Worries about pink flamingoes
Rosedale Way gets conceptual approval

GUILDERLAND — The exclusive Rosedale Meadows condominiums may get new neighbors of the two-legged variety. An adjoining parcel formerly held a horse and pasture, but a four-unit home will soon replace them.

Surveyor Mark Blackstone told the Guilderland Planning Board last week that the applicant, John Ciancetta, plans to match the siding and shingle colors, and other architectural features, of the homes he plans to build on 1.1 acres on Rosedale Way to those of nearby Rosedale Meadows. Ciancetta is a former Rosedale Meadows resident, Blackstone said.

In the old pasture, the outbuildings will be removed and a 4,600-square-foot four-unit town house will be built, Blackstone said. An existing single-family home will be subdivided from the townhouse parcels. The property is zoned for townhouses, but, across the street, the zoning is R-15 for single-family residences. Blackstone said that 15-foot side yards will be maintained to meet both standards.

Ciancetta fully anticipates maintaining the standards set by Rosedale Meadows so the new building is not out of character for the neighborhood, Blackstone said.

Rosedale Meadows is located off of West Lydias street near the northern border of Guilderland.

Board member Paul Caputo asked if the owners of the new homes would join the established homeowners’ association at Rosedale Meadows.
Joining the homeowners’ association is "past the point of being realistic," Blackstone said.

Albert Brevetti, a Rosedale Meadows resident who was a planning board member long ago, asked if the addition of four units would affect the density of the allowed zoning. Adding four more units, he told The Enterprise, would crowd the original intent of the Planned Unit Development zoning.
"This wasn’t a lot in the original subdivision, but it was mapped then," Blackstone said.
"I don’t think it’s a density issue," Blackstone told The Enterprise. He said that the initial application may or may not have specified 90 units in Rosedale Meadows and on the proposed lot, but that the number is not a critical aspect of the application. He said that requirements for the town are six units per acre. "We have more square-footage than necessary to build the four [units]," he said.
The proposed units are 24 feet wide, compared to units in Rosedale Meadows, which meet the town’s minimum requirement of 20 feet, Blackstone said. "Twenty feet is a little bit tight for two rooms," he said.

One Rosedale Meadows resident said at the meeting that worries of cars and trash on the lawn, late parties, pink flamingoes, and orange doors would not be taken care of by architectural similarities.
"What’s to prevent chaos"" he said. "Potentially, it could be a nightmare."

Blackstone told The Enterprise that he and Ciancetti will propose "a contractual obligation of a purchaser"to become a dues-paying and stricture-abiding member" of a homeowners’ association "to allay any fears of purple doors and all-night parties."

The board gave Ciancetti conceptual approval.

Mill Hill

Mill Hill developers, planning a large complex for seniors off of Route 155 in Guilderland, continued to wrangle with town requirements at the Guilderland Planning Board meeting last week, and the final site-plan approval they sought was delayed.

In August, the planning board suggested that the development include landscaping, pedestrian walkways, and a traffic study. Last week, Mill Hill presented all of those.

Skip Francis of CT Male said that deciduous trees had been added to the landscaping, as had a pedestrian walk and bike path. A separate Stewart’s Shop landscaping plan will also be proposed, he said. The town should take ownership of the water and sewer facilities, he said. Francis said that an 8-acre parcel at Johnston Road would be donated to the town.

Terresa Bakner, of Whiteman, Osterman and Hanna in Albany, said that the ballet school included under the 1993 agreement would also be dedicated to the town.

Mill Hill is seeking approval of the Planned Unit Development plan approved in 1993. The plan was to be built in stages: Phase one was a 100-bed senior residence, which has already been built. The current phases include 88 multi-family units, 24 townhouses, and a Stewart’s convenience store. Phase four includes a 12,000-square-foot office building and nursing home. Phase four is not currently before the town.

Bakner said that a stoplight was allowed by the state’s Department of Transportation only because the Stewart’s shop is there. Bakner hoped to have a final agreement for the deed for Mill Hill Court soon. Planning Board Attorney Linda Clark said that the current owner of the property must be a co-applicant. Clark said that the road ownership was an important issue.
"We have a right-of-access — not something we can pass on to someone else," Bakner said.
"We’re not talking about a shared driveway here," Clark said. "We’re talking about a network of roads."
Planning board Chairman Stephen Feeney said that the multi-use path as proposed was "unacceptable."
"Basically, they’re in the street with a stripe," he said.

Bakner said that a multi-purpose path was always in the plan, and that the design is for private roadways.
"Putting people out on a roadway"is a non-starter," Feeney said. "It’s basically an expanded shoulder" where people will park cars, he said. "I had envisioned a typical sidewalk"five feet between the sidewalk and the road, with trees between." Feeney said that a multi-use pathway should be eight feet across, not six feet as proposed. "It’s just inappropriate. It doesn’t meet any standards," he said.
Feeney also questioned the lack of greenspace, noting the steep grade behind the proposed townhouses. "There’s no real accommodation for space," he said. The pedestrian realm was supposed to be more developed, he said.
"It provides an amenity that wasn’t there before," countered Bakner.
"We’re certainly willing to work with your engineer. To put people on the street"is not an idea that we’re going to endorse," Feeney said. "Pedestrian access is very important to us."

Bakner said that the pedestrian access would be designed by Creighton Manning engineers.

Board member Lindsay Childs, who also chairs the town’s Pathways Committee, said that the board may meet again with the developers, but Feeney hastened to add that all meetings would be public.
"You could make it very attractive or very unpleasant, and right now, it’s very unpleasant," Childs told the Mill Hill representatives.
Ann Pennock of Maid Marion Road in Albany, said that she plans to buy a home in the Mill Hill development. "Every time they come before the board, you ask for new things. I’ve waited two years," she said.

The board told her that new projects take time.

Other business

In other business, the board:

— Approved a proposal by Dominic Rigosu to subdivide 5.17 acres on Veeder Road into three lots. He plans to build a cottage-style house with a garage on the first level and a living space on the second. The board said that the plan should show limits of grading a clearing, and that Rigosu may be limiting the project by showing the home built into a hill;

— Approved a two-lot subdivision of 1.4 acres on Carman Road. Engineer Mike Davis of ABD Engineers represented the Moule family, who intend to build a home on one lot. An existing two-family home is on the first lot.

An existing ditch on the property with a pipe and a grate covering gets blocked with debris and needs to be cleaned out, residents said at the public hearing.

Davis’s plan calls for 180-feet of pipe to deal with drainage issues on the parcel, but town planner Jan Weston said that town engineer Todd Gifford does not want pipe on the property.
Feeney suggested using an open ditch, but Davis said, "It would be too steep a grade to have a house on this lot" without using pipe.
"I don’t know what to do without talking to DOT first," Feeney said. "I have no problem with a house here. It seems very reasonable."
Board member James Cohen said, "I think we’re playing with things we don’t understand."
"DOT has authority on the highway [driveway access] and somewhat on the drainage," Feeney said.

The board approved the proposal dependent on DOT review, installation of a T-turnaround driveway, construction of an adequate swale, a sanitary easement at the rear of the parcel, and an open swale instead of 180-feet of pipe to convey water slowly away from the property; and

— Approved the final plat to create three building lots out of two for the Saddlebrook development on Stonebriar Drive.