Chairman Doyle called the March 8, 2007 meeting to order at 7:30pm and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Chairman Doyle reviewed the agenda.

John Smith, Zepko Lane for a Sketch Plan Conference/Major Subdivision. Mike Brooks of Tommell and Associates was present to present the case to the Board. Mr. Brooks said that this proposed subdivision is located in the Town and the Village of Ballston. The proposal is for a 16 lot subdivision on approximately 24 acres with 10 lots that will be proposed in the Village of Ballston and 6 lots in the Town of Ballston will both be accessed by Lewis Street from the Village side. Mr. Brooks said that 8.2 acres of land on the Village side will be over 10,000sq. ft. and 760 linear feet of new road. Mr. Brooks said that 16.5 acres will be subdivided into 6 lots in the Town of Ballston with the minimum lot size of 17,000sq. ft. and will be presented as a Conservation Subdivision which will include greenspace in the rear and 540 linear feet of new road.

Mr. Brooks said that the wetlands have been delineated by DEC, but have not received verification from the ACOE until a construction permit has been applied for.

Mr. Doyle indicated that this application is on the April 11, 2007 agenda for the Village of Ballston. Mr. Doyle asked if the project will be serviced by village water and sewer. Mr. Brooks said access will be from Chester St. and Lewis Street.

Ms. Eddy has a concern for the "drop off" and wants to know "how much of a drop can be done." Mr. Brooks said that will not be connected.

Mr. VanVorst asked if the plan was to finish Lewis Street all the way. Mr. Brooks replied no. Mr. VanVosrst suggested adjusted Trumble Street to access. Mr. Brooks said that there is concern with the grade and are trying to avoid. Mr. VanVorst said that the grade is greater on the bottom of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Brooks said that it would be parallel with the contours.

Mr. Cwalinski asked who is responsible for the storm water management area. Mr. Brooks said that the storm water management is whether an access easement, Home Owners Association, Town or Village. Mr. Brooks said that it would be similar to Saunders Lane; that was just completed. Mr. Rhodes said that Saunders Road was a complete Town Road; this will be part Town and part Village. Mr. Rhodes said that the storm water management area should be owned or maintained or on property within whichever municipality is going to maintain the road. Mr. Brooks said that it could possibly be a combination. Mr. Cwalinski said that a building envelope goes through a storm water management area. Mr. Brooks said that a new easement will be cut out for that storm water management area; conceptually shown.

Mr. Rhodes said that the building needs to be compatible with what the Village is going to approve. Mr. Rhodes said that a Conservation Subdivision is being proposed so the building envelopes and lot sizes can be redefined. Mr. Rhodes said that a much smaller lot being proposed in the Village with the building envelope being closer to the street which should be followed across the Town of Ballston side.

Mr. Doyle said that it is the Board’s opinion to make the Village the Lead Agency in the SEQR process because that is where the water and sewer are going to be coming from. Mr. Rhodes said that a coordinated review is more applicable.

Mr. Doyle said that setback line around the cul-de-sac of 370’ to 335’. Mr. VanVorst has a concern for lot #13 having a steep driveway if taking soil away from the west side of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Brooks said that it needs to be looked at whether it is cutting, filling to raise the grade up to meet the minimum with the driveway.

A further discussion was held on setbacks.

Mr. Rhodes said that following the Rural Guidelines to use the conservation techniques to preserve assets; create open space, protect development away from the wetlands.

Mr. Rhodes has a concern for the width of Lewis Street and make sure that the Village is cognizant of this under the SEQR process for emergency services access. Mr. Rhodes wants to make sure that there is sufficient fire flow, vehicle access, the grades work and to have that in the Town record.

Ms. Eddy said that it is "more like a long driveway."

Mr. Johnson asked how many homes will be on Lewis Street total. Mr. Johnson said that if there are more than 21, there will be a problem with a cul-de-sac.

Application tabled.

Joseph Hilco, 169 Lake Road Site Plan Review/concept. Eric Rutland, agent for the applicant was present to present the case to the Board. The proposal is for a 2200sq. ft. home addition on 169 Lake Road which meets all the setbacks and will be also adding a new septic system.

Mr. Rutland said that the proposal is to repair the waterfront on the other side 8’ to 10’; due to erosion

Mr. Cwalinski asked what steps will be taken to repair the erosion. Mr. Rutland said to extend out with a head wall which needs DEC and ACOE approval.

Mr. Hayden asked the location of the septic system. Mr. Rutland replied the front yard.

A discussion was held on location of driveway and septic system.

Mr. Doyle asked during the construction of the addition, will the individual continue to live in the residence. Mr. Hilco said that the building is not livable it’s to small and presently reside in Ballston Spa.

Ms. Cristy asked how the applicant plans on repairing the shoreline. Mr. Rutland said that the applicant would like to fill it in and get the area back to grass. Mr. Rhodes said that it is unlikely that it will be able to be filled, but will allow some bulk heads for additional soil erosion. Mr. Hilco said that #2 stone was allowed Mr. Rhodes said that there are a couple of ponding areas behind it that are likely to be considered wetlands. Mr. Rhodes said that protecting the shoreline erosion, however, is something that the Board needs to be sensitive about so sediments do not get back into the lake.

Mr. Doyle asked the Board their concerns with the non conforming lot size with the proposed 2200sq. ft. house.

Mr. Rhodes asked the thresholds on an expansion on a nonconforming lot. Mr. Reilly said that the lot is meeting all the bulk and area of the setback requirements; build on a nonconforming lot. Mr. Rhodes asked if there is a 20% expansion. Mr. Reilly said a nonconforming use, not a nonconforming lot.

Mr. Johnson asked the septic system distance from the lake. Mr. Johnson said that the Town’s policy is that is a replacement system cannot meet the "RedBook" standards the Town Board will act the Board of Health for a variance.

A further discussion was held on the separation distances to adjoining property lines. Mr. Rhodes said to define it on the map. Mr. Johnson asked if it downgrade in from 150ft. Mr. Rhodes said to a well. Mr. Johnson said that it needs to be addressed. Mr. Rhodes said that there is a Town code that requires the applicant to comply with the "RedBook." Mr. Johnson replied yes, if the system does not comply with the Town code the Board acts as the Board of Health and would consider a variance.

Mr. Doyle reiterated the concerns with the size of the dwelling, size of the lot and will need to determine how the shoreline will need to be repaired.

Mr. Rhodes said that the Board cannot have a concern over the size regarding the size of the expansion. Mr. Doyle said logically it is a very large addition for a very small lot.

Application tabled.

New York Development Group, Lake Road for a Planned Unit Development. Scott Lansing, P.E., of Lansing Engineering was present with Jeff Knox and Geoff Booth of New York Development Group to present the case to the Board. The proposal is for The StoneBridge Mixed-Use Residential Planned Unit Development District. Mr. Lansing said that this project proposed is a PUDD following the TND Standards within the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The proposal is over 100 units and is required to follow the PUD process. Mr. Lansing said that the applicant has been in front of the Town Board with a referral and received positive comments from each Town Board member and felt that the project complied with the Comprehensive Plan.

Mr. Doyle asked Mr. Lansing to give an exact location to the audience members. Mr. Lansing said that it is located on the south east side of Lake Road by the Ballston Creek where the creek leads into Ballston Lake near Outlet Road.

Mr. Lansing said that in the PUDD process the applicant is required to get referral from the Town Board to the Planning Board to review layout (conceptual) for density to be referred back to the Town Board and would then hold a public hearing an enact the legislation for the PUDD and then return back to the Planning Board for a detailed design of the project.

Mr. Lansing said that the overall parcel consists of 74.1 acres on the south east side of Lake Road and adjacent to the Chapel Hill project which is under construction at this time. The vegetation of the parcel is densely wooded; underbrush, forested. Mr. Lansing said the topography on site are moderate grades uniform from the south east portion of the site to the north west portion of the site; contours are parallel to Lake Road. Mr. Lansing said that the wetlands have been delineated by a Wetland Scientist and the ACOE have performed their on site delineation and are expecting a jurisdiction determination letter.

Mr. Lansing said that the surrounding uses of the parcel are single family residence on Lake Road on the south east side and a wetland area on the north west side surrounding Ballston Creek.

The parcel is zoned Ballston Lake Residential and have an exact boundary survey and topography have been performed for the site; 2’ contours.

Mr. Lansing said that the PUDD is being proposed within the Ballston Lake Residential zone and area requirements are per the TND standards per section 104-14. Mr. Lansing said that a density determination for the parcel for unconstrained land was 63.64 acres. Mr. Lansing said that in accordance with the guidelines the applicants are permitted six units per acre for a single family residence or 12 units per acres for multiple family residences. Mr. Lansing said the allowable density range of 382 units to 764 units for the parcel.

Mr. Lansing said that the applicant’s are proposing Mixed-Use Residential Development totaling 242 units overall on 43.98 acres.

Mr. Lansing said that the applicant’s are proposing to preserve the rural view of Lake Road and position as much open space in the front portion of the parcel and limit the curb cut. Mr. Lansing said that the applicant’s are proposing a "Boulevard" type entrance with a green corridor around through the Boulevard. Mr. Lansing said that a round-about was made as a central focal point for the project and from that round-about will be split off the individual uses of the project.

Mr. Lansing said that the three types of the project:

Townhouses

Single Family residential

Condominiums

Mr. Lansing said that the individual units have been separated with green space for each individual use.

Mr. Lansing said that single family detached is targeted toward young professionals, young families, empty nesters and seniors which will be approximately 15.57 acres of the parcel. The lot sizes will be 5,000sq. ft. and are proposing 70 units. Mr. Lansing said that the town homes will be triplexes targeted toward young professionals, empty nesters and seniors and will be approximately 11.27 acres. The lot sizes will be 40,000sq. ft. and would have zero lots lines and those lots associated with the zero lots lines would be 16,000sq. ft. and are proposing 12 buildings or 36 units overall. Mr. Lansing said that the condominiums are 8 unit buildings which will be approximately 12.65 acres on the overall parcel will be targeted toward young professionals, empty nesters and seniors. Mr. Lansing said that there will be Home Owners Association associated with that complex which is proposed to have a maintenance free type of living arrangement. Mr. Lansing said that the applicant is proposing 17 buildings or 136 units overall. Mr. Lansing said that the buildings that are proposed for the condominiums are similar to the Beacon Hill Plan; applicant is flexible on the type of building to be placed; possible 6 unit buildings or 4 unit buildings.

Mr. Lansing said that there is a narrative for potential future neighborhood business area which is positioned so that the main entrance coming into the project on the adjacent areas for potential use.

Mr. Lansing said that there is 9,210 linear feet of roadway proposed. The round-about design will be placed on the plan as a concept.

Mr. Lansing said that the wetland disturbance is for the project is less than a 1/10 of an acre.

Mr. Lansing said that water would be proposed to be extended form the Lancaster Ct. within the Eastline Farms project and be distributed to the entire project and brought up to the intersection of Lake Road.

Mr. Lansing said that the sanitary sewer is proposed to be conveyed by gravity to an area down to a central pump station. The pump station in the Eastline Farms project will be abandoned and gravity flows from both Eastline Farms and Chapel Hill down gravity to that central pump station. Mr. Lansing said that central pump station was identified in the Master Plan Sewer Study for the Ballston Lake Watershed area and the pump station for this project and the Chapel Hill project will be designed to handle a much broader area in accordance with the sewer study. Mr. Lansing said that the proposed force main from that to go back out to the Chapel Hill project to Eastline Road where there is a trunk line on Eastline Road and the force line that was considered for the design of the Chapel Hill project so the discharge from that pump station and the surrounding area; the force line will be able to accommodate the flow.

Mr. Lansing said that storm water will be managed on site and the proposal has conceptual locations at this time.

Mr. Lansing said that open space on the project is 30.12 acres or 41% of the overall site.

Mr. Lansing said that the streetscape that is being proposed is sidewalks on both sides of the road throughout the entire project will be 5’ wide and ADA compliant sidewalks. Mr. Lansing said that street trees would be positioned in between the edge of the pavement and the sidewalk in accordance with the ADA standards. Mr. Lansing said that street lights are being proposed on both sides of the roadway in a staggering fashion; a maximum of 100’ per the TND guidelines.

Mr. Lansing said that there is a lot of passive park land on the proposal.

Mr. Lansing said that the applicant’s are proposing a contribution of $100,000.00 to the Town of Ballston to assist in securing Federal or State Grants.

Mr. Lansing said that a technical comment that was raised regarding an internal plan not be submitted; the project is conceptually outlined which include site details. Mr. Lansing said that the grade for the water supply and pressure flow does go downhill and supplies enough pressure and will alleviate friction loss.

Mr. Lansing said that the project phasing is in the conceptual design phase and will be developed as the project progresses.

Mr. Lansing said that the Traffic Impact Study has been initiated.

Mr. Lansing said that the wetlands have been highlighted on the map and showing less than 1/10 of an acre.

Mr. Lansing said that storm water management access and ownership; central locations have been determined for basins and will work with the Town to identify and accessibility.

Mr. Lansing said that the connection has been shown on Lancaster Ct.

Mr. Lansing said that the comments from the Town Planner were incomplete or missing items on the submission regarding open space. Mr. Lansing said that landscaping details for the project will be outlined. Mr. Lansing said that the utilities, phasing, Traffic Impact Study and storm water management areas.

Mr. Lansing feels the coverage statistics were outlined in the narrative and outlined the amount of open space area on the parcel and feels that this item was addressed and impact on adjacent properties and impact on services. Mr. Lansing said that the open space that would be provided on the project. Mr. Lansing said that the applicant’s are working on a model ordinance for the PUDD for the project. The final comments from the Town Planner were in reference to the Town’s Traditional Neighborhood Design Standard (TND) and possibly additional development for the Board to consider.

Mr. Lansing would like to reiterate the TND purpose: The purpose of these standards if to allow the optional development and redevelopment of land in the Hamlet Residential and Ballston Lake Residential Zoning Districts consistent with design principals of Traditional Neighborhoods.

A Traditional Neighborhood is relatively compact. Mr. Lansing feels that this proposal is relatively compact according to the density calculations there could be less maintenance on the project and more units and the applicants chose to reduce the number of units to increase the amount of green space and still provide the buffers.

Mr. Lansing said that is designed for the human scale; the applicant’s feel that it is not "big box" type of structure and have architectural features on the structures such that they develop into a human scale; rendering, types of structures, layout and differing types of uses.

Mr. Lansing said provides a mix of uses, including, residential, commercial, civic, and open space uses in close proximity to one another within the neighborhood. Mr. Lansing said that there are three different types of uses and suits a broad range of income levels, ages levels and family situations with a mix of uses within the project.

Mr. Lansing said that it incorporates a system of relatively narrow interconnected streets with sidewalks or pedestrian paths, bikeways and transit that offer multiple uses to routes to motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Mr. Lansing said the roadway network will have a central roadway coming in and a round-about in the middle splitting off into various uses and those uses connect back to one another into the main thoroughfare. Mr. Lansing said that there are areas within the project for potential future extension for other projects.

Mr. Lansing said that retains existing buildings with historical features or architectural features that enhance the visual character of the community. Mr. Lansing said while the parcel does not include any historical features or architectural features, the applicant’s feel an important feature on the project is the rural corridor along Lake Road and tried to preserve. Mr. Lansing said that once this is constructed, the roadway entering the project will have a "grand entrance with a Boulevard" and will develop the green wooded area along the front of the parcel will be secluded.

Mr. Lansing said that it incorporates significant environmental features into the design. Mr. Lansing said that the project has a fair amount of wetlands on the parcel and is consistent with the Towns Comprehensive Plan.

Mr. Lansing said actual individual standards for specific TND subdivision development:

Mr. Lansing said that the bonuses in reference to the 16 units per acre and 12 units per acre have proposed blocks and dimensions have outlined of what the maximum and minimum size of lot will be. Mr. Lansing said that a grid or block pattern has been created to work around the environmental constraints. Mr. Lansing said that the project also supplies residential development on the parcel. Mr. Lansing said that lot sizes and setbacks have identified. Mr. Lansing said that circulation with the project to be proposed provides functional and visual links. Mr. Lansing said that sidewalks and roadways are linked to open space areas. Mr. Lansing said that the street orientation has been identified in the area to enhance open space corridor in the front. Mr. Lansing said that there is an encouragement of a variety of architectural features and the applicant feels that they comply. Mr. Lansing said that 10-20% open space required and have provided 40% open space. Mr. Lansing said another requirement in the TND guidelines is to be within a 10 minute walk; 100% of the residents are within a 10 minute walk of the site. Mr. Lansing said that lighting fixture have been proposed including the spacing on both sides of the roadway. Mr. Lansing said that within the project in the corridor are long and short roads with proposed screening along Lake Road. Mr. Lansing said that the applicant’s are working towards a referral back to the Town Board to consider legislation for this project.

Mr. Hayden asked what school district this project is located. Mr. Lansing replied Ballston Spa. Mr. Cwalinski asked the estimated impacts on the school district; similar to Beacon Hill. Mr. Booth replied that he would "get the numbers together for you."

Mr. Rhodes said that in reference to the scope of the Board’s review the mixing of terms; Traditional Neighborhood Design Standards implying that the application is exempt, since it is a PUDD. Mr. Rhodes asked the scope of the Board’s review. Mr. Rhodes asked has the Planning Board been assigned a project that the zoning that this mixture of uses that are being presented and that were reviewed by the Town Board meets the TND standards; does the Planning Board have jurisdiction. Mr. Doyle said that it was his understanding from the Town Board that concluded this application was appropriate. Mr. Rhodes asked to be in conformance with the TND. Mr. Reilly said that it section 104-14; what triggers the PUDD is the size of the project, however the intent of the ordinances even if done under a PUDD, the TND guidelines will prevail and should be applied must be applied. Mr. Reilly said the intent of the ordinance is TND should apply.

Mr. Rhodes said that the Planning Board has the flexibility. Mr. Rhodes said that use of the Design Standards has shaped this project, but still needs work based on the details presented.

Mr. Rhodes asked Ms. Cyr if there is a concern with a looped water main. Mr. Rhodes asked if it is a requirement for this project, or would the typical flushing equipment be appropriate. Ms. Cyr asked for a fire flow test on a portion of the Chapel Hill Subdivision and would need results when completed. Ms. Cyr has prepared a hydraulic model of the Town of Ballston system and there are issues with fire flows in this area. Ms. Cyr has a concern for a main break in these areas; there would be no water to the customers. Ms. Cyr said after speaking to the Water Department there recommendation was constructing a loop up Outlet Road (bottom of hill past railroad tracks) and would need to be looked at by the consulting engineer whether or not fire flows will work. A further discussion was held on dead end loops in the Town and would be incumbent on water district extensions. Ms. Cyr said that the water district would defer to the CT Male analysis and the fire flows results from the water were bad. Mr. Rhodes suggested booster pumps to increase pressure. Ms. Cyr replied yes. Ms. Cyr would have to speak to the Water District and Town Board who could mandate a Water District improvement or extension. Ms. Cyr said that there were studies performed in the late 1990’s early this decade regarding extending along Lake Road which is not cost beneficial based upon a lack of density in this area. Ms. Cyr said that it may affect this plan significantly without fire flows and does not feel that booster pumps will help the situation it will be drawing from a long water main.

Mr. Rhodes asked if there is anything that the Town Board is considering that exceeds the DEC thresholds for storm water protection. Ms. Cyr replied no not at this time. Mr. Rhodes said that that comments would not apply because this project would be triggered by phase II actions.

Mr. Rhodes asked the applicant’s to show commercial proposal that would work within the project.

Mr. Rhodes said that the round-about needs to be designed to work. Mr. Booth said that this has been reviewed so there are no pedestrian connections to the area in the center. Mr. Booth said the plan was to make this proposal visually appealing which may need adjustments. Mr. Rhodes said that the entry and exit radius’s have to be designed better and there should be a central splitter island to be ADA compliant.

Mr. Rhodes asked who would take over the open space ownership. Mr. Booth said that the open space going toward the south west corner would be owned by the Home Owners Association or it could be turned over to the Town of Ballston. Mr. Rhodes said that this should be addressed parallel with the Planning Board’s review directly to the Town Board if there is a use for it with an extension of a pedestrian pathway happening along Outlet Road or a possibility of a pocket park.

Mr. Rhodes said that the garages should be recessed from the roadway. The TND standards allow the structures to be close to the sidewalk; when a garage is placed that close, it is no longer pedestrian scale it is more vehicle oriented. Mr. Rhodes said by offsetting those with a longer driveway could accommodate the same architectural standards.

Mr. Rhodes said that a typical wing curb or concrete curb needs to be discussed with Joseph Whalen, Highway Superintendent. Mr. Rhodes said that the typical curbing is concrete and protects the landscape island.

Mr. Rhodes said that the landscape plan needs to be incorporated in the PUDD legislation.

Mr. Rhodes said that the density computation requires a Town Planning Board’s action. Mr. Rhodes said that it is at the Planning Board’s discretion to increase density based on these TND features; sidewalks, landscaping.

Mr. Rhodes asked if the Town Board involved with the creation of the sidewalk and lighting district. Mr. Rhodes said that the connections along the sidewalks need to be maintained year round as either a sidewalk district so it can be contracted out and collectively maintained or it goes onto the local landowners.

Mr. Doyle said that the Town Board will be interested in how the snow removal with be handled on the sidewalks.

Mr. Rhodes said the ideal way is to encumber the adjacent properties.

Mr. Rhodes said that the TND guidelines said that there is an individual curb cut for a service road or parallel easements between the parking lots to adjoin each other and minimize those access points.

Mr. Rhodes said that material on the checklist is all required, but need to discuss the impacts on adjoining properties; a narrative describing that you can or cannot see it from the road. (see documentation)

Mr. Rhodes asked for a narrative for sewer and solid waste. Mr. Booth said basically "a synopsis."

Mr. Rhodes said on page (3) regarding density said that 5,000sq. ft. minimum per lot; 5,000sq. minimum lot size. Mr. Rhodes had the same question with the townhouses.

Mr. Rhodes said that the important concept is the diversity in housing stock which is being shown, but wants to make sure that that there is the diversity in this doesn’t become a "gated community." Mr. Booth asked Mr. Rhodes to repeat. Mr. Rhodes said that "to make sure that these are not all real expensive homes that nobody can afford to live there and would like to see a wide variety of people moving into the Town or being able to stay in the Town."

Mr. VanVorst asked why the entrance to this project did not closely coincide with Outlet Road. Mr. Booth said to keep it as far away from the Lake as possible and preserve that land closest to the Lake.

Mr. VanVorst asked if this is a wetland area. Mr. Booth said yes and open area as well. Mr. VanVorst asked in the area marked "active parkland", what are the plans there. Mr. Booth said there are no plans and will working through as the plan progresses. Mr. VanVorst asked if there are intentions to change the landscaping in the open areas along Lake Road. Mr. Booth said the intention is to leave as much existing vegetation as possible.

MOTION: Mr Rhodes made a motion to allow the increased density according to the TND guidelines as presented as long as the applicant continues to apply the TND standards through the rest of the review of the project. Ms. Eddy seconded the motion and all present voted in favor. CARRIED.

Ms. Cyr asked if the roads will be Town owned. Mr. Knox replied that the condos to the south will be Home Owners Association and the remaining will be Town Road.

Ms. Cyr said that the Board’s would like to see the storm water management basin privately owned with a maintenance easement agreement to the Town and access. Ms. Cyr has a concern with the location of the southern most basin behind the condos which does not look like it has a lot of access and it would not be the preference of the Town to have the Home Owners Association maintain these basins. Mr. Rhodes suggests installing a driveway. Ms. Cyr recommends maintenance through one of the condo driveways.

Mr. Cyr has a comment about the sanitary design and likes the idea of the having that common pump station per the Ballston Lake Water Shed Design. Ms. Cyr recommends a larger pump station with future space for an extra pump to accommodate any future design.

Mr. Rhodes asked if the pump station is sized for the application and oversize the pipes. Mr. Doyle said the equipment.

MOTION: Mr. Rhodes made a motion for sketch plan approval of this conceptual sketch. Mr. Voss’s opinions were the Board’s consideration of the TND Standards as to how they conform to this project and with the density issues.

Mr. Doyle asked if an archeological study has been performed on the site. Mr. Booth said that a study has been performed several years ago and SHPO did sign-off on it; it was a 1 (B).

Mr. Doyle said that the Town has a concern how the water system comes out and how it affects the whole area. The other issues were curbs and needs to discuss with Joseph Whalen, Highway Superintendent.

MOTION: Mr. Rhodes made a motion to approve a sketch plan approval as presented. Ms. Eddy seconded the motion and all present voted in favor. CARRIED.

Mr. Reilly asked for the proposed draft of the local law and section 138-24 the procedure for the PUDD the level of review at this point; may require more detail than other Town’s require.

Mr. Johnson asked who will schedule the public hearing. Mr. Doyle replied the Town Board.

Mr. Rhodes asked for County comment parallel with preliminary plans.

Mr. Rhodes asked who will be performing the SEQR process. Mr. Reilly replied the Town Board. Mr. Rhodes asked on the zoning action. Mr. Reilly replied yes. Mr. Rhodes asked will it be based on the development impact SEQR or SEQR for the zoning action. Mr. Reilly said that Town Board has to perform the SEQR action of the approval/legislation. Mr. Rhodes replied environmental impacts as well as the zoning legislation.

Application tabled.

Alan Colyer, 227 Blue Barns Road for a Minor Subdivision. Duane Rabideau of Gilbert VanGuilder and Associates was present to present the case to the Board. Mr. Rabideau said the proposal is to subdivide the 22.34 acres into three lots. Mr. Rabideau said that lot (1) will consist of 16 acres which would encompass the existing house and improvements. Lot (2) would consist of 1.8 acres and lot (3) would consist of 4.2 acres. Mr. Rabideau said that the site has public water and will have individual septic systems. Mr. Doyle said that the Board’s determination is that the two adjoining lots are not within the Water District. Mr. Doyle said that the original 16 acres does have some land in the water district, but the home is not within the district; but does have water.

Mr. Doyle said that each proposal will have its own driveway. Mr. Doyle said that the on Lot (3) there is large ACOE wetlands.

Mr. Cwalinski asked for a common driveway; access management.

Ms. Eddy asked for dry sewers.

Ms. Eddy has a concern for all the contaminated soil across the street and how the water will run. Ms. Eddy asked for soils tests before wells are placed on the property. (heavy metals, contaminants) Mr. Doyle said this area is part of the orchard and realize that an arsenic type base is not being used. This is across the area from where there were orchards which were contaminated and had a lot of surface soil removed. Mr. Doyle recommends a soil analysis to see if contaminants are in the soil.

Mrs. Kline said that there is no water and the Town does not want to give it to us. The berms are full of contaminated soil.

Ms. Eddy said that the map needs right-to-farm law added. Mr. Cwalinski said that #12 on the SEQR form needs to be completed.

Mr. Doyle does not see a need for dry sewers for this application. Mr. Rhodes wants to see development does preclude connection to a sewer. Mr. Rhodes said that perhaps an easement along the frontage would allow a connection to be made.

Mr. Rhodes said a 10’ sewer easement to be granted to be used by properties from lot (3) can convey across lot (2) and across lot (1) and connect into the sewer system that would be potentially access into Seelye; utility easement.

Mr. Rhodes said a 20’ easement.

Mr. Reilly said to whom will that to be conveyed; Town, Sewer District. Mr. Reilly said to convey to the Town of Ballston as successors and/or assigns.

Mr. Doyle asked about the proposal for a common driveway. Mr. Rhodes feels that it is a good idea and consistent with the County Plan.

Mr. Rhodes said to show minimum lot size on map with or without water recognizing that a Water District extension will be needed.

Mr. Rhodes said to add the water contingency note.

Mr. Doyle abstains from voting on this application. Mr. Cwalinski abstains from voting on this application.

Mr. Doyle opened the public hearing 9:27pm.

Gina Marozzi commented that Mr. Colyer is not included in the water, but has water. Mr. Doyle said that the water on his property and can run it any place on the property. As long as the entrance adjoins the Water District it can be run to the house. Mr. Johnson said that if you look at the Water District map a section of the property on Kingsley Road a portion of that is in the Water District. Ms. Marozzi said that if you are not in the water district, if there is extensions to get into the district can the adjoining property owner’s hook up to the water. Mr. Doyle replied yes.

Mr. Doyle reiterated that a technical analysis of the soil will be performed to look for heavy metals, contaminants.

Mr. Reilly asked if there is a standard for one or two places on the lot. Mr. Doyle said that a DOH had a grid type standard.

Ms. Eddy read the County comments (see attached)

Application tabled.

Meeting adjourned. 9:25pm

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle L. Dingman

Enc.