For more than three decades, Saratoga Springs has embraced a unique vision: our community is the “City in the Country.” This is more than a slogan—it is the foundation of an intentional and forward-thinking Comprehensive Plan that recognizes the importance of both our vibrant downtown and the natural areas that surround it.

Saratoga Springs’ urban core and its large Greenbelt area of “rural character” are complementary pieces of a larger whole: the compact city center provides energy, interest, and economic vitality, while the outer Greenbelt delivers ecological resilience, scenic beauty, open spaces, and a sense of place treasured by visitors and residents alike. This “City in the Country” identity is embodied in the city’s 2015 Comprehensive Plan, a document that articulates the city’s land use vision, and upon which our land use and development regulations are based.

This hard-earned balance has always required vigilance. Sometimes developments are proposed that would push against the standards the community has long agreed upon. Instead of reinforcing the values etched into our Comprehensive Plan, some proposals would erode them by wanting the city to bend or reinterpret its standards.

There are calls for creating a new Comprehensive Plan review process. While this is not unreasonable, a Comprehensive Plan review is typically a protracted process that could open the door to an undesirable model of development in the city.

The risks of abandoning our “City in the Country” model are both immediate and long-term:
• Environmental degradation: Large or inappropriate developments in the Greenbelt stand to harm wetlands, wildlife habitats, and ecological systems that protect against flooding and improve our water quality. Once compromised, these resources are nearly impossible to restore.
• Loss of rural character: Saratoga Springs’ appeal is not only its downtown but the striking contrast between a lively city center and the rural landscapes that surround it. Unmitigated sprawl across the Greenbelt would blur this distinction and diminish the city’s defining charm.
• Economic consequences: Tourists are drawn to Saratoga Springs not only for the racetrack or
Broadway but because Saratoga offers something rare: a small vibrant city infused with nature and history. We risk undermining one of our strongest economic drivers if we allow sprawl, sold to the city as “progress,” to replace the community’s Greenbelt. It also detracts from the downtown as our economic center.
• Cumulative impacts: A single inappropriate project might be defended as “not too harmful,” but taken together, each exception sets a precedent. Before long, the protections that have safeguarded our community’s unique identity for over 30 years will unravel.

Saratoga Springs can embrace growth without abandoning the vision that has guided it for decades. Our Comprehensive Plan is more than a suggestion—it is a community blueprint for how to balance vitality and conservation. Let’s keep that vision intact, with citizens actively shaping its direction. Saratoga Springs must continue to be a place where economic vitality thrives alongside nature’s abundance, not at its expense.

The post Editorial: Our Comprehensive Plan Protects Saratoga Springs as the “City in the Country” appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

Downtown Truck Traffic: A Challenge for Saratoga Springs

By Ian Elphick, Sustainable Saratoga Summer 2024 Intern

Saratoga Springs is a pleasant city that is centered around store fronts and people being able to walk up and down Broadway. Vehicular traffic is normally busy but the wide sidewalks and numerous crosswalks support pedestrian walkability. This pedestrian access and the hustle and bustle make for a vibrant downtown area.

However, there is one aspect of the street traffic that is not pleasant: the number of 18 wheelers that drive down Broadway, which is the center of downtown and runs north-south, and Church and Van Dam Streets (download a traffic volume report here), which feed into Broadway and run east-west. Both are state highways that allow truck through traffic. This traffic has been a source of concern for both locals that live downtown and downtown business owners, as well as those who go downtown as either area residents or visitors. Some are worried about the effect that vibrations caused by trucks have on older, historic, houses and buildings, due the loud engines and brakes, and the weight of the passing trucks. This might affect building foundations.

Then, there is the concern of pollution: the average 18-wheeler gets 7 MPG city, and each gallon of diesel burned produces about 10,069 grams of CO2. This means that the average 18-wheeler driving through downtown Saratoga produces 1,438 grams of CO2 per mile compared to the average which gets 25 mpg producing 355 grams of CO2 per mile. Being a high-density area with families with children this raises a concern for families, as 20% of the population of Saratoga is between the ages of 0-19. In addition to the climate impacts, neighboring residents living near these truck routes will also notice the effects of air pollution from other components of diesel exhaust, including nitrogen oxides, ozone, and particulates.

Another concern is the noise level, as 18 wheelers can emit decibels of up to 100. Exposure to this level of noise for more than 30 minutes can cause hearing damage; the number of minutes that causes hearing damage is cumulative, so if a person hears 30 minutes in total over the course of, for example, a week, damage may result. And for a town of almost 29,000 people in an area of 28 square miles with hundreds to thousands of trucks per day that’s a lot of noise and pollution in a highly populated area, especially for those living along the streets where they drive.

This issue is not a new one, it has been going on for years. However, by spreading awareness of the issue we can work together to try and figure out a solution that includes residents and truckers alike.

This video from The Daily Gazette highlights residents’ frustrations

Read more about our Climate and Energy program

Read more about our Land Use program

The post Downtown Saratoga Truck Traffic appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

By Ian Elphick, Sustainable Saratoga Summer 2024 Intern

Artificial turf is common on many types of athletic fields, such as football, soccer, baseball and lacrosse. It first became popular in the mid 1960s when a dome in Texas was having trouble keeping their grass alive for a whole season. Since then, demand has increased greatly in the U.S. with 1,200-1,500 new installations each year.

Artificial turf has several seemingly attractive benefits, including being lower-maintenance, less water-intensive, it can be used immediately, and it looks polished soon after being installed. But when looking at longer effects, such as how the field holds up over time, as well as other impacts it can have on the athletes that use them, it starts to look like they aren’t as beneficial as they first appear.

After a couple of years, synthetic grass fields begin to look and feel more like concrete. The sand that is packed underneath to provide structure becomes compact and hard. The pieces of plastic grass get bent over and pushed down so the rubber pellets are more visible and start to make their way to the surface. The average lifespan of an artificial turf field is about 10 years, after which point they are disposed of in landfills resulting in millions of pounds of plastic and tire waste polluting our air, water, and soil.

Playing on natural grass is very forgiving to athletes, but artificial turf is harder, especially as it ages, and is taxing on players’ joints. Foot, ankle, knee and hip injuries are more common when playing on turf fields and there may be other serious health consequences as well. A former U.S. women’s soccer player was a coach as synthetic playing surfaces became more popular. She did some research and found that college age kids that were athletes playing on artificial turf were starting to get cancer, potentially from the chemicals within synthetic grass. These products are made from petroleum based plastics and the rubber infill is sourced from scrap tires, both of which contain a large number of chemicals which are hazardous to human health and the environment, but some being suspected or known carcinogens such as benzene, arsenic, and VOCs.

Similarly to the potentially harmful effects on human health, artificial turf also has several established environmental impacts including microplastics pollution, loss of biodiversity, and greenhouse gas emissions during the manufacturing process. The effects, especially from large athletic fields, can cause more harm to the environment than good. Some say that they may also be contributing to the warming climate through what is know as the urban heat island effect, as synthetic turf can reach temperatures of 120 to 190 degrees F in the summer.

There are both positive and negative arguments for artificial turf, but undoubtedly they have a major impact on the environment and the health of those who use them. As awareness of these effects increase, universities and municipalities may be convinced to resort back to natural grass.

---

Works Cited

Environment, Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the. “Artificial Turf in a Warming Climate.” ArcGIS StoryMaps, 26 Jan. 2024,
storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/45a256f135674d88a474f2602e6ef68e#. Accessed 2 July 2024. Factors Impacting Degradation of Artificial Turf Fibers Kunstgress 2021 a Project on Artificial Turf.

“What Does Research Say about Grass vs. Artificial Turf Safety Debate in Sports?” Health News Florida, 11 Oct. 2023, health.wusf.usf.edu/health-news-florida/2023-10-11/what-does-research-say-about-grass-vs-artificial-turf-safety-debate-in-sports#.

Read More

Get more info on plastics and other Zero Waste issues on our Zero Waste pages

The post Artificial Turf appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

The post Join the Land Use Committee’s advocacy efforts appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

Discover the vibrant world of Sustainable Saratoga’s committees, each dedicated to a unique aspect of community sustainability: Zero Waste, Urban Forestry, Land Use, Climate and Energy, and Pollinators. Whatever your passion, you’ll find a place to make a difference.

Let’s get to know the Land Use Committee

by Amy Durland, member of the Land Use Committee and Chair of the Board of Directors

Saratoga Springs is a vibrant and popular small city, and with good reason! It has a thriving downtown with many interesting shops, restaurants, and walkable destinations. It has many homes with beautiful and historically relevant architecture. It has a Greenbelt – an area of rural character surrounding the city core. It even has a state park within the city limits!

There are many reasons for the winning formula of Saratoga Springs’ success, and foremost among them is the commitment of city officials and residents to its “City in the Country” identity, which is encoded in numerous municipal documents. Sustainable Saratoga supports this identity. It forms the basis of our land use advocacy work.

The Land Use Committee’s goals: To promote a sustainable city, we work on supporting housing affordability, and development patterns that promote infill development, compact design, and mixed uses. To support the country, we emphasize maintaining our Greenbelt, protecting its valuable natural resources, and avoiding sprawl. And in all of our work, we aspire to reduce climate impacts. Our sustainability work on the Land Use Committee extends to other areas outside of Saratoga Springs as well, and we have a particular interest in protecting water resources.

Enjoy our volunteers’ photos of the beautiful Saratoga Greenbelt

Bog Meadow_Steve Samuell

Fish Creek_Steve Samuell

Lake Lonely_Steve Samuell

Bog Meadow_John McMahon

GreenBelt_Scott Bergmann

Greenbelt 2020_Scott Bergmann

---

Learn more about the work and goals of Sustainable Saratoga’s Land Use Committee

The post Get to know the Land Use Committee appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

On December 27, 2022, the Saratoga Springs City Council approved amendments to the city’s Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to allow Liberty Affordable Housing, Inc. to construct two four-story buildings on a 30-acre parcel near the corner of Crescent and Jefferson Streets. The buildings will contain 215 studio, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom apartments targeting young professionals, with rents calculated to meet affordability standards.

Significant Issues

Sustainable Saratoga strongly supports appropriate efforts to provide more affordable and economically diverse housing in the city. A new development like the Liberty project, which provides lower-cost housing with the support of government grants, is one approach to serve a growing need. But every project’s location, size, and character must conform with the city’s Comprehensive Plan and UDO. That is why, after our review of the Liberty project as first presented, we told the City Council about significant issues, including the applicant’s request to change the zoning of the proposed location – thereby greatly increasing the allowable building density, the project’s potential impacts on the environment, and the lack of important procedural steps.

This large wooded and undeveloped parcel is adjacent to the city’s Greenbelt and wooded state parkland. It contains more than 9 acres of protected wetlands. Most of the parcel’s designation by the Saratoga Springs Comprehensive Plan was “Residential Neighborhood-1,” intended to promote the character of a low-density single-family residential neighborhood. The parcel’s “Rural Residential” zoning designation in the UDO allows a maximum average density of one house for every 2 acres, and requires conservation design (the clustering of houses), which would protect a large portion of the parcel from development with a conservation easement. The Liberty proposal included a request to change the zoning to “Urban Residential 4,” which allows up to 14.5 residences per acre, a 29-fold increase. It did not address the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate such a steep increase in density.

In our September 1, 2022 letter to the City Council, we pointed out that the proposal could not move forward without a significant Comprehensive Plan amendment. Also, if the proposed zoning change were adopted and the affordable housing project did not materialize, not only would the property be open to a substantial increase in residential density, but it would be available for a number of other uses having nothing to do with affordable housing. We noted that the project’s large multi-story apartment buildings should be sited closer to downtown in areas zoned for more intensive uses, and we expressed concern that the proposed size and density of the project could have negative impacts on the wetlands.

With Changes, a Better Project

In the end, our concerns were acknowledged by the city planning board, the City Council, and the Liberty team, and our actions helped create a better project. The City Council approved the required Comprehensive Plan amendment. Approximately 20 of the parcel’s 30 acres, including the wetlands, will be protected from future development with a permanent conservation easement. The parcel’s new Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations will be restricted to an affordable housing project, which will be required to meet affordability standards for at least 30 years. We applaud the project’s green design elements, including energy efficiency, connection to public transit, dark-sky lighting, and reduced water consumption, which must be included to meet state funding requirements.

But it Required Extraordinary Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments

The Liberty project will provide much-needed workforce housing within the city limits. However, we agree with the Planning Board’s admonition that these were extraordinary Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments to accommodate a single project. Our current Comprehensive Plan, which lays out the city’s vision for future development, was hammered out after many meetings by a large committee appointed by the City Council. The planning process spanned many months and included substantial public participation. Changes to the Comprehensive Plan should only be made through the same process, involving the entire community in a comprehensive look at the future development and conservation policies of the entire city.

A Broader Approach to Affordable Housing

We advocate a broader approach to addressing Saratoga’s affordable housing needs. Large developments dedicated exclusively to workforce housing have the undesirable consequence of segregating the city by income, rather than integrating such housing into existing neighborhoods and new mixed-income developments. Many of them are no longer managed as affordable housing after their typically 30-year financing period. We continue to promote other options for more diverse and affordable housing, many of which have been adopted by other communities. For example, inclusionary zoning, which would incorporate affordable housing in every new development with 10 or more residences, is an effective way to ensure the steady growth of permanent affordable housing throughout the city. Because it is unlikely that simply building more housing will reduce housing costs in our popular resort community, we oppose efforts to increase building density in the Greenbelt. We must maintain the integrity of our Greenbelt and the “City in the Country” vision that is the foundation of Saratoga’s unique character and economic success.

Providing affordable housing in a thriving, attractive city such as ours is a daunting challenge. In the coming year, we will continue to seek and explore workable alternatives, and we hope to assist the City Council in developing a comprehensive affordable housing plan for Saratoga Springs.

Read more about Sustainable Saratoga’s position on affordable housing

The post Liberty Affordable Housing: Where We Stand appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

Below is the text of a letter we sent to the Saratoga Springs’ City Council on December 14, 2022 about our position on affordable housing. Download PDF

Mayor Kim and Honorable City Council members,

We at Sustainable Saratoga have recently learned that we have been publicly described as “against” affordable housing. We would like to set the record straight.

We have long advocated measures to create more diverse and affordable housing, because it would make our community more sustainable. In our years of operation, Sustainable Saratoga has fought hard for policies and programs that would result in more economically diverse housing opportunities within the city of Saratoga Springs. We support affordable housing because we believe that increased housing diversity brings greater economic stability and resilience. We have supported the city’s workforce rental housing developments in the city, and have also advocated for more home ownership opportunities for middle income citizens. 

We have actively advocated inclusionary zoning as a good solution. In 2016 and 2017, Sustainable Saratoga led an effort to have the city legislate an inclusionary zoning program, which would have resulted in mixed-income housing for larger new residential projects. Although that effort was not acted on by the City Council at the time, Sustainable Saratoga expended considerable time and energy to promote that proposal, and we believe such a program could still be adopted, with some modifications. Our IZ ordinance would have mandated affordable housing in every geographic area of the city — including the city’s Greenbelt.

We advocated the inclusion of more affordable housing provisions throughout the UDO process. Early in the UDO review process, we presented amendments to the draft UDO that would promote affordability in various ways. We have produced numerous policy positions and proposals that would create more tools in the toolbox that communities need to create affordable housing options for their citizens. We have always urged the city to address affordability through a comprehensive review and enactment of available strategies, rather than through individual applications that do not comport with the city’s legislative and regulatory standards. We have publicly expressed our disappointment that the UDO did little to promote more diverse and affordable housing.

Our concerns about the lack of a comprehensive approach, and the critical importance of location, were highlighted by the Liberty proposal. Because the proposed use was far more intense than the current zoning designation would allow, the Council was asked to approve extraordinary changes to the Comprehensive Plan and the UDO. We submitted a letter to the Council sharing our concerns. While Sustainable Saratoga enthusiastically supports adding more affordable and economically diverse housing options, and we are encouraged that the Council is taking this issue seriously, we are very concerned about using this environmentally sensitive location for intensive development, and we share the opinion of the Planning Board that the process of amending the Comprehensive Plan and UDO for a single project is problematic for many reasons.

We have maintained that affordable housing and the “city in the country” model are compatible sustainability goals. Our “city in the country” identity means not only promoting a vibrant downtown, but also focusing on a conservation standard in our outer rural areas. The economic and environmental advantages of the city’s Greenbelt are substantial, yet we find that the need to actively protect this valuable asset of tremendous ecological and economic value is almost constant. Other communities recognize and envy the unique formula that has helped Saratoga Springs thrive. However, we have found that often some in our city do not seem to appreciate the need to protect and promote our rural features. In this era of climate change, in which natural land features will do much to protect the area against flooding, it is even more urgent that we do so.

Affordable housing is an important priority, and so is protecting our city’s Greenbelt. Sustainable Saratoga does not believe that we need to sacrifice one to protect or promote the other. From an economic standpoint, both our successful urban core and the surrounding green space make the city more attractive to visitors, businesses, and residents, thus providing a more stable local economy and enhancing the quality of life for all.

We hope that our city will explore some of the approaches to land use regulation that other communities are employing to achieve more diverse and affordable housing. Affordable housing is a complex issue that is not unique to Saratoga Springs. Many other communities across the country have created a variety of programs and regulatory tools to address the issues of housing diversity and affordability.  We think that some good solutions exist that might work in our community.

We appreciate the Council’s enthusiasm for this issue and would like to be part of the city’s efforts to address it. In the coming year, we hope to increase our efforts to address affordability, and we would value the opportunity to work cooperatively with the city in doing so. 

Very truly yours,

Dianna Goodwin, Co-Chair

Read more about our Land Use and Urban Planning work

The post Sustainable Saratoga’s position on affordable Housing appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

Below is the text of a letter we sent to the Saratoga Springs City Council in support of bike lanes on Union Avenue. Download PDF

December 6, 2022

Dear Mayor Kim and Council Members: 

I am writing on behalf of Sustainable Saratoga to express our strong support of the bike lanes proposed for Union Avenue.  Please accept this letter as our public comment for the December 6th hearing on the matter.

Climate change is already affecting this region, and experts warn us that we must act now to avoid greater climate disruption. Investing in greener, alternative transportation such as biking infrastructure is one critical component of any strategy to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. 

Many communities are seeking to reduce the preeminence of the automobile to improve the efficiency of transportation systems and reduce traffic congestion, energy use, air pollution, and the emission of greenhouse gasses. Our city recognizes the threats posed by climate change and has committed to address them by becoming a certified Climate Smart Community. To qualify for certification, the city council passed a resolution pledging to take a number of actions, including the promotion of a compact, transit-oriented, bikeable and walkable community. The more we can do to invite people to get on their bikes and leave their cars at home, the closer we will be to attaining our Climate Smart Community goals.

Cities structured to support walking and biking are desirable places to live and work. When communities recognize that public streets should accommodate a range of users, the streetscape must be configured to account for the safety of everyone, including those who ride bicycles. Cyclists need the protection of bike lanes so that they do not have to rely on motorists’ good behavior and alertness to safely navigate city streets. Our city should encourage bicycling by making it safer and more attractive through the creation of a network of bike lanes connecting residents and visitors to destinations throughout the city. 

Saratoga Springs has undertaken important projects to encourage bicycling in the city, including the bike lanes on North Broadway and Lake Avenue, and the recent completion of the Downtown Connector segment of the Saratoga Greenbelt Trail. But there is much more to be done. The details of the city’s vision for a citywide bicycle network are presented in the Saratoga Springs Complete Streets Plan. The plan recommends adding bike lanes along the length of Union Avenue in light of its importance for the creation of a citywide bicycle network.  

Union Avenue is a main entrance to the city and a connector to downtown from the east side neighborhoods. It is used regularly by visitors and community members, some of whom rely on bicycles as their primary means of transportation into the downtown area.  Union Avenue currently resembles an extra-wide four-lane highway, encouraging people to speed, and making it difficult to cross by foot or to bicycle safely in the traffic lanes.  Since cars park along the shoulder, bikes either use the traffic lanes or the sidewalks. If a cyclist uses the sidewalk, pedestrians are forced to step aside into the tree lawns or onto people’s yards, a dangerous situation. Many cyclists in town are children or teenagers – it is simply not safe for them to use the traffic lanes along a busy street like Union.   

Creating bike lanes on Union Avenue and connecting them to other bike lanes will make cycling safer and more accessible in our city. A recent study of European cities found that adding bike lanes increased the number of cyclists across the cities, not just in the streets with bike lanes but everywhere. Bike lanes encourage cycling.  Cycling is good for the environment and for our health, and is a strong indicator of livability in any city.  Bicycle lanes should be part of Saratoga Spring’s plan for a sustainable and equitable future.  

We look forward to seeing the plans for Union Avenue bike lanes and hope they are constructed in the near future.  

Very truly yours,

Dianna Goodwin, Co-Chair, Sustainable Saratoga

cc: Rick Fenton, Laura Faulk, Ed Lindner, Ken Grey

The post Letter supporting bike lanes on Union Avenue appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

Below is a letter to the Saratoga Springs Commissioner of Public Works regarding the development of the Flat Rock Park area of High Rock Park

September 13, 2022

Commissioner Jason Golub, City Hall, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866

Dear Commissioner Golub:

At a recent City Council meeting, you presented a proposal for a small public park within the area of the City-owned High Rock parking lot south of the City Center parking structure. Sustainable Saratoga would like to thank you for inviting public comments on the proposal. 

Sustainable Saratoga has focused on the development of the City-owned High Rock parking lot since a parking structure for the City Center was proposed in 2012. Because this important parcel is of great interest to all the people of the city, from the beginning we have advocated a comprehensive planning approach with an open public process for the entire parcel. 

On November 20, 2018, the previous City Council adopted a resolution which, among other things, separated the development of the parcel into two phases. Phase I would include the design and development of the Downtown Connector segment of the Greenbelt Trail and the parking structure. In Phase II, the Council and the committee who developed the original Flat Rock Center concept would work to “increase and reconfigure the public park, green space and outparcels,” and the Council would “schedule a special meeting to present the proposals to the public for input and consideration.” Sustainable Saratoga offered suggestions and design elements that could be incorporated into the Phase II design, and we offered to participate in that planning process. 

With the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic and the attendant challenges to City finances and staffing, planning for the future of the High Rock lot was suspended. We understand that the proposed public park is intended as an improvement of modest cost that will involve only the planting of trees and other landscaping, and the installation of footpaths, benches, and a small amphitheater. However, we are concerned that it represents a continuation of a piecemeal approach to the development of the High Rock lot, and a significant postponement of the resumption of a comprehensive planning process involving public participation from the start.

We urge you and the rest of the Council to initiate a comprehensive planning process for the entire High Rock lot as soon as possible. We look forward to the eventual creation of an exciting plan for this important piece of public land.

Very truly yours,

Dianna Goodwin, Co-Chair

cc:  Mayor Kim, Commissioners 

Read more about our Land Use and Urban Planning work

The post Letter about development of Flat Rock Park appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.

Below is the text of a letter we sent to the Saratoga Springs City Council regarding the Liberty Affordable Housing, Inc. application for a zoning amendment for a parcel on Crescent Avenue and Jefferson Street.

September 1, 2022

Dear Mayor Kim and Commissioners:

We are writing this letter to express concern about the Liberty Affordable Housing, Inc. application for a zoning amendment for a 30.27 acre parcel on the corner of Crescent Avenue and Jefferson Street.   

As you may know, Sustainable Saratoga has long advocated for workforce housing in Saratoga Springs. We encourage the Council to develop a comprehensive, proactive, and creative strategy to meet the housing diversity and affordability needs of our community, and would be happy to work with the Council toward this goal. For years, Sustainable Saratoga has recommended workable alternatives, such as inclusionary zoning and the conversion of carriage houses into apartments. We also vigorously support development patterns in our city that conform to the established sustainable development principles embodied in our city’s Comprehensive Plan.  We do not believe that these goals are mutually exclusive.      

We have reviewed the application for a zoning amendment filed by Liberty, as well as a similar 2018 application for a zoning amendment and subsequent unfavorable advisory by the city Planning Board, and believe that the current application is flawed both procedurally and substantively.  The Council should, at the outset, require the applicant to address the procedural flaws before accepting the application through a vote on “merit for review,” at least until the significant procedural errors are rectified.  

There are two major procedural errors. First, the petition falsely states that the map amendment is compatible with the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. It also states that the proposed Urban Residential-4 (UR-4) zoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. However, page 55 of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan states that all zoning must conform to the uses and density requirements set forth in the Future Land Use Map. When areas are to be rezoned, the uses and densities permitted within the zoning district must be compatible with the ranges presented in that land use category in the Comprehensive Plan. The property is clearly designated as Residential Neighborhood-1 on page 65 of the Future Use Land Map. Such zoning allows a maximum density of 3.5 units per acre. The proposed UR-4 zoning, which has a maximum density of 14.5 units per acre, is not compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan map must accompany the application. No such request accompanied the Liberty petition.  

 Second, the SEQRA form attached to the rezoning petition fails to analyze the full set of uses that are permitted under UR-4 zoning. If the City Council were to rezone this 30-acre parcel to UR-4, many other uses in addition to housing would be permitted. These include private schools, hotels (20 rooms or less), lodging houses, adult care facilities, children’s homes, community centers, day care facilities, churches, social clubs, shelters, rooming houses, and other uses not permitted in the existing zone, as well as higher density residential units.  The SEQRA form needs to evaluate the potential environmental impacts from the full list of uses allowed by the UR-4 zoning, not just for a  housing development. The SEQRA form needs to be amended to address that omission.

Because of these two procedural errors, specifically, the failure to include a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan map and the incomplete SEQRA assessment, the application should not be advanced through a “merit for review” vote.  

 In addition to the procedural flaws, we also have concerns about the Liberty zoning amendment application on substantive grounds.  

Our first substantive concern about the application is that the City Council does not have the authority to specify that only affordable housing can be built on the property if it is rezoned to UR-4. To try to do so would constitute “contract zoning”, which is not permitted by state law. The City Council is being asked to rezone the property, hoping that it will be developed as affordable housing but, in reality, opening this parcel to any UR-4 development.  If the applicant fails to obtain federal or state funding for affordable housing or abandons the project for another reason, the UR-4 zoning would allow the applicant to sell or use the property for any of the other UR-4 uses allowed by the Unified Development Ordinance. Although a restrictive deed could perhaps restrict the property for use only as affordable housing, no such deed has been proposed by Liberty.

Second, while Liberty may intend to apply for federal funding for affordable housing if they are granted the requested zoning amendment, there is no guarantee that they will receive such funding. If the project does not receive federal funding, the zoning change to UR-4 would allow the property to be developed in any manner permitted in that zone. By amending the zoning the city loses its ability to control development on that parcel. It cannot rescind the zoning change if the applicant fails to obtain federal funding, or make the change conditional on the developer obtaining federal funding for affordable housing. Once the parcel is rezoned, if the applicant does not receive the affordable housing grants it seeks, the parcel likely will be developed to its most financially lucrative potential within UR-4 parameters.    

Third, the allowable densities proposed in the amendment are inconsistent with the development 

of much of the surrounding area. The project parcel’s current zoning designation allows primarily for the development of low-density, single-family residential neighborhoods, applying conservation design standards. The parcel is adjacent to the city’s Greenbelt and to forested state parkland. While large multi-story apartment buildings might be appropriate in one of our downtown Transect zones, they are inappropriate on this site, which is adjacent to lower intensity development and which contains significant protected wetlands.  

Finally, the Liberty application is not compatible with the city’s existing land use policy.  This is a proposal for  Comprehensive Plan and UDO amendments to accommodate a single incompatible use. Saratoga Springs’ current Comprehensive Plan was created through a long collaborative effort by a large committee appointed by the City Council. The planning process spanned many months and included substantial public participation. Changes to the Comprehensive Plan should only be made through the same process, involving the entire community in a comprehensive look at the future development of the entire city. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan should be made sparingly and judiciously, and not for the purpose of promoting a single application.  

Looking at the bigger picture, we strongly believe there are better ways to address the city’s affordable housing needs than the apartment complex proposed by Liberty. Large developments dedicated exclusively to “workforce housing” have the undesirable consequence of segregating the city by income, rather than integrating such housing into existing neighborhoods and new mixed-income developments. That said, we are willing to consider supporting less diverse housing projects that help address this major need but only if they are in a location that’s consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s “city in the country” vision that is responsible for so much of this City’s success and uniqueness. 

We hope the City Council will carefully review this proposal and consider the broader implications of the proposed amendments. 

Thank you for considering our comments. 

Sincerely, 

Dianna Goodwin and Laura Rappaport, Co-Chairs

Read more about our Land Use and Urban Planning work

The post Sustainable Saratoga letter regarding zoning amendment for Crescent and Jefferson appeared first on Sustainable Saratoga.