point now proposed utilizing the Century Hill Office
Park (no mention of NYS Building Code access requirements and whether the Albany County
Planning Commission has reviewed this project). Discussed the viability of eliminating the
Dunsbach Ferry Road emergency access point. Fire Services, however, recommended that the
emergency access should include Dunsbach Ferry Road. May also need to redesign layout for
emergency turnaround. Boght Road GEIS fees apply and Dunsbach Ferry Road Route 9
intersection identified as problem intersection. Will need a detailed traffic study regarding the
proposed development’s impacts to the Century Hill and Dunsbach Road intersections. TDE
pointed out that Town Board will need to review the public benefit amenities proposed. The
project narrative currently states that the applicant wishes to provide a monetary contribution to any intersection improvements at Dunsbach and Route 9, presumably as the public benefit
required for a PDD (with its increased density).

There were also some side comments that a local park benefit may also be proposed. The Century Hill Office park owners submitted a comment letter to the Town. The TDE read from the letter but this letter was not made available to the
public. Board Member Austin questioned why the development was not going to be exclusively
for Seniors. He further pointed out that if the market rate apartments were rented to families this could have a great impact on the local schools as they are “bursting from the seams” right now. Board member Shamlian stated that the town cannot guarantee that the apartments are rented to 55 and over residents. Applicant’s consultant countered that non-residential development would allow a 180,000 square foot office building. Residential zoning would only allow 48 residential units. 168 units are being proposed for the PDD which results in a 120 unit density “bonus.”

Board members also discussed how the monolithic look of the apartment buildings was not
desirable and suggested that the long buildings be shortened as there are no hotels in the Town at these dimensions. This point was disputed by the applicant’s consultant.
(Members are invited to check out the drawings for these enormous tall complexes, which will
significantly add to the terrible traffic conditions on Rt 9 at the northern end of the town. Perhaps the town will reject this PDD with its 120 unit “density bonus” and go with the currently allowed 48 single family residences on this parcel.)

SAVE Report: Colonie Planning Board October 16, 2018

This report is based upon personal evaluations and opinions by audience members at a public meeting, what was said, what transpired. Each person is invited to attend Planning Board and other public meetings and draw their own conclusions.  

All told, this meeting considered five major projects for a total of 637 new residential units, and a large car wash with 22 outdoor vacuum stations.  The meeting ended at about 11:30 PM.  We thank all SAVE members and other community members (the room was packed..) who spent their evening and night witnessing our government at work!

As always, the site plan & narratives are archived on SAVE’s website (www.savecolonie.com), even when they are gone from the Colonie’s.

Park Place at Shaker West, 945 & 957 Watervliet Shaker Rd, Rosetti
“Re-issuance” of Concept Acceptance:  APPROVED

(This proposal, at the former Shaker site, then Gordon Apartments, received Concept Acceptance in Jan, 2017.  This Concept Acceptance would have expired in August, 2018, after the statutory 18 months. How can an expired concept approval be reissued? We must inquire further of the PB attorney, who seems unable to apply the law to the actions of the PEDD. Why?) Originally 6 two-story apartment buildings, this project is now 2 three-story buildings, containing 126 units.  PB Chair Stuto did not have the ACPB review and approval conditions in his file. We believe that the NYS General Municipal Law requires Albany County Planning Bd to have another opportunity to review the revised development proposal, since their initial approval/comments may need revising due to project changes.  There was no mention by PB Chair, TDE or PEDD Director about a referral to the ACPB.. Frequently referenced TDE letter dated 9/18 was not available to the public**.  Apparently the TDE letter details further reviews needed, but we must await the transcript to see what, exactly.

The owner (Coleman) of the neighboring Shaker Shed farm and nursery requested fencing be required to prevent trespass by residents into her farm and fields. (approved)

Hoffman Car Wash, 1066 Troy Schenectady Rd
Concept Acceptance:  APPROVED

This proposal is for a 7000 sq ft car wash with 22 outdoor vac stations.  Access will be from Residence Inn Drive, off Troy Schenectady Rd.
The major concern here was to prevent traffic congestion and stacking of cars on Residence Inn Drive and unsafe turns onto Rt 7.  Also of interest was saving existing mature trees planted along Residence Inn Dr.  The Board suggested seeing whether there could be two lanes for exiting onto Rt 7, one turning right and one turning left.

Hoffman Senior Housing PDD, 1 Alice Ave and Rt 2
Application to Amend PDD (from 2011)

This reduced unit (formerly 170, down to 140, with 90 assisted living) market rate senior apartment complex, on a steeply sloped wooded site.  Again, much discussion centered around the TDE’s 9/18 letter, which is not available to the public.** Issues raised:  Soils on site are clay; nearby buildings are “sliding downhill to Watervliet.” Alice Drive will be for emergency access only, with the entrance on Rt 2.  Board asked about project’s “public benefit” which the law requires for a PDD. There was also discussion about how to “calculate” a monetary value to the public benefit already approved, but which will not be built. Suggestions included sidewalks to Route 2, improvements to Alice Dr., pedestrian connectivity with neighborhoods; mitigation fees in lieu of public benefit; concerns about drainage into neighboring yards; more architectural detail desirable. 4 neighbors spoke with concerns.

Radke Mixed Use PDD, 614 Albany Shaker Rd (proposed connector rd to Maxwell circle)
Re-zoning from Single Family Residential, Board Update

Project has been considerably scaled back responding to comments at last meeting.  Instead of 6 two story apartment buildings, we have 2 three story buildings, 158 units; retail space removed.  The 64 unit assisted living facility remains the same. Again, the TDE comment letter ** was repeatedly referred to, as developer responded to items indicated.  Issues discussed:  The developer proposes that the public benefit will be donation of the 7.3 acres to site the connector road, plus they will construct the much ballyhooed connector road. Neighbor concerns:  Height of buildings, excess traffic onto already burdened Shaker Rd, only 20ft buffer between assisted living facility and homes on Rustyville; uselessness of restricted “right in right out” onto Shaker Rd (Chief, who should know).  PB members liked the one story feature of the assisted living facility. They also commented favorably on its appearance and design. Density of SFR for 19 acres:  38 units vs 200 + units proposed. Austin opined no one would buy $400K SF on busy connector rd (Maxwell Village, anyone??)  Several neighbors spoke in opposition, citing discordance with community character, excessive density, increased traffic, loss of privacy due to height of these 3 story buildings.  

NB:  There are reportedly 30 other parcels to be built out along Albany Shaker Rd in future. What will this do to traffic and community character in this residential neighborhood? 

Summit at Forts Ferry, 33 & 45 Forts Ferry Rd.  (Nigro)
SEQRA & Final Approval:  APPROVED

Consideration of this most controversial project commenced after 10 PM, despite numerous calls for it to be postponed to allow neighbors to properly address documents the town finally release just the day before this hearing.  Board members and members of the large audience were obviously tired out; comments were made about hurrying things along so people could go home…by the Board!  Changes had been made to increase landscape screening behind the senior residence garages; the entrance had been moved further away from the across the street neighbor to moderate headlight disturbance; and stormwater handling was modified to direct most runoff into a wetland constructed southeast of the development..owned by??.  Again, reference was repeatedly made, by the developer’s rep and the Board, to the TDE’s letter,** which the town does not make available to the public.

Public comments by WLNA and others:  The town’s obstructionism and lack of concern for the neighbors is wrong, citing denial of FOIL; developer’s refusal to meet with neighbors despite PB direction to do so; concerns regarding drainage/runoff due to loss of vegetation on site and increased impermeable surfaces; Concerns about maintenance of stormwater systems & plantings; increases in traffic into local system already horribly congested.

The PB was most concerned with the architectural design & color of the office building in front of the project, rather than any aspects of the 3 story plus monster abutting the residential neighborhood!  One member suggested more shade trees on site; one suggested the office building & residence apartments should be the same color…which color??  Where are architectural experts for the TOC?We have lawyers, a former police chief, and music teacher opining on architectural finishes, styles and colors neighbors will live with for years.  Notably, there was no discussion about the impact of the proposed development on neighborhood character, especially the need for a 3 story senior apartment building.  Storm water plans had been modified after concept approval and after consultation with the Town Stormwater Coordinator John Dzialo. One of the stormwater management methods will allow drainage from the Summit site to go into wetlands on a neighboring parcel.(The PEDD usually requires all stormwater to be handled on site.) Nothing was mentioned about whether the adjacent landowner (Target plaza) was consulted about this stormwater plan.

In the end, about 11:25 PM, the board unanimously approved the SEQRA findings and unanimously approved the Summit.  

**  The TDE’s letter on each project constitutes a summary of the Town departments’ and engineer’s analysis. SAVE believes that the TDE’s letter is vital to understanding the project’s likely impacts on many levels. Earlier this summer, SAVE sent an email to Chairman Stuto and PEDD Director LaCivita requesting that these letters and applicant responses be uploaded onto the PEDD site with the project narratives and site plans. No response was issued to date. To properly evaluate how a project will impact the neighborhood, residents need to have such information.  AND SHOULD!  The Town works for US, the residents and taxpayers. Does this town think neighbors should have to hire their own expert to evaluate each project?  Apparently.  Don’t you love governmental transparency! 

SAVE supports West Latham Neighborhood Association's efforts for transparency

The Summit at Forts Ferry
Many residents in Colonie have been following the development proposal by Frank Nigro for a large senior living facility on Forts Ferry Road called “The Summit.”

The project has been on many agendas for the Colonie Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals, and the West Latham Neighborhood Association and neighbors of the proposed project have been raising concerns. The project design has changed several times, and despite direction and discussion by the Planning Board and other town officials for the developer to meet with the Neighborhood Association, adequate outreach and meetings with neighbors have not occurred.

October 2018: Latest Developments
Forts Ferry area residents have been advocating for their quality of life, their property values, traffic matters and more. The Summit was placed on the packed October 16, 2018 Planning Board agenda, this time for final approval. 

On the Friday before the meeting, the Town denied the neighbors' Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request for the Town Designated Engineers' evaluation of this project, which they were seeking in order to prepare for the meeting. 

Late Monday, October 15th, the day before the meeting, the Town reversed that decision and GRANTED the FOIL request. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT VICTORY FOR THE NEIGHBORS as they seek transparency around the decision making pertaining to this project!

However, despite this victory, this late decision leaves the neighbors with mere hours to review the hundreds of pages of documents and prepare for the Planning Board meeting where final approval of the Summit is scheduled.  Unless, of course, the Town grants the neighbors' reasonable request to postpone this Planning Board review of the Summit to allow for a meaningful examination of the files.

See the documents on the Summit at Forts Ferry just released for public review:

• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (549 pages)

• Site Plans (22 pages)

• Water District Extension Report (22 pages)

• Geotechnical Evaluation (61 pages)

• Garage Design (1 page)

• Notice of Substantial Compliance with Subbmittial Requirements (5 pages)

• Comment Response Letter (14 pages)

CALL TO ACTION: POSTPONE AND ALLOW RESIDENTS TIME TO REVIEW DOCUMENTS
The meeting agenda is already packed, and it is clear to the Town that there are residents interested in becoming more informed prior to the meeting so they can meaningfully participate. Postponing the review of the Summit would allow for transparency and informed resident participation, elevating the discussion. It would also shorten the overly packed agenda where FIVE projects are scheduled for review, a practice which often makes for a long and grueling night for resident, applicant and Planning Board participants alike.

What’s the rush? Why would the Board not encourage a delay to allow the public review of the newly released documents? What do you think? 

Please let the Town know you support delaying this project review to give residents time to look at the newly released files and encourage transparency in our Town government. Email:

Town Supervisor Paula Mahan: MahanP@colonie.org

Town Board Member Paul Rosano (liaison to Planning Board): RosanoP@colonie.org

Planning Board Chair Peter Stuto: c/o PEDD@colonie.org

Planning and Economic Development Director Joe LaCivita: LaCivitaJ@colonie.org

In Depth: A look at the Birchwood Neighborhood Association's submission to the Colonie Town Board

You may have read the recent Times Union story about the July 26th Colonie Town Board meeting where SAVE Colonie and Birchwood Neighborhood Association members attempted to participate in a public hearing regarding a development proposal and were met with accusations and adversarial behavior from town officials.

The proposal was an Open Development Area to allow an applicant to build three homes served by one driveway.  The Birchwood Neighborhood Association made a verbal and written presentation to the Town Board pointing out several deficiencies with the proposed resolution and town action.  

Below is the Neighborhood Association's presentation to the Town Board, and other background materials, for those who are interested in learning more about this matter.

Birchwood Neighborhood Association Presentation to Colonie Town Board, July 26, 2018

Birchwood Neighborhood Association Presentation to Colone Planning Board, Jan 23, 2018

34 Denison Road Timeline

2009 Site Map for Proposed Ridgewood Subdivision at 34 Dension Road

SAVE Report: July 10, 2018 Colonie Planning Board meeting

SAVE Report
Planning Board Meeting
July 10, 2018

This report highlights the issues raised during public comments and reflections on
events, and is not intended to be an exhaustive description.
Absent: Member Dalton. Present: Members Stuto, Shamlian, Mion, Austin, Heider,
Millstein, Attny Marinelli, PEDD Director LaCivita, TDEs CHA Grasso and Voss Barton
and LoGuidice. Also present: TB member Rosano and Town Clerk Gansle, CAC
member Laura Weed

Prior to the agenda session, Chairman Stuto advised the PB that they are working on a
public comment policy which will be run by Counsel’s office.

PEDD Director LaCivita announced that the Comprehensive Plan Committee has been
reactivated. August 8, 2018 6:00 pm next scheduled Committee Date; September 19,
2018 public hearing at the Crossings; October 11, 2018 Hearing before the Town Board.

PEDD has hired a new planner to replace retired planner Mike Lyons.

Serio Subdivision 60 Dunsbach Ferry Road and corner Pollack Road
Sketch Plan
No Action
Applicant represented by Nick Costa Advanced Engineering
Ted Cillis developer/contract vendee
Greg and Linda Serio owners of record
TDE Chuck Voss Barton and LoGuidice
14 lot single family subdivision to be located on 9.27 acres site
(note: this property is located within an Agricultural District which was not noted in the
Project narrative or during the applicant’s presentation or TDE comments)
Site is currently vacant with agricultural fields and wooded areas. Federally protected
wetlands are also located onsite. Property is zoned SFR. TDE Voss advised that he
has not done his formal review. However, he considers the proposed layout to be a
standard “lollipop” subdivision. He acknowledged that the Town Historian has inquired
about the location of a historic cemetery on site. This will be confirmed by an
archeological study. Mr. Costa advised that the grading plan for the site will take into
account sensitive environmental areas. TDE also recommended that there be a tree
inventory done for the site. Chairman Stuto asked the applicant to consider a cluster
subdivision layout for the site which would entail smaller lot sizes. Chairman Stuto
stated that smaller lots are the new development trend and popular with Seniors.
Member Milstein asked for details about the size of the homes. Nick Costa advised
probably between 1500-2500 square feet. Member Mion was concerned about the
location of two homes on Pollack Road at the corner of Dunsbach Ferry Road. Nick
Costa advised applicant will look at whether driveway access can be changed to the
interior site roads.

On the Farm Subdivision
261 and 261A Troy Schenectady Road
Applicant Halfmoon Materials Group LLC/Dean Marotta/RJ Valente (developer)
Nick Costa Advanced Engineering
63 Lot Subdivision
TDE Chuck Voss Barton and Loguidice
At the outset Chairman Stuto inquired about pending action items listed in the TDE June
11, 2018 final comment letter. Apparently, the applicant failed to provide several
requested items including site elevations. An inaudible discussion ensued between
Chairman Stuto and PB Attorney Marinelli about whether the PB should hear this
agenda item. Attorney Marinelli cited Land Use law provisions and it was decided that
PB final review could proceed with the site elevations required as a condition of final
approval. Attorney Marinelli also read the published public hearing notice for the project.
Nick Costa advised that 18.8 acres of land is going to be preserved which will add value
to the neighborhood. Stormwater collection will also improve the neighborhood situation.
Public Water will be supplied to the site via a closed loop system at the request of the
latham water district. Costa noted that this will help in situations where there are water
main breaks for the older water infrastructure in the neighborhood. Latham Water will be
able to isolate the break and still provide water via this loop system to the existing
neighborhood. Nick Costa acknowledged that construction will have an impact on the
wildlife and speculated that they will return once construction has been completed.
TDE noted that he has worked very closely with the applicant. The site’s extensive
wetlands have been the focus for the site layout and development. The site has uneven
topography. He also commented on the site stormwater issues and how the proposed
stormwater system will improve existing conditions for the surrounding neighbors. TDE
also noted that the stormwater will be directed to a NYSDOT culvert.
CAC member Laura Weed asked about whether a tree inventory was done and also
whether an ACOE permit was issued. Nick Costa did not provide a clear response
regarding the tree inventory and he noted that an ACOE permit application is pending
which he stated was likely to be approved.
There was a packed house of neighbors who addressed the PB and were there in
support of their neighborhood. Many commenters questioned why the Town is not
looking out for the interests of existing neighborhoods and making neighborhoods and
not developers the town’s priority. Many lamented the impact the development would
have on neighborhood traffic, school enrollment, and wildlife that lives on the wooded
site. Many also wanted to know what impact the grading and clearing would have on
stormwater issues they currently were experiencing and screening and buffering for
their homes. Several neighbors questioned why lots were depicted in areas where they were wet and had drainage issues. No response was provided other than the site
elevations would have to be raised to address these issues. One neighbor asked why
the Town was not purchasing this property as open space. PEDD Director LaCivita
explained that the Town’s current funds are not sufficient to purchase properties. He
cited the Town’s incentive zoning fee fund and current Town fiscal constraints as
barriers to open space purchases. He opined that the Town could use IDA and Local
Development Corporation funds for purchases. He also noted that the Town would be
applying for State grants for green space.
(It should be noted that the 2005 Comprehensive Plan directed the Town to develop an
open space and recreation plan and create an open space fund.)
A SAVE member requested clarification about whether a tree inventory was done for the
site. After much hemming and hawing, Nick Costa confirmed no tree inventory was done for the site. SAVE member also asked how the site grading was going to proceed-
was the entire site to be cleared straight away or as individual lots were sold?

Neighborhood comments indicated that many of the lots were not suitable for
development because of water issues and uneven topography. SAVE member also
asked whether the PB would require the Loudon Hills East subdivision approval
condition that required the developer to only remove mature trees located within the
building envelope and driveway.TDE Voss explained that this would not be needed as
this was a conservation subdivision design which contemplated minimized clearing.
PB individual comments were provided by Shamlian, Austin, Mion and Stuto. Shamlian
was concerned with the building elevations and he wanted to see elevations when the
project was next back before the PB (note this was a final approval so no opportunity for
further PB review). Austin was concerned with renaming the street. Stuto noted that a
lot had been done by the applicant to best mitigate the impacts based upon the
restrictions in the land use law.
Final Approval (unanimous) Granted and SEQRA Negative Declaration Issued

Starlite Mixed Use, Phase 1
629 Columbia Street
150,000 sq foot building, 900 parking spaces
Final Approval (SEQRA determination previously issued for Phase I and Phase II)
Applicant Starlite Associates/Galesi/Ayco
Hershberg consultant, 1066 Troy Schenectady Rd, Sketch Plan Review
TDE Joe Grasso CHA
PEDD Director LaCivita listed the project review history. Hershberg stated that the final
plan has minor changes- a reduced retention basin to preserve wetlands and a modified
trail to accommodate wetlands preservation. He also announced that NYS DEC
granted freshwater wetlands approvals that afternoon.
TDE Grasso noted that the applicant will be constructing the connector road which will cost far in excess of the applicant’s fair share of Boght Road GEIS mitigation fees.
Consequently, the applicant will receive “credits” for future mitigation fees owed for the
development of the additional parcels (60 acres), TDE Grasso also noted that 40% of
unconstrained lands will be deed restricted leaving 50% green space on the site. The
applicant will need 3 design waivers-building setback, front yard parking and parking in
excess of allowed parking. The TDE noted that his final review letter is dated June 27,
2018.
Two members of the public commented. Tom Sorenson questioned the veracity of the
traffic counts and provided documentation showing where there were traffic counts for
various intersections from 2011 and 2018 which had not changed. He also questioned
the number of parking spaces for Phase I. TDE Grasso stated that only certain
intersections were studied in 2018 so that there is still older traffic statistics for other
intersections. He also noted that the total parking spaces for Phases I and II will be
1,500 spaces.
Barb Numerich questioned why this project is proceeding to approval prior to the
completion of the Comprehensive Plan review. She also stated that the connector road
is not going to be a “miracle road” to solve the traffic issues in this area of the Town.
She asked why the PB was not doing its job to “plan” and make sure that there are
appropriate locations for certain types of development.
Chairman Stuto stated that the office project is a permitted use in the zone. PB Member
Shamlian asked about what type of signage would be used for the building and wanted
the design to account for the large size of the building. Chief Heider thought the
proposed landscaping was not appropriately sized given the large stature of the
building. Hershberg responded by noting landscaping is in flux and he would take Chief
Heider’s comments into account.
Final Approval Unanimous

SAVE Report: June 19, 2018 Colonie Planning Board Meeting

As always, this report is not official or designed to be complete, but rather contains impressions of members who attend these meetings.  
(I got home at 10 PM. Good thing the Town is slowing down development approvals (Magguilli said…) pending the completion of the Comp Plan.) 

Still no overhead or video projection; air conditioning not working; mics in use only sometimes, no explanation of new terminology:”public hearing” vs Final Approval.
Thanks for reading…and attending!  Your comments are always welcome!  And remember our SAVE Colonie Facebook Page and Web Site.


Present PB members:  Stuto, Milstein, Dalton, Austin, Mion, Shamlian, Attny Marinelli; LaCivita; TB Rosano, Murphy, Carey.

1.  On the Farm Subdivision:  Public Hearing will be held on July 10th.
     Donna Drive Subdivision:  Public Hearing will be held on July 24th.

2.  Rosetti Apartments, 57 Vly Rd (Entrance on New Karner Rd.)  Concept Acceptance (NO VOTE TAKEN)
This project generated a lot of negative comments from neighboring single family homeowners concerning excessive traffic already on Vly & New Karner; insufficient parking/garage spaces; high water table with flooding of nearby basements “24/7/365”; low water pressure currently in area; concern re noise during construction; fencing & light pollution mitigation needed; site preferable for commercial devel; how has TOC allowed site to be clear-cut prior to Bd approval?

Planning Bd:  Project too dense for site; insufficient info presented to PEDD & Bd; need elevations and amenities for apt. residents; “Just because you have the property doesn’t mean you have to pack it full!” said Austin; scale down, must lower the impact on neighborhood; dev. cannot use green space on other parcels he owns to meet requirements here; need pedestrian accommodation; developer should meet with Vly Rd neighbors; required waiver for bldg orientation is questionable.
 
TDE Voss: Project now reflects Bd comments & May 24th TDE comments (too bad we can’t have the TDE comments!).  

LaCivita stated that clear cutting is allowed under a grading permit.  This is contrary to town law which holds that no clearing can be done prior to final Planning Board approval.  This strange reading of the law is why we have the Maxwell Village debacle, by the way.  

Result:  TABLED. Developer to return with better info and revised plan to lower density, height, impact.

3.  Radtke Mixed Use: PDD Sketch Plan Review  (so public comments were not welcome) TABLED

This project would rezone 23 plus acres of Single Family Residential actively farmed lands (which, under current zoning, would support approximately 40 single family residences) to allow 1. 204 apartments (7 buildings) & 61 assisted living/memory care units, 2. a long-planned connector road from Maxwell Rd roundabout to Aviation Drive, parallel to Wolf Rd. with developer “dedicating” 2 acres for this road.

TDE Grasso had many negative comments, as did PB members.  PB unanimously disapproved of high density, inconsistency with neighborhood, height & orientation of buildings, density to add to area’s traffic congestion.  Most favored Bickford assisted living/memory care proposal but not its proposed Albany-Shaker Rd access.
Among PB comments:  Density “too full”, layout & height “unfriendly to Rustyville Rd neighbors”, “where is the public benefit justifying the PDD?”, design & density of apts is “over the top”, make these on-site wetlands an integral part of the design rather than a problem to overcome, 

NB:  If the “connector road” is necessary, that can be achieved without this dense and discordant development.  There are ways, TOC!

4.  Starlite Mixed Use “Public Hearing”  Comments welcome.
Phases 1 & 2 would result in 1500 cars, 300,000 sq ft of office buildings, impacting 8 + acres of TN-11wetlands and buffer.  A connector road between the Johnson Rd intersection and Rt 9 north of the Rt 9R intersection.  (There will be more “Phases,” since Galesi owns 2 more contiguous parcels which are possibly inaccessible w/o the connector rd. AYCO, a Goldman Sachs subsidiary, is also seeking tax abatements and other public benefits from NYS and the TOC IDA (pretty cheeky, as one of the richest corporations ever!!!)

Probably in recognition of the “done deal” aspects of Starlite and the multiple hours of negative comments already expressed on Starlite, public comments this time were few and focused upon the obvious untenable traffic increases.  SAVE members Tom Sorenson and Paula Weiss spoke about the terrible current congestion.  Tom presented new data refuting the Creighton Manning data & revealing its shortcomings.  He noted the problems for fire responders created by the plan to reroute and close off Old Loudon Rd access to Rt 9.  Paula cited current backups, especially if the Northway was blocked, reminded PB of increased landfill truck traffic, and warned of the danger to school children from added traffic. Neighbor Tom Dembroski urged alternative sites without the obvious traffic impacts, challenged the rectitude of giving taxpayer subsidies to this project,  urged requiring off-site parking and busses to the AYCO site.

No vote taken.

SAVE Report: June 5, 2018 Colonie Planning Board Meeting

(This report consists of impressions of the authors.)

Present:  PB members Mion, Austin, Heider & Shamlian (acting Chair), Attny Marinelli; PEDD Director LaCivita; Town Bd members Van Dollen, Rosano; Supervisor Mahan.  Not present:   Milstein, Dalton, Stuto.

Loudon Hills East:  120 Spring Street, Final Approval?:  Approved

(Although not listed as “final approval” it appears that this public hearing was, in fact, final approval for this development.  No mention was made of the challenge to the legitimacy of the “extension” of the expired concept acceptance, nor was any statement made concerning the date the concept would have expired and the date the applicant applied for the “extension.”  Strangeness abounds.)

This is a 29 lot subdivision on 22 heavily wooded and hilly acres located next to the Al Tech hazardous waste site on Spring Street.  After the developer’s presentation, the TDE from Barton & Loguidice spoke in favor of keeping as many of the mature trees as possible, and suggested as a condition of approval that the PB require the developer to flag the home sites, driveways, and rights of way, and that every effort be made to protect the trees, including tree wells.  Also suggested was moving the homes closer to the interior road so there would be a wider treed buffer between these homes and the properties on Shelburne.  Also, the tree removal company should be included in the pre-construction meeting.  It was mentioned that 73 evergreens, 7-8 feet in height*, would be planted along the site’s boundary.

Five neighbors from the Loudon Hills development bordering this site strongly objected to the plan to extensively deforest and grade the site, stressing the impact on their quality of life and property values.  One highlighted the importance of keeping the mature oaks & maples, which provide shade, fresh air, protection from winds, and absorb stormwater. Several cited the Maxwell Village horror, also involving Prime Companies. Also raised was the closeness of the new homes to those on Shelberne; one neighbor suggested eliminating the three lots closest to Shelberne; the developer rejected this as fiscally prohibitive.  LaCivita suggested eliminating the lot closest to Spring St and repositioning the two other homes. (Developer to consider.)

Vote:  Approved with conditions:

Reposition westerly homes 10 ft closer to internal road, saving trees behind them; require flagging of homesites, driveways etc (pursuant to Ch 177, tree removal allowed in footprint of home, driveway plus 10 ft) and the saving of as many trees as possible; impose deed restrictions re: tree cutting by owners; impose deed restrictions regarding wetlands on site.

Anthony’s Pizza Mixed Use, 155 Wade Rd.m Sketch Plan: No Action

Cumberland Farms, 1893 Central Ave, Concept Acceptance: Approved

Starlite Mixed Use:  Public Hearing Called for June 19, 2018

SAVE Report: May 8, 2018 Colonie Planning Board Meeting

Planning Board (PB) Report for  May 8, 2018

PB Members Attending:  Dalton, Mion, Milstein, Heider, Shamlian, Stuto; Town Attny Magguilli in for Marinelli.  Staff:  LaCivita , Tengeler  Town Bd: Supervisor Mahan, Murphy, VonDollen, Rosano  

The two TDE’s all referenced their comment letters and town Department comments which were sent to applicants. These TDE comment letters and Department comments and any applicant responses are not provided on the PEDD website prior to PB meetings.  SAVE has repeatedly requested PEDD to upload all TDE, Town and applicant responses on the PEDD website.

1. Ferraro Entertainment Inc. Entertainment Complex  Sketch Plan
941 Albany Shaker Road 
Chuck Voss, Barton and LoGuidice, TDE

Applicant proposes to construct an indoor entertainment facility with laser tag, spin zone, ninja warrior, mini bowling, party rooms, lounges geared to multiple ages. Child care will also be provided. The Facility will also have a liquor license.   The applicant has future plans for an additional building on site for possibly an indoor electric go cart track. PB questions and TDE comments focused on whether there would be an adequate number of parking spaces. The applicant’s consultant Hershberg argued that the total square footage should not be used to calculate the requisite number of parking spaces as much of the square footage will not be fully occupied.  Hershberg advocated for parking based upon 10,000 square feet rather than the 25,000 square foot building which will be constructed. Design waivers were also sought for road setbacks, parking in front and smaller sized parking spaces.  Town Attorney Magguilli also questioned whether there are any similar facilities in the Town.

2.Safelite Autoglass Application for Concept Acceptance
327 Old Niskayuna Road
Joe Grasso CHA TDE

TDE issued a comment letter on April 27, 2018. TDE referenced this letter. TDE asked for plans to reflect the vegetation and trees located on site and noted that a cultural resources signoff is required by NY State Parks and Recreation. TDE also asked the applicant to clarify where the sidewalks would be installed on Old Niskayuna Road. Discussion ensued about what is the developer’s responsibility to provide sidewalks for projects. Chairman Stuto asked what should be a reasonable requirement for development-funded sidewalk construction. Note to SAVE members- The Town’s 2005 Comprehensive Plan called for the development of a Town wide bike and sidewalk plan. To date, this plan has never been adopted by the Town Board.  The applicant’s consultant Hershberg noted that he expected high ground water because the site is located close to wetlands.

PB unanimously approved concept acceptance.

3. Hyatt Hotel and 2 Restaurants (Texas Longhorn Steakhouse and another tbd)
144 Wolf Road 
Applicant Tom Burke of Colonie Real Estate Holdings LLC, now known as 1476 Route 9LLC. 
Representative of Darden
Joe Grasso CHA , TDE

Nick Costa of Advanced Engineering presented. This project was most recently before the Town Planning Board on February 13, 2018.  At that time, the adjacent landowner raised concerns about flooding from the project site and PB members requested the developer to relocate the restaurant building farther away from Wolf Road.  These issues were discussed again last night. The neighbor reported that he met with Nick Costa and reviewed the stormwater plans and the on-site landscaping plans.  PB members Heider and Shamlian again raised their concerns with the location of the Texas Longhorn restaurant vis a vis the adjacent Sherwin Williams building. There was back and forth discussion between the PB members about whether it would be better to move the building 15 or 20 feet further away from Wolf Road in order to ensure that the adjacent commercial businesses would not lose their “commercial visibility” on Wolf Road.  Mr. Burke stated Longhorn's executives refused to move the building any further back, and explained that this would interfere with the dumpster location behind the building. The PB did not accept this explanation and pressed Mr. Burke for a further justification for his position.  

Darden/Longhorn restaurant representative, present at the hearing, finally addressed the PB and explained why his company could not move the building any further away from Wolf Road.  He noted that this was the first time he heard anything about moving the restaurant building further back on the site, and stated that his company executives have already signed off on this project so it would be difficult to ask them to review any further project revisions.  He further advised that the building could not be relocated because this would affect the signature Longhorn landscaping and there would be a loss of parking spaces.   

At one point, the Darden representative left the hearing room and telephoned a Darden executive team member. A lively discussion then ensued between Burke and Planning Board members. Chairman Stuto at one point asked the TDE whether the PB could just complete the SEQRA review to help the project along. Town Attorney Magguilli did not weigh in this issue.  

PB members were clearly uncomfortable with this debate and finally settled on proceeding with the SEQRA review and final vote which would be conditioned upon the PB’s delegation of their authority to TDE Grasso and the PEDD director to review whether the restaurant building could be moved either 15 or 20 feet back, whether there can be a 3 lane entrance from Wolf Road, and the final landscaping plan. 

PEDD Director LaCivita is quoted in a May 10, 2018 TU article as stating that the Town and the applicant agreed upon a 15 foot setback and construction is slated to begin later this summer.  TDE Grasso also suggested that the Airport Area GEIS mitigation fees should be reduced for this project because a GEIS credit should be applied to this applicant’s mitigation fees because the Lazare auto dealership is no longer in existence.   SAVE is researching whether this project is eligible to receive a GEIS mitigation credit. 

Final Site Plan was unanimously approved, with PB delegation of their SEQRA review to PEDD director and TDE Grasso.  

4. Panera Restaurant
601 Troy Schenectady Road
Application for waivers to allow a drive thru, reduction green space.

PEDD staff presentation Tengler

Panera is seeking to relocate from its current location to the now vacant Pizzeria Uno restaurant space in the same retail plaza. PB member Shamlian asked the applicant’s representative about the troublesome intersection of Erin Street and Troy Schenectady Road. Member Shamlian stated that there are problems with left turns onto Erin Street which causes back up vehicle stacking.  Shamlian stated that the drive thru aspect of this project will impact traffic.  Chairman Stuto remarked that “we are not traffic engineers.”  (These same traffic concerns were raised by Member Shamlian during Kimco’s Latham Farms restaurant expansion project earlier this year. )

The Panera Rep stated that it would be difficult for his client to provide off-site intersection analysis based upon ITE standards.  The PB tabled their review and directed Panera to address traffic impact concerns. Chairman Stuto stated that the applicant can touch base with Tengler and promised the applicant that its application will be quickly placed back on the PB agenda once the traffic impact analysis is provided to PEDD staff.  Member Stuto suggested that the Board hire CHA (a Town TDE), as they were already involved with the Kimco Latham Farms application and familiar with the traffic analyses done by VHB. 

Thanks to all SAVE Colonie members who participate to make things better here for everyone.

Colonie's ethics issue makes the TU's Perspectives Section

Times Union
Editorial
May 6, 2018

Colonie should leave no doubts about conflict

The town of Colonie has a conflict of interest problem in its review of a hotel-office building on Albany Shaker Road: Clough Harbour & Associates, the engineer for the developer, British American Development Corp., is also the planning board's engineer.

The town says it's OK since Clough Harbour disclosed the relationship before taking the job with the town and, as a contractor, is not subject to town ethics rules.

That's pretty thin, especially since, as the citizens' group SAVE Colonie notes, a condition of taking the town position was to "avoid all conflicts of interest or appearances of impropriety," including not representing clients with projects before the town.

Assuring citizens that they have an ethical government means following not just the letter of the law, but the spirit of it. Perception matters.

There's a simple solution: Hire a different firm to represent the town in this review.

https://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Editorials-Long-story-short-12890961.php

Update on May 3rd ZBA meeting from West Latham Neighborhood Association

Dear Neighbors and Friends,

Many, many thanks to the approximately 25 neighbors and friends (including those from SAVE Colonie) who attended last evening’s Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. We feel that Atty. Tingley represented our neighborhood with integrity, professionalism and obvious hours of research and preparation.

The “public” hearing was very shocking and disappointing. Of the six appeal issues on the agenda, the Zoning Board would not allow the public to speak regarding our appeal only and would not even allow John Drake, a petitioner party to the appeal, to speak.  Microphones were not used, or minimally used by the Board members, and it was sometimes difficult to hear what they were saying.

The Board permitted the Neighborhood Association’s attorney, Jonathon Tingley, to present our appeal, the land owner’s attorney and the developer’s attorney to present their rebuttals to the appeal and then for the most part turned the meeting over to Town of Colonie Attorney Michael Magguilli. Mr. Magguilli told the Zoning Board that everything was done correctly regarding the buffer and zoning at 33/45 Forts Ferry Road and there was no reason for the Zoning Board to consider an appeal. Only two members of the Zoning Board asked a question and they were all responded to by Mr. Magguilli, who again assured the Board that everything was done correctly and there was no reason for the Zoning Board to consider our appeal.

Our Neighborhood Association’s attorney again requested that they allow John Drake to speak and the Board declined although they did not state why they would not permit him to speak before them.  At that point, Atty. Tingley submitted John Drake’s written comments (see attached pdf) to the Board for the record and told the Board that he has never been to a zoning appeal’s public hearing where the public was not allowed to speak and where a party to an appeal was not allowed to present. 

The Zoning Board attorney, Michael Garry, then repeated most of what Town Atty. Magguilli said and instructed the Zoning Board members to consider only whether the building department properly approved the developer’s project application based upon what the Town attorney said is the correct zoning.  The Zoning Board unanimously agreed the application was approved correctly and rejected our appeal. The Board members did not even take the time to read John Drake’s written statement before rendering a decision.

While this result was unexpected and illustrates that Colonie does NOT have an independent Zoning Appeals Board, the Neighborhood Association officers expect to meet with counsel next week to discuss what further action can and should be taken.

We are very close to our goal to pay our most recent outstanding invoice of $3,500 to our attorney for his counsel. A check for $1,600 was paid to the firm on April 25th and right now we are just $75 away from collecting the additional $1900 needed to pay the balance.THANK YOU again to EACH ONE OF YOU for contributing to our Legal Defense Fund for our cause. After last night’s meeting, we feel it would have been impossible to participate without legal representation.

If you would like additional information, please contact WLNA President Erich Smith at esmith15@nycap.rr.com.

Happy Earth Day!

SAVE Report: April 10th Planning Board Meeting

Planning Bd Report for April 10, 2018

PB Members Attending: Dalton, Mion, Austin,Milstein, Heider, Stuto; Magguilli in for Marinelli. Staff: LaCivita Town Bd: Carey, VonDollen, Rosano

1. Report on fire issues by Fire Official Joe: Firefighting in Town is hampered by a. Narrow streets without secondary egress; b. increasing use of new petroleum-based building & furnishing materials;c. trend toward ‘open concept’ homes allowing quick spread of fires, d. fewer volunteer firefighters signing up. Apparently this talk was triggered by new fire code requirements which, however, were not really discussed, except to mention that new residences “may” be required to have sprinklers in bedrooms and egress areas. 

2. Soldier On PDD Amendments Resolution Passed 
   Chuck Voss, TDE

Redevelopment of former Ann Lee Home into 200 residences for homeless vets. Due to financing requirements, this project needed to be redesigned. New plan includes several garden apartment-style buildings rather than the original 2 large structures, which better meets the needs of residents. The buildings will match the existing 1920’s Ann Lee Home rather than the Shaker buildings on site. Working with the Shaker Heritage society to resolve some issues.

3. Starlite Mixed Use Traffic Mitigation Plan 
   629 Columbia St (RT 9R) 
   Joe Grasso, TDE

Mark Sargent of Creighton Manning presented. Helpfully using projection equipment and providing large maps for the audience, Sargent first explained the thinking behind the 2011 Boght Rd Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) with its two traffic mitigation alternatives: 1. do nothing, 2. build a connector road from Rt 9R north through this parcel to Rt 9 north at Auto Park Drive. (Query: Why were no other options explored? )The GEIS did identify other possible mitigation, including widening Rt 9R and adding another through lane onto the Northway. This would address the worst of the traffic tie-ups and may take place “down the road” said Sargent, but not as part of this project. Further, the proposed connector road would do little to mitigate the Rt 9/Rt 9R peak hours congestion. 

Sargent discussed the CM traffic study (available at SAVE’s website) and admitted that their earlier peak traffic numbers were low by about 100 trips per hour. Neighbor Tom Sorenson had many questions about the traffic numbers CM presented. Kevin Bette, a developer from First Columbia that’s proposing additional offices at Century Hill Drive directly across Rt 9 from the proposed “connector rd”, stated that his traffic study numbers were considerably different from CM’s; that new data from actual development in the area should inform base figures being used, rather than estimates from 6 years ago; and the discrepancies between his expert’s study and CM’s should be resolved before the TOC makes any decisions here. Bette offered to work with the TDE and CM on this. (TB member P.Rosano didn’t seem to understand the importance of basing town decisions on good data and stated emphatically that CM’s numbers should be good enough.) However, PB Chair Stuto
suggested that the parties get together ASAP to do this and it should be done expeditiously so as not to slow down the project. 

Commenting on the project in general were: Colonie residents in favor Caroline Ahl (we've learned that her husband is an employee of Galesi Group, a partner in Starlite Associates) and Lynn Romania, based mostly on "new jobs"; Paul Amedore, developer of Canterbury Crossing and the new owner of 3 Autopark Drive (the former Walmart site) and who has stated he wishes to develop a mixed use project for this site, “development is good for Colonie and Starlite is terrific”; Siena College VP Charles Carletta loves the public benefits given by AYCO, jobs & internships; Dean Devito of Prime (bro-in-law of PB Chair Peter Stuto), local developer: “development is good”; David Buicko of the Galesi Group & Starlite Associates, touting the benefits of having a Goldman-Sachs company such as Ayco headquartered in Colonie, getting the long-abandoned property “back on the tax rolls," and having deep pocket Goldman "fronting the money" for the connector road. (NB: on 4/23 they will seek tax exemptions for this project from the Colonie IDA. And the Town is proposing to use Boght Area mitigation fees for the proposed connector rd.  Hmmmm.) Starlite Associates purchased the property in June 2012. 

Commenting on the traffic issues, in addition to Tom Sorenson, were: Barbara Numrich, neighbor & Save member, stating that right now the traffic is untenable and the connector rd will not fix it; asking for public amenities to compensate for the damage; questioning CM authoring the GEIS & now flogging for Starlite; and suggesting that “the fix is in” on this project. (TDE Grasso responded that engineering reports are reviewed by the Town PEDD and in this case by CDC and the DOT, and that the fix is actually not in.) Susan Weber of Save asked that the traffic reports by the NYS DOT and CDC Grasso referred to be posted on line to help residents understand these esoteric issues; and that public amenities be required of this developer, such as opening the proposed walking trails to the community, in exchange for all the difficulties the Town residents will be subjected to. 
(TDE Grasso responded that engineering reports are reviewed by the Town PEDD and in this case by CDC and the DOT, and that the fix is actually not in.) 
No vote needed...Next steps: 4/23 IDA Public Hearings on tax breaks for Starlite & Ayco; 4/24 Planning Bd hearing re: wetlands.

Vly High Service Area Water Meeting

On March 27th neighbors from the Birchwood/Vly/Denison/Brookhill areas were given a briefing by officials from the Latham Water District and consulting engineers on major water infrastructure upgrades needed to provide adequate water pressure to this "high service area" of Colonie.

Many residents living in the western area of town in these neighborhoods have inadequate water pressure. (Unless they are in one of the new Londonderry Ridge or Forest Hills luxury homes that are hooked up to the $1.8 million town-funded water tower that currently only services those new developments.)

Following the meeting, John Frazer, head of Latham Water District, provided us a copy of the Power Point presentation used during the meeting for SAVE members and other residents who live in this area who might not have been able to attend. The town officials would not commit to maintaining an email update list and regularly updating residents in the affected area, and asked us to do that for them, so we will do our best to share information. This is a long-term project that could take up to 10 years and cost $1 million. 

The Town is asking residents to provide them any comments in writing within the next 3-4 weeks by emailing LWD@colonie.org or FrazerJ@colonie.org.

Update from West Latham Neighborhood Association about the Summit at Forts Ferry discussion at the March 20th Planning Board meeting

Dear Neighbors and Friends,

First a huge THANK YOU to the 35+ members, neighbors and friends of the West Latham Neighborhood Association (WLNA) who came out to Tuesday’s Town of Colonie (TOC) Planning Board meeting and stayed for 3 hours to send a strong message in opposition to the Summit at Forts Forts Ferry to the board, as well as Supervisor Mahan and the four Town Board members who were in attendance. Ten community members spoke at the meeting, all in opposition to the proposed development. No Town Board member spoke during the meeting.

The proposed Summit at Forts Ferry project concept was approved by a 4-3 vote by the TOC Planning Board and was a very big disappointment to the WLNA. The concept approval was decided despite broad opposition from those in attendance, backed up by both strong legal and engineering data, and there seemed to be pressure to move this project through concept approval by the board. Issues raised by the WLNA included the appeal submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals, false and incomplete information on the Environmental Assessment Form submitted by the developer, a lack of any plan to deal with storm water and multiple issues raised regarding traffic and safe exit from the development.

Here is a summary of what was covered in the three-hour discussion of the Summit at Forts Ferry: 

1 - The applicant agents (Nigro not in attendance) re-presented the project proposal. There were no significant changes to the last proposal: one three-story apartment building and one two-story 30,000 sf office building.

• The only new information that was shared includes:

• • The apartment building height did in fact exceed the 40-foot restriction. The building was 45 feet and the cupola added another ten feet. They explained that they are removing the cupola and reducing the height from 45 feet to 39 feet, 8 inches. They did not explain how they would accomplish this.
  • They propose a second emergency ingress/egress to the south of the office building. It will not be a full-service entrance as preferred by emergency departments.

2 – Town Designated Engineer summarized the application with few issues and concerns. He discussed sidewalk connectivity between Omega Terrace and Wade Rd. 

3 – Members of the community spoke including:

• Erich Smith – reiterated that the traffic exiting this project will most likely take a right and go down Omega Terrace due to timing of the light at Forts Ferry and Wade Road.  Erich pointed out how improper it would be to have the large project ingress and egress directly across the street from a residential property with children.
• John Drake – began by stating that the current zoning verification is being appealed and asked the board to confirm that they received copies. He requested further action on proposal application be stayed. The board confirmed that they have the letter informing them of the appeal and board chair Peter Stuto asked the board counsel (Kathleen Marinelli) if the stay needed to happen. Her opinion was that case law was clear that if did not need to happen. John explained the reason for the appeal and that the 2007 law that enacted the enhanced buffers could not legally be reversed through a Town Board resolution and therefore was still in effect.
• Mary Cox – presented the review letter from Sterling Environmental Engineering to the board and highlighted the areas of the letter that were most significant – including concerns over storm water management (and the significant proposed condition changes to the property including increase of 4.5 acres of impervious surface, loss of 7 acres of existing forest cover and loss of .78 acres of wetlands, elimination of wet lands and the height of the building (potential to be different from side views than front view).

• Other community members who spoke include John Fahey, Cindy Methe, Jeff McGlynn, Todd Drake, Jim Callister, Susan Weber and one additional resident from the Byrnes Whitney area.

Items that were addressed either by the community or the board included:

• Stuto - How will property legally be designated over 55?  Atty. Marybeth Slevin advised that the age restriction will be an approval condition and that only the TOC Planning Board y could reverse that restriction.
• Stuto – wants town to look into the problem with light at Forts Ferry and Wade Rds. (even though traffic engineer and neighbors who spoke with DOT told him that it was purposefully tied to Wade Rd/Route 7 traffic light.)
• Austin – mentioned that the brick face square office building should look more like the apartment building in design.
• All board members – want entrance moved away from the McGlynn property (traffic engineer indicated the reason for location was the hill on Forts Ferry in order to maximize visibility. It was not clear that all board members fully understood the ‘hill’ reference.
• Jim C. – wants renderings from all sides of property, not only Forts Ferry Road.
• Austin – asked why they can’t change one-three story building to several lower rise. Slevin responded (as she has before) that this is their project and no changes arepossible.

Below is each Planning Board Member’s Vote on the Summit at Forts Ferry concept acceptance:

Brian Austin – made a motion for concept approval – voted Yes

Kathleen Dalton – made a motion not to vote until the neighbors’ zoning appeal had concluded – voted no

Steven Heider – voted yes

Susan Milstein – voted no

Louis Mion – voted yes

Craig Shamlian – voted no

Peter Stuto – voted yes

We are still moving forward with the appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and will share information as that process moves forward.

Chairman Stuto indicated the need for an interim project review before the end of May to ensure all the errors, issues and questions raised are resolved before the final project is reviewed. We will continue to push to ensure the Planning Board follows up on the interim review.

Read the Colonie Spotlight's article about the meeting, proposed project and property brief history.

Comprehensive Plan Process Update

The Comprehensive Plan Update process in the town of Colonie has been moving forward over the last couple of years, albeit very slowly. 

To date, the Committee and town officials, along with the consultant hired by the town for this process, Barton and Loguidice, have held a round of community engagement meetings in neighborhoods around town, to hear from residents and other stakeholders about the issues they believe are most important to be addressed in the Plan's update.  The Committee also worked with Siena Research Institute to conduct a survey of town residents to learn more about public opinion on a variety of matters related to the plan's scope.  The Committee has also reviewed and discussed draft updated vision and goals.  

At the February meeting, the Committee received for their review a draft of Preliminary Plan Recommendations.  These recommendations put some additional "meat on the bones" and put forth strategies that can be used to achieve the vision and goals that were discussed at earlier meetings of the Committee.

The March 21st meeting of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee was cancelled without explanation.  

Until the Committee is scheduled to meeting again, SAVE Colonie urges residents to review the draft vision and goals and draft recommendations (both linked above) and then provide your feedback to the Committee online.  You can do so in the comments/questions box on the right side of this page, or by emailing your comments to pedd@colonie.org.  

The Comprehensive Plan is an important tool for guiding the growth and future character of the town of Colonie.  While the town seems to be moving quite slowly with this process, we encourage residents to hang in there, and stay engaged!  Your voice matters!

Thank you for your continued interest in SAVE Colonie, and the future of our town!

SAVE Report: February 6, 2018 Planning Board Meeting

All planning board members were present except for Craig Shamlian. PEDD Director LaCivita and Attorney Marinelli, Town Board members Linda Murphy and Paul Rosano, Ellen Rosano of the Town Conservation Advisory Council and Joseph Mahan of the Building Department were in attendance. Ryan of Barton and LoGuidice was the Town Designated Engineer.

Century Hill Plaza Offices 16 and 16 Plaza Drive/3 Autopark Drive Latham
Sketch Plan Review
2 story 40,000 square foot office, two 5 story offices totaling 228,000 square feet
1 4 story 67,830 square foot office

Kevin and Chris Bette of 1st Columbia LLC outlined their development proposal. This development proposal is located on 18 acres site in the Boght Road GEIS study area and received a concept approval in 2010 which expired in 2011. The Town’s DCC met on December 20, 2017. PEDD Director LaCivita updated the PB about the project and intimated that since this project already received concept approval in 2010 the PB should approve this project as there have been no changes. He further indicated that the SEQRA Neg Dec should still be applicable. 1st Columbia built a connector Road for the office buildings they already constructed on the site. This connector road was not paid for with GEIS mitigation fees. The Connector road was identified as a traffic mitigation measure in the Boght Road GEIS. According to Mr. Kevin Bette, 1st Columbia paid $1million for this connector road and also paid $1 million in GEIS mitigation fee payments. He advocated for the Town to credit the $1million connector road payment towards any GEIS mitigation fees that they would now be required to pay for this new project. PEDD Director LaCivita stated that this was the first time that he heard this GEIS mitigation fee “credit” proposal (It should be noted that the Town’s March 26, 2013 FGEIS Findings Statement rejected this proposal).

Kevin Bette asked for the Planning board’s opinion regarding a GEIS mitigation fee credit. Chairman Stuto stated that he should write a letter on this issue so that it can be analyzed by the Town Attorney’s office.

PB member Dalton asked whether anyone has considered a new entrance to the Northway near the Pollack Road area as the 1st Columbia proposal would add another 2000 workers/occupants to the area. Kevin Bette advised that this new exit was studied under the various traffic studies and found to not be necessary. He further noted that this part of town has been extensively studied. He believes that all that is needed is to get rid of a few traffic bottle necks as Route 9 has the capacity for commuter traffic. PB member Dalton stated that although she is not a traffic person, it seems as a resident that widening of roads and incremental fixes might be an adequate solution but not optimal. Kevin Bette responded by stating that he wants to make sure that the traffic is ok for his tenants as he believes that the northern end of the town will see a lot more growth as the economy has turned around. He further noted that they can make the traffic adequate but still not great with all of the traffic mitigation measures identified in the various studies. Kevin Bette also advised that his development and the Amedore and Holiday Inn development proposals should all be plugged into the GEIS traffic model.

TDE Ryan advised the PB that he saw no significant changes since 2010 so the SEQRA review from 2010 should carry through. However, he will still take a close look at this issue.

On the Farm Concept Review Plan
261 & 261 A Troy-Schenectady Rd.
63 lot SFR, 1 commercial lot subdivision. Sketch plan review occurred on January 9, 2018.

TDE comment letter was issued January 24, 2017. CAC member Rosano asked the developer to consider impacts to wetlands during the road construction over ACOE regulated wetlands. SAVE member asked the PB what their policy was concerning building lots containing wetlands. She suggested that the PB require notice to prospective purchasers via DEED restrictions. She also asked the developer whether the ACOE issued a jurisdictional determination. Developer Representative Costa advised that his client received a ACOE wetlands delineation but has not submitted the plans for approval to the ACOE. The room was filled with the project neighbors. However, no neighbors spoke. Chief Heider questioned how the developer was going to address an old trail the surrounding neighborhood is currently using. Costa advised that this trail will be on privately owned lots and the private owners will have to deal with members of the public who will continue to use the trail. PB member Austin asked whether there will be larger homes on the larger lots. Costa advised there could be but he thinks they will be on the same scale of the other homes in the development. The PB voted to grant unanimous approval.

Huntington Associates Medical Office
123 Everett Road
Application for SEQR Determination and Final Approval 2 story 53, 910 square foot Professional Building

Most of the discussion entailed whether the PB should only allow a right in right out from the Office address. Apparently, the applicant has not received Albany County Highway Department sign off regarding the curb cut for this development. PB member Dalton noted that the green space will be less than 35%. PEDD Director LaCivita noted that the developer will be paying $21,000 (it should be noted that the incentive zoning fees are not available on the PEDD website and have not been updated since 2009). There was also discussion concerning the building’s architecture. Apparently, the plans submitted did not reflect the final architectural renderings for the building. The physician’s group who will be the building occupant had not given final approval. PB members saw a rendition of the current building rendering and stated that if the final looks like this they would be supportive. PB granted final approval subject to the following conditions to be confirmed by PEDD-screen roof for neighbors, right in right out only, architectural rendering for the building like what they were shown. A Neg Dec was issued after the TDE read his rationale for the Neg Dec.