Chairman Doyle called the January 31, 2007 meeting to order at 7:30pm and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Chairman Doyle reviewed the agenda.

Corrections to minutes

Page 1) Change Monthly to "Special", 4^th para; strike "s" from Curtiss, Page 2), 2^nd para; add "to" after C5, 9^th para; strike "turn around", 10^th para; strike "s" from vehicles. Page 3) 2^nd para; add "/" between present future, 7^th para "ask" should be "as". Page 4) 6^th para; add "d" to require. Page 5) 5^th para; strike "d" from projected". Page 8) 1^st para; strike "that", 2^nd para; strike "in", 4^th para; strike "the", "the", 12^th para; add "of". Page 9), 4^th para; add "Mr." Page 11) 3^rd para; strike "’", and strike "d" from and, strike "’" from carports.

MOTION: Ms. Cristy made a motion to approve the December 20, 2006. Mr. Hayden seconded the motion. CARRIED.

MOTION: Mr. Hayden made a motion to approve the January 10, 2007 minutes as amended. Ms. Cwalinski seconded the motion. CARRIED.

Louise DeLucia, Saunders Lane for a Major Subdivision. Kurt Bedore of Tommell and Associates was present to present an update and revision on Saunders Lane. Mr. Bedore went on to describe the current proceedings related to other regulatory agencies that are looking at this project that have occurred very recently in the past two or three days. Mr. Bedore spoke with Grant from the Saratoga County Sewer District #1 on January 30, 2007 and accepts the plans that are currently proposed with a minor comment about tracer wire. Mr. Bedore said that the applicant is anticipating a formal comment letter from the SCSD#1 leaning to the affirmative for the project as far as their concerns. Mr. Bedore said that the ACOE received verbal notification from Mr. Brad Sherwood that they are accepting of the amended ACOE permit for the access to commercial lot B adding on an additional 5.5 hundredths of an acre to access across the intermittent stream to access commercial lot B and in the process the applicant’s are proposing a 1 per 1 small mitigation creation of new wetlands to offset that. Mr. Bedore said that the wetland plans were updated and resubmitted.

Mr. Bedore said that a verbal acceptance was received from Mr. Shaw on January 30, 2007 of the New York State Department of Health via e-mail followed up by a telephone call, but asked the applicant to wait for the final stamping of the plans until approvals are completed at the Town level.

Mr. Bedore said that revisions that were made to the plans that were submitted last month remained unchanged, proposing ten single family residential lots with a great lot 10; with carefully worded conditions on a potential future subdivision of great lot 10 creating an eleventh lot with conditions of that potential future subdivision.

Mr. Bedore said a revised performance bond estimate which received comments from the Town Engineer immediately was revised and was resubmitted back to the Town Engineer. Mr. Bedore asked Michelle if a copy was received. Michelle replied yes. Mr. Bedore indicated that this item was satisfactory to the Town Eengineer.

Mr. Bedore said that minor revisions to drainage changed some of the release pipe sizing and did not significantly affect the drainage detention basins.

Mr. Bedore received the Town Engineer’s comments; dated, January 23, 2007 comments are technical in nature, however, there were issues raised and would like to discuss with the Board as a matter of what the Town’s policy is and how it would affect the project.

Mr. Bedore said that one issue was the two Storm Water Management areas in the lower end toward to the bike path in the cul-de-sac; Storm Water Management area #2. It is currently shown as being proposed to being conveyed to the Town. Mr. Bedore said that it appears from the comment that the Town would not want to own the land, but would rather want the owner of lot #8 own that Storm Water Management area and maintenance would be covered under an easement to the Town.

Mr. Bedore asked if the Town would be open to retaining ownership as opposed to having future owner lot #8 owning it with an easement. Mr. Bedore said that the concern would be the liabilities with single lot #8 owner; if something were to happen in that particular detention basin area.

Mr. Reilly said that the Town also shares the concerns with the liability. Mr. Reilly wants to apologize about this issue and is one of the first projects that this issue has been handled and it obviously everyone is working their way through it. Mr. Reilly said the Town Board on this project and most residential projects the detention basins will have to be owned by the Home Owners Association, private owner; however, the applicant chooses to set it up as the applicant, the Town will require a maintenance easement agreement to be executed so the Town can maintain the facility that they do no want ownership of.

Mr. Bedore said that the Town by virtue of having maintenance easement would be responsible for the upkeep and maintenance. Mr. Reilly replied correct.

Mr. Doyle said that it is the Board’s conclusion that there would not a retention treatment district; it would be paid out of the general town fees.

Mr. Bedore said that the next comment was related to the high water in that particular detention basin and referring back to the Storm Water Report that has been submitted shows that the high water mark for the 100 year storm to be outside of the future right-of-way of the Saunders Lane extension. Mr. Bedore said that the Storm Water Report as it currently stands adequately addresses that comment.

Mr. Bedore said that reticulated grates should be or may be needed on catch basins. Mr. Bedore said that reticulated grates are typical on state highways. (DOT standards; interwoven grate pattern).

Ms. Cyr said that the concern was for catching it coming down the grade which was referred to by the Highway Superintendent.

Mr. Bedore said that he did not know if there was a precedent in Town and shares the concerns from a technical and practicing standpoint. Mr. Bedore visited other approved sites in the Town of Ballston (Meadowbrook Ct. and the SSP Industrial Park) and looked at the grades based on his experience and those areas appear to have better than 4% as well and have traditional cast iron catch basin grates, but not reticulated which is normal for DOT. Mr. Bedore is proposing in keeping with the same as what is existing at these sites. Ms. Cyr said that it was a suggestion from the Highway Superintendent.

Mr. Bedore would advise potentially against that, if there is a precedent, a reticulated grate would be adequate for this application; however, the Town Highway Department would have to stock. Mr. Bedore said that there is not a reticulated standard grate which would force the applicant into a larger structure 2 ½ x 4 basin; more maintenance cost, Town Highway Superintendent would have inventory available.

Ms. Cyr will take a look at the size and talk to the Highway Superintendent.

Mr. Bedore said that an easement needs to be added over the easement to the proposed low pressure sewer force main in the extension. Mr. Bedore asked if the current force main is sized adequately for 10 or 11 lots or future connection of the 10 lots down by the lake. Mr. Bedore believes that what is proposed is adequate.

Mr. Bedore said that there were comments about the cul-de-sac in terms of adding the grading detailing to the cul-de-sac detail. Comment #9 maximum slopes the cul-de-sac should be a maximum slope of 1%. The existing grades coming down the hill where the cul-de-sac is being proposed are 7% and it’s an engineering challenge to properly grade that out and make it work and transition it into the extension for the private road. Mr. Bedore said in order for the applicant to do a 1% "feather" from a new cul-de-sac into the private road extension would need to be set down into grade such that it could come back down and "feather" back down into the road. Mr. Bedore said that it is shown now at grade with a "hump" to keep the drainage down into the cul-de-sac in a higher flow in a drainage situation and then "feathering" back in.

Ms. Cyr said that details shown in her opinion would come up the cul-de-sac go up at 5% and immediately come back down at 5 ½ %, if that small "hump" could be reduced to something more practical. Mr. Bedore said traffic control in that area; stop signs for pedestrians traveling up from the lake. Mr. Bedore said that speed control signs will be added suitably proposed speed limit venturing 20-25 mph with consideration of the grades and the transition from the cul-de-sac in.

Mr. Bedore said that the next comment was related to the applicant’s proposal to tap off of the town water main on the west side of Route 50 and bring it under Route 50 into the project. Mr. Bedore said the plans indicated for four months directional drilling which is new technology using directionally controlled drilling to control the depth and horizontal direction and utilizing a pressure rated plastic pipe suitable for this application; pressure water system. Mr. Bedore said that he spoke with Jay Janczak of the NYSDOT and did not have a preference of what was being proposed or the more traditional larger steel casing with ductile iron pipe inside (historical standard in the Town of Ballston). Mr. Bedore said that this method has been used successfully in the past ten years and is safe and viable alternative. Mr. Bedore spoke with Mr. Whalen, Water Superintendent said that the standard Town precedent was no plastic and would follow the Town Engineer’s recommendations. Mr. Bedore said that he spoke with Ms. Cyr and would wait for Mr. Vopelak’s final opinion. Mr. Bedore said that this recommendation is reasonable and viable to suggest connecting into the water main into this manner. Mr. Bedore said that this would work, it’s safe and would down below the frost line. Mr. Bedore said that as a cost comparison in rough numbers the cost is double. (Directional boring is approximately $130.00 a ft. versus standard $250.00 a ft.). Mr. Bedore asked the Board to consider this as an option.

Mr. Bedore said that the hydrant detail will be revised.

Mr. Bedore said that the performance bond at the present time meets the Town acceptance.

Mr. Bedore said that at the present time the plan is technically complete in light of the comments that were raised.

Ms. Cyr said that Mr. Bedore has satisfied most of the questions and will be updated on the next submission.

Mr. Doyle would like to see better grading from the cul-de-sac to the private road and lower the speed. Mr. Bedore said that it is the Town and the Town Board’s prerogative to post the speed limit on that road.

Mr. Doyle asked Mr. Cyr if the Board could continue with the SEQR process. Ms. Cyr said that all the comments have addressed all items that are related to SEQR.

Mr. Doyle asked if big lot #10 should be released with DOH approval or come back before the Board. Mr. Doyle suggests that the applicant returns to the Board for a minor subdivision. Mr. Bedore asked what would the Board envision the review process. Mr. Doyle said that a presentation would be made to the Board and it would get reviewed and concur.

MOTION: Mr. Hayden moved to issue a Negative Declaration, with the basis that there is not a potentially significant environmental impact. Mr. Cwalinski seconded the motion. CARRIED.

MOTION: Mr. Cwalinski made a motion for preliminary approval. Ms. Cristy seconded the motion. Ms. Cristy voted in favor, Mr. Hayden voted in favor, Mr. VanVorst voted in favor, Mr. Cwalinski voted in favor and Ms. Eddy voted in favor. CARRIED.

Curtis Industrial Park, Route 67 for Site Plan Review. John Gay of Northeast Land Surveyors was present along with Mark Jacobsen, P.E. to present the case to the Board. The applicant is proposing two buildings consisting of 6,000 sq. ft each (60’x100’) to be used to repair heavy equipment. The buildings will be serviced by municipal water and sewer.

Mr. Gay said that CT Male suggestions were to place a concrete pad out in front for parking which will include a handi cap spot.

Mr. Gay said that the elevation is 256.6 and 256.5 and the parking areas is 257 or above the buildings are at 258.

Mr. Gay said that it was determined that a detention basin would not be recommended because the site sheet drains about 300’ – 500’ away into the Ballston swamp to a woodland area.

Mr. Gay said that the lighting will be wall packs.

Mr. Cwalinski said that what will be stored in the warehouse. Mr. Gay said tools.

Mr. Cwalinski asked what will be repaired in the warehouse. Mr. Gay said the construction vehicles that Schultz Construction; pickup trucks, dump truck, bulldozer any vehicle which is kept in their yard.

Mr. Cwalinski said that this application will require a Special Use Permit. Mr. Gay asked why.

Mr. Reilly said that the new zoning requires a Special Use Permit for this use.

Mr. VanVorst said that on the repair work that is going to be done is only for Schultz Construction. Mr. Gay replied yes. Mr. VanVorst asked if Schultz construction is aware of this. Mr. Gay said yes, because they are renting it for that purpose and maintaining their own equipment.

Mr. VanVorst said that there might be repair work done for other entities on that same facility. Mr. Gay said that construction companies intend to have their own mechanics and take care of their own equipment and if they get to a point where they have nothing to do, will not work on another contractor’s equipment.

Mr. VanVorst said typically when machines are brought in they are pressure washed and degreased. Mr. VanVorst asked is there any machinery or equipment to process that waste water planned for this site. Mr. Gay said that internal oil/water separator units in this case to remove the mud off a piece of equipment are not going to done in this type of a facility; it will be performed in the "store yard." Mr. Gay said from a practical standpoint the applicant did not see a need to put in an oil separator in the floors of the proposed buildings because typically washing will not be done; only mechanical work.

Mr. VanVorst said that if mechanical work is going to be performed, it will need to be cleaned before the work is performed. Mr. Gay said that they may spray down an engine, but not take mud off the tracks. Mr. VanVorst is not concerned with the mud it would be the grease from the engine. Mr. VanVorst said that Southworth and Nortrax have facilities with wash bays and equipment to process the wastewater. Mr. Gay said the comment was addressed to place a concrete pad out in front of the building for easy clean up if any residue were to be emitted.

Ms. Cyr said that she will ask one of their Environmental Scientist’s what the exact regulations are to washing vehicles. Ms. Cyr asked about oil spills and his comment was to place a concrete pad in front of the building. Ms. Cyr said that the only regulations would be if discharging to a septic system or onsite disposal system. Ms. Cyr said that there could be strict environmental regulations that dictate. Mr. Gay said that the applicant will comply.

Mr. Doyle said that if this is going to be repair shop facility and there should be some type of revetments for storage of petroleum products. Mr. Gays said the applicant will comply with the environmental laws.

Mr. Doyle reiterated that Storm Water Retention may not be good for this site because of the closeness and elevation relative to floodplain and concentration of all the runoff from these impervious surfaces may not be the be in the best interest of the total environment.

Mr. Doyle asked if there have been any problems with shifting of the floor in previous buildings. Mr. Gay said there have been problems with one building next to the railroad; infiltration of uphill storm water coming through the ballast on the railroad and coming down and has gotten near the floor of one building and twice has had 2" of ice on the floor. Mr. Gay said that will not be the case because this area is 3’ to 4’ above the finished floor elevation. Mr. Gay said that if a problem were to be anticipated, footing drains would be placed around the foundation.

Mr. Doyle asked if there are any plans to fix the existing drainage problems at the main entrance of the facility. Mr. Gay said that it is a joint venture with Lane Pipe in that area and in his opinion needs some work; filter fabric underneath and gravel will bring it up with some under drains on the other sides of the road.

Chairman Doyle opened the public hearing 8:41pm.

Mr. Gay said that these roads are private roads; not Town roads. Mr. Doyle has a concern for the heavy vehicle traffic on Route 67 and feels that this needs some consideration.

Richard Voehringer said that this proposal is a permitted use and provides employment, keeps the heavy machinery out of site and does not see a problem with Schultz Construction working on other contractor’s equipment. Mr. Voehringer thinks that it is a good project.

Chairman Doyle closed the public hearing 8:45pm.

Mr. Gay said that the applicant is looking to start construction April 2007.

Mr. Doyle said that two industrial buildings are being proposed in an Industrial Zone and the environmental concerns can be remediated.

Ms. Eddy said "Do your thing John."

Mr. Cwalinski said "Good project."

Mr. VanVorst said "I’ve done work for Schultz Construction for years and would very much appreciate being inside."

Mr. Hayden said "that if it is where it is suppose to be."

Ms. Cristy said "that it is fine with me; it’s an industrial area and looks good."

Mr. Doyle said that the Board concurs and this is a good conceptual plan and work with CT Male. Mr. Gay said that Ms. Cyr has been very cooperative and Mr. Doyle said that she is a very brilliant young lady.

Ms. Cyr said that the applicant indicated that the design provided and location of the outdoor lighting facilities was on the updated submission. Mr. Gay said that the cut sheets were for the wall packs. Ms. Cyr said wanted to confirm that there was not a formal lighting plan; illumination plan showing lighting contours.

Mr. Reilly said that a Special Use Permit application will still need to be submitted for the next meeting.

Application tabled.

Saratoga Chapel, 359 Eastline Road for Sketch Plan Conference. Mr. Doyle said that this proposal is for a storage shed; 12ft. x 20ft. with a gambrel roof and two cross buck doors. Alan Strong was present representing Saratoga Chapel and wanted to apologize to the Board for building already being placed on the site.

Mr. Strong indicated that the storage shed will be used to store a riding law mower and metal chairs, hoses, tools, shovels and rakes. Mr. Cwalinski asked if there was electrical power to the shed. Mr. Strong replied no. Mr. Hayden asked the height of the building. Mr. Strong replied 8ft. Ms. Cristy asked if the building will stay in the same location. Mr. Strong replied yes.

MOTION: Mr. VanVorst made a motion to accept the shed as it currently stands. Ms. Cristy seconded the motion. CARRIED.

New York Development Group, 1487 Route 50 for Sketch Plan Conference. Scott Lansing of Lansing Engineering was present to present the case to the Board. The application is for The Cornerstone Condominiums project which is located on the west side of NYS Route 50 north of Brookline Road and south of the Route 67 and the Route 50 intersection. The overall parcel is approximately 7.7 acres with an existing business on the parcel; Cornerstone Chimney across from Mangino Pontiac. The parcel is zoned Mixed Use North and the applicant’s are proposing condominium’s which consist of 15 buildings (4 units per building) each building would have a garage.

Mr. Lansing said that an access road is being proposed and a cul-de-sac in the back of the parcel. The green space area is located in the center with the roadway extending back with an additional cul-de-sac up on the northwest corner of the parcel. Mr. Lansing said an area has been retained out front of approximately 1.1 acres of the developed area that is being proposed at this time, is 6.6 acres so the balance of the parcel the applicant’s would like to retain for some form of future commercial use which is undermined at this time.

Mr. Lansing said that the access way to Route 50 would have one curb cut to be coordinated with DOT. Mr. Lansing said potentially for future development the curb cut could come off of that access way so it would only have one curb cut onto Route 50.

Mr. Lansing said storm water will be managed on site and conceptually positioned storm water management areas on the parcel which have not been formally designed yet. Mr. Lansing said water would be serviced by public water on the west side of Route 50.

Mr. Lansing said that sanitary sewer would be about 2500ft. to the south of the project by the railroad corridor where there is a SCSD trunk line and that area would have to convey to that through a series of gravity and/or force lines and would have to be determined at a later date.

Mr. Cwalinski would like to see sidewalks inside on both sides of the street and down along Route 50.

Mr. Cwalinski asked about screening.

Mr. Cwalinski asked about trash removal and dumpsters. Mr. Lansing said they would be internal rollaway cans.

Ms. Cristy asked if each unit will have a garage. Mr. Lansing replied yes, and additional parking in the driveway.

Mr. Booth, New York Development Group, distributed drawings of the proposed condominiums to the Board.

Ms. Eddy asked one car garage. Mr. Booth replied yes.

Mr. Johnson said that this application will require a Special Use Permit.

Mr. VanVorst asked the distance between Carpenter Acres and this property and if there is ownership between the two. Mr. Lansing said not to his knowledge. Mr. VanVorst is suggesting connecting this proposal to Carpenter Acres. Mr. Lansing said that there is not a R.O.W. Mr. Johnson said private lots all back up to this propertyl. Mr. VanVorst asked how the entrance will line up with the entrance to Mangino’s. Mr. Lansing said that Mangino’s is further to the south.

Ms. Eddy asked if the units will have two or three bedrooms. Mr. Knox, New York Development Group, said that it will be two or three depending on the unit chosen.

Ms. Cyr asked if this proposal is for a private road or town road. Mr. Lansing replied private road.

Mr. Hayden asked if the existing commercial buildings will be taken down. Mr. Booth said that the building in the front which is currently occupied will remain and the building in the rear will be taken down. Mr. Cwalinski asked if the current business going to remain. Mr. Booth said that there are two businesses; landscaping and chimney. Mr. Booth said that the landscaping business has shown and interest in remaining, but would not be able to operate at the same level. The chimney business would possibly continue their business on a smaller operation.

Mr. Booth said that the proposed driveway was positioned to the north for more flexibility down the road if a commercial application does come before the Board.

Ms. Eddy asked for driveway identification on properties on either side.

Mr. Hayden asked the plan for the center area. Mr. Lansing said to leave as green space.

Mr. Doyle asked about street lighting.

Ms. Eddy asked about traffic. Mr. Booth said that a traffic study has been prepared.

Ms. Eddy asked who has prepared the traffic study. Mr. Booth replied Creighton Manning.

A discussion was held on lighting; post lights and street lights. Mr. Booth said that a lighting plan will be proposed at a later date.

Ms. Eddy asked if a sign will be placed at the road. Mr. Booth replied yes. Mr. Doyle said that the sign ordinance will need to be followed.

Ms. Eddy said that she votes for "Trader Joes."

A further discussion was held on the proposed design of the buildings.

Ms. Eddy asked the cost of each unit. Mr. Knox said $200,000.00 would be the market. Mr. Booth said that the first floor is smaller the second floor by 200 sq. ft., but has a basement. The second floor has a larger floor plan which utilizes the space over the garage. Mr. Booth said that factoring in the cost of the sewer extension (2500ft.), site work, water and sidewalks is very difficult depending on the market.

Ms. Cristy said that it is not affordable housing. Mr. Booth agreed. Mr. Knox said when looking at affordable housing with HUD standards is $67,000 and the method is three to four times the affordable flow over the income; $200,000.00 to $250,000.00 would be considered affordable housing in Saratoga County.

Mr. Booth would like to point out this was part of the location which was originally proposed for the big boxes which will eliminate any possibility of this happening in this general area.

Mr. Doyle said that as the Storm Water Management areas are designed, is there a possibility that they could be made mobile to prevent standing water and cattails. Mr. Lansing said it is difficult, but will look into this matter.

Ms. Cyr has no engineering issues at this time.

Mr. Doyle polled the Board for there comments.

Ms. Cristy said that "it looks good to me."

Mr. Hayden said "so far so good."

Mr. VanVorst said "do it."

Mr. Cwalinski said "good plan."

Ms. Eddy said is in favor.

Mr. Doyle told that members of the audience that a concept plan there is no public hearing.

Mr. Doyle said that Mr. Booth indicated that this is "Smart Growth versus Big Box Stores."

Application tabled.

MOTION: Mr. Hayden made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Cwalinski seconded the motion. CARRIED.

Meeting adjourned. 9:15pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

Michelle L. Dingman