TOWN OF NISKAYUNA Tree Council Agenda March 12, 2020 6:00 PM
REGULAR AGENDA MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. January 9, 2020
IV. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR V. NEW BUSINESS / ACTION ITEMS 1. 1140 Myron St 2. 2520 Vincenzo Drive – 4 lot subdivision 3. Capital District Jewish Holocaust Memorial
VI. DISCUSSION ITEM 1. 2020 Tree Council Goals 2. Rivers Ledge / Aqueduct Park Improvements 3. 2538 River Road – Kelts Farm 4. 2220 Crescent Ave – landscaping for additional parking
VII. REPORTS 1. Public Outreach Subcommittee A. Arbor Day 2020 2. Tree Inventory / Tree Master Plan Subcommittee 3. Tree Planting Subcommittee
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
NEXT MEETING: April 2, 2020 at 6:00 pm in the Schaefer Room Tree Council Minutes January 9, 2020
1 TOWN OF NISKAYUNA 2 Tree Council 3 Minutes 4 January 9, 2020
5 Members Present: Carol Carey, Acting Chairwoman 6 Melissa MacKinnon, 7 Andrea Worthington 8 Amanda Matuszyk 9 Amy Howansky 10 Chris Zimmerman 11 Steve Signell 12 Laura Robertson, Town Planner 13 Clark Henry, Assistant Town Planner
14 I. CALL TO ORDER
15 The meeting came to order at 6:00 p.m.
16 II. ROLL CALL
17 Paul Sebesta was absent/excused.
18 III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
19 Minutes from the December meeting were presented. Acting Chairwoman Carey noted the date of the 20 minutes were incorrect. Ms. Howansky noted line 29 had an incorrect word. Ms. Howansky also asked to 21 clarify lines 65 - 67. Ms. Robertson suggested alternative wording. Ms. Howansky made a motion to 22 accept the modified minutes. Ms. Carey seconded the motion. All members of the Council accepted the 23 amended minutes for the December meeting.
24 IV. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
25 No one was present to speak.
26 V. NEW BUSINESS
27 Mr. Signell noted that he is creating a hiking app. He is thinking of modifying the app to allow hikers to 28 add interesting trees or report damaged/diseased trees. He hopes to tie it into the Tree Council website. 29 Members suggested we can hand out prizes to people who post information to the app at the Arbor Day 30 event. Mr. Signell originally created this app for the Lake George Conservancy.
31 Ms. MacKinnon asked the general question about when we as a group decide on the 2020 goals. Ms. 32 Robertson stated it probably should have been on the agenda this month but will add it to next month. It is 33 a good idea to review what happened in the previous year and set goals for the coming year.
34 Ms. Howansky asked if any decision has been made on upgrades to Blatnick Park. Ms. Robertson noted 35 that nothing could be done until the spring but Ray Smith has committed to improvements. Ms. 36 Worthington asked if any improvements were planned for Aqueduct Park since other work was being 37 done there. She noted there is no shade structure at the park and some big trees that did create shade may 38 have to be removed.
39 Ms. Robertson talked about trees that she ordered for planting next spring. The trees are small. Some 40 cannot be planted as street trees. The Council will need to make a plan for locating the trees. Ms.
1 Tree Council Minutes January 9, 2020
41 Howansky asked what neighborhood we will focus our planting in this year. Ms. Robertson suggested 42 Stanford Heights which is down in the 12304 zip code area of Town south of State Street.
43 VI. DISCUSSION ITEM
44 1. 2520 Vincenzo Drive
45 Ms. Robertson stated that the usual practice of locating street trees in this minor subdivision is impractical 46 due to the configuration of the land and lots. An alternative is to plant trees in the vicinity of the two stub 47 streets that access the new lots. Mr. Zimmerman asked what the Town Code actually requires and what 48 the Tree Council can do. Ms. Robertson explained how all the committees work together and noted the 49 Planning Board makes the final conditions for the developer to abide by. Discussion continued as to what 50 is considered a valuable tree. The Council pushed the definition to a sub-committee but they have been 51 busy with other things and have not finalized their definition. New York State defines a tree as one with 52 6” diameter.
53 Ms. Robertson stated she will tell the developer we will minimally define valued trees as ones with a 6” 54 diameter. The Council also needs a survey showing limits of clearing. She also will tell the developer the 55 Council may want to visit the site and GPS trees over 6” in diameter. She warned that this property is not 56 open to the public and any time someone wishes to walk the site, permission will need to be obtained 57 from the developer.
58 2. Capital District Jewish Holocaust Memorial
59 The Council discussed the landscaping and tree planting for the Jewish memorial. Ms. Howansky stated 60 that the trees planted should be from a list of resistant to the environment and insects. She stated she 61 narrowed the list to include only trees that will sustain in the New York climate. The Council discussed 62 what trees would be best for buffer and drainage. The council discussed various species of trees that 63 thrive in various soils and wetlands that make up the property. The Council went through the list of trees 64 to be planted at the memorial and discussed the trees that will be most viable.
65 3. 2220 Crescent Ave – landscaping for additional parking
66 The Council took a look at the drawings for 2220 Crescent Ave. Ms. Robertson briefed the Tree Council 67 on the project to move Ms. King’s electrolysis business from Nott Street to the multi-use building on 68 Crescent. She pointed out the boundary lines and where Ms. King is putting up the buffer. The Council 69 decided not to make concrete recommendations until the Council has seen and walked through the site.
70 VII. REPORTS
71 1. Public Outreach Subcommittee 72 a. Arbor Day
73 Ms. Robertson discussed with the Council for ideas for this year’s Arbor Day and possible locations that 74 would provide indoor and outdoor festivities.
75 The consensus of the Council was to have it at the Town Hall. The Town could plant a new tree and have 76 access to indoors if there is bad weather. The Council agreed to have Arbor Day at the Town Hall and for 77 it to be on the closest Saturday to the actual date of Arbor Day. The Arbor Day event will be on Saturday 78 April 25 at the Town Hall.
79 The Council brainstormed ideas for Arbor Day and Niska-day which follows closely after. Ms. 80 Howansky suggested the seed planting idea for Arbor Day. She stated it was quite a success.
81
2 Tree Council Minutes January 9, 2020
82 2. Tree Inventory / Tree Master Plan Subcommittee
83 a. Meeting with Weston and Sampson.
84 Mr. Zimmerman discussed with the Council that there was a meeting with Daniel from Weston and 85 Sampson to discuss the Tree Master Plan. Mr. Zimmerman stated it was a very productive meeting. 86 Weston and Sampson demonstrated a way to gather data on the density of trees in a designated area and a 87 status on the health of the trees. Weston and Sampson agreed to using the area of Old Niskayuna as a test 88 case. They supported categorizing by zoning district also. This way they can begin to get a consensus of 89 the different zoning districts because the density in a CN district will be different than the density of a R1 90 district.
91 Mr. Zimmerman stated he spoke to Daniel on coming in and doing a lecture on the selection of trees. The 92 Council agreed stating it would be very helpful.
93 3. Tree Planting Subcommittee
94 Ms. Robertson stated she will be putting the list together for the next meeting. Ms. Howansky suggested 95 adding pictures of the desired tree to alleviate confusion for the Highway Department. Mr. Zimmerman 96 suggested a member of the tree council attend the highway meetings to support and inform the Highway 97 on planting issues.
98 VII. ADJOURNMENT
99 Acting Chairwoman Carey asked if there was any other business to discuss. Hearing none she asked for a 100 motion to adjourn. Mr. Zimmerman placed the motion to adjourn. Ms. McKinnon seconded the motion. 101 The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
3
ST
ST ST ST ST ST UD UD UD ST
ST
ST
UD UD
ST ST
ST
ST ST
ST
ST
ST
ST
ST
UD
UD UD
ST
ST
UD ST
ST ST
ST
UD ST
ST ST
ST ST
ST
UD ST ST
ST
ST UD
UE
UE
UE
UE
UE
UE
0 30 60 Feet
TOWN OF NISKAYUNA Tree Council
DRAFT - 2020 Goals
Primary Goals 1. Street Tree Inventory a. Continue collecting data in Fulcrum 2. Tree Master Plan a. Create a sample tree master plan from Old Niskayuna neighborhood data b. Diversify Street Tree species 3. Public Outreach a. Educational Events i. Arbor Day ii. Community Action Day iii. Niska-day Booth b. Website c. Develop Education and Outreach Materials 4. Tree Planting a. Streamline tree request procedure for residents b. Purchase unique and special trees for parks c. Pilot program of Tree Planting d. Coordinate roles with Highway Department e. Support Highway Department f. Plan 2020 Tree Plantings g. Understand and organize budget h. Bring in training opportunities
Ongoing Responsibilities 1. Code Updates 2. Review Subdivision and Site plans for street tree recommendations and existing vegetation assessments /impacts 3. Address any private homeowner question / concerns / issues 4. Update Master plant list 5. Pursue Forestry Grants
Committees:
Weston & Sampson, PE, LS, LA, PC 1 Winners Circle, Suite 130, Albany, NY 12205 tel: 518-463-4400
M E M O R A N D U M
Chuck Pafundi, Jr., Project Manager (Peter Luizzi & Bros. Contracting, Inc.) TO: Laura Robertson, AICP, Town Planner (Town of Niskayuna) Lauren Fahey (Canal Corp)
FROM: Daniel P. Biggs, RLA, ISA
DATE: Updated 02/13/2020
SUBJECT: Aqueduct Park - Concept Design Memorandum
This memorandum summarizes the existing conditions and proposed improvements at Aqueduct Park in the Town of Niskayuna.
Project Intent Aqueduct Park is a 10-acre waterfront park area in the Town of Niskayuna, on lands of the New York State Canal Corporation, along the Mohawk River. The shoreline park includes a grass walking path following the river from the existing parking area west to a cleared grass opening. The eastern end of the park includes an informal asphalt parking area that accommodates approximately 10 - 11 parking spaces, and is shared with the Community Rowing Club. The remaining areas of the park include a mixed canopy forest area along the southern property limit, and scrub-shrub vegetation along the bank of the Mohawk River. The intent of this project is to expand the pathway connections from the park to the adjacent residential development and the Mohawk Hudson Hike Bike Trail, and to enhance the park area with aesthetically pleasing park amenities and site features. Park improvements include: • Creating a trailhead with landscaping, benches and informational signs • Developing overlook areas • Creating outdoor picnic areas with pavilions • Creating a pathway network through the park area. • Repurposing historic aqueduct blocks currently stored on-site as landscape features • Expanding the parking lot The site improvements are summarized below and illustrated in Attachment B – Concept Plan. As a part of the concept development a review of the existing trees greater than 6-inches dbh was completed and is summarized below. A copy of the forestry study is included as Attachment A.
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
Page 2
Trailhead A trailhead is a park entry area with benches, interpretative signage and a covered pavilion. A trailhead is proposed at the western end of the parking lot extension. Example images are included below.
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
Page 3
Overlook Areas Overlook areas are proposed at the base of the central connection trail to the future residential development and at the western end of the trail overlooking west along the River. These areas will provide views to the river, Rexford Bridge to the east, and remaining bridge support structures to the west.
Outdoor Picnic Areas with Pavilions Two 24-ft by 24-ft pavilion structures are proposed at key points of interest in the park. The first pavilion is planned at parking lot trailhead and will act as a focal point and gateway with its convenient proximity to the parking area. The second pavilion is planned at the central trail connection to the residential development.
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
Page 4
Pathway Network The pathways within the park area are proposed as 8-ft wide stone dust pathways with 2-ft shoulders on both sides. The pathway is to be maintained for National Grid access along the east-west corridor.
A secondary pathway at the western end of the park area down to the waters edge is proposed as 6-ft wide stone dust.
A steep drop in elevation currently separates the residential development from the park area. A series of accessible ramps, additional retaining walls and modifications to the proposed retaining wall plans at the residential development are recommended in order to connect these circulation systems. A switchback ramp to accommodate a ±15’ grade change is proposed at the central connection to the development. This ramp has a smaller footprint to reduce conflicts with existing trees and cut and fill along the slope.
At the western end of the park area, a pathway extends south to the residential development and connects to the Mohawk Hudson Bike Trail. The pathway follows the proposed retaining wall to accommodate a ±13’ elevation difference. It is recommended that the proposed retaining walls be shifted approximately 3-ft to the east, and an additional retaining wall be constructed to the west of the pathway to avoid disturbance to the existing stream.
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
Page 5
The asphalt pathway extends from the corner of the park parcel south towards the Mohawk Hudson Bike Trail and along the western side of Rivers Run Drive. In this location a pathway adjacent to the road with a retaining wall along the property limits is recommended.
Aqueduct Blocks Approximately 400 to 600 limestone blocks from the deconstructed aqueduct are stored within the existing park area. Block sizes range from 3 to 4-ft long x 2-2.5-ft wide x 1-1.5-ft deep. In an effort to create a series of unique landscape features and repurposed the historic blocks, four strategies for the blocks are proposed.
Treatment A - Flush, linear blocks: Two rows of embedded blocks flush with the adjacent grass/landscaping that follow the existing grass pathway, representing the historic alignment of the canal through the park area.
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
Page 6
Treatment B – Berm/ Wall: Blocks are stacked 3 to 4-ft high at the face of curvilinear berms. The berm/walls create topography and interest areas in the park for sitting and viewing the river.
Treatment C – Benches: Blocks 18 to 24-inches in height, placed in clusters in the landscape for seating
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
Page 7
Treatment D – Stacked Blocks: Blocks stacked 18 to 24-inches in height, in clusters to create unique forms for sitting and climbing along the pathway
Existing Trees/ Removals In the Fall of 2019, Mary J. Spring of Spring Forestry completed a field assessment of existing trees greater than 6-inches dbh (diameter at breast height) in Aqueduct Park and concluded that there are very few trees in healthy condition of desirable species, conditions or form. As a result, very few trees exist within the park area with long-term growth potential and longevity to be retained to create a pleasing green space for park use. Seventy-eight trees are proposed to be removed based upon current conditions as tabulated in Attachment A. Trees to be removed and existing forest areas to remain or be replanted are illustrated in Attachment B.
Based upon the field review, the primary tree species on site are cottonwood Populous deltoides, box elder Acer negundo, American elm Ulmus americana, silver maple Acer saccharinum, and black cherry Prunus serotina. Common shrub species include buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica, tree of heaven Ailanthus spp., sumac Rhus spp. Buck thorn and tree of heaven are invasive species and should be eradicated when possible. Vine species on site that are also invasive include asiatic bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus, Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia, and poison ivy Rhus toxicodendron. Further analysis of the various species and conditions are included in Attachment A – Forestry Report.
Attachments A – Forestry Study B – Aqueduct Park Concept Plan
westonandsampson.com Offices in: MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL
ATTACHMENT A – FORESTRY REPORT
Spring Forestry MARY J. SPRING 798 Sunny Hill Rd. Freehold, NY 12431 (518) 947-9342 (cell) [email protected]
Aqueduct Park Property Niskayuna N.Y. Primary species existing on site are Cottonwood Populous deltoides, box elder Acer negundo, American elm Ulmus americana, silver maple Acer saccharinum, and black cherry Prunus serotina. Common shrub species includes buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica, tree of heaven Ailanthus, sumac Rhus. Buck thorn and tree of heaven are considered invasive species and should be eradicated. Vining species that are also invasive include Asiatic bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus, Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia, and poison ivy Rhus toxicodendron.
There are very few existing trees of desirable species with the long term growth potential and longevity, wood characteristics, and aesthetic value to be retained to create a pleasing green space for the future of this development. The dominant species on site (dominant in canopy position, meaning they are the largest, tallest overstory trees) are the large diameter cottonwood Populous deltoides. Cottonwood are considered early successional species and thus are relatively short lived. They grow rapidly and their diameter is not reflective of being especially old. Because they grow rapidly their wood is brittle and prone to storm damage, and as such potentially pose risk as hazard trees when growing in proximity to structures or where the public may spend time under their canopy. Box elder Acer negundo, and silver maple Acer saccharinum, similarly are fast growing trees often planted in residential and park areas to produce shade trees and tree cover quickly, but whose wood is brittle and prone to the same shortcomings and potential problems as cottonwood. American elm, which is common on site, was once a desirable shade tree for residential areas, park settings, and as street trees, but the pathogenic and virulent fungus which causes Dutch elm disease, Ophiostoma ulmi, has rendered the species unsuitable due to eventual mortality. While there are elm on the property which are alive and apparently still healthy, there are just as many or more dead trees of this species, which would indicate that eventual mortality is inevitable.
Since there is little existing desirable species in any size class, planting trees that have long term growth potential and longevity, along with desirable aesthetic value and wood characteristics for structural integrity is recommended. Also, when existing trees are retained on a building site and any amount of site work, ie. grading and excavating is conducted over the root system of these trees, it severely negatively affects the tree and almost always results in eventual mortality. It is better to remove most existing trees and start over, planting new trees upon completion of site work. Growth potential of this site is very limited by shallow soils. It is evident that the depth to bedrock of this site is minimal. Therefore trees with shallow, spreading root systems, NOT those with a tap root, will do better on this site. These include Sugar maple, Yellow birch, fir species, Norway spruce, and hackberry. Other species ATTACHMENT A – FORESTRY REPORT
with root systems that are not quite as shallow but still lack a tap root and may be suitable for planting are sycamore, honey locust, basswood, and pine species.
Tree # Species Diameter at 4.5' off the ground (DBH) Reason for removal
#1 Cottonwood Populous deltoides 30” dead
#2 Cottonwood. 30” Broken branches, crown dieback, hazard
#3 Cottonwood. 25” Leaning over trail, broken branches hanging off, hazard tree
#4 Cottonwood. 24” Leaning over trail
#5 Black cherry, Prunus serotina 12” Poor form/specimen, no aesthetic value or long-term potential
#6 Silver maple Acer saccharinum 8” Growing next to aqueduct blocks, will be damaged when they are moved.
#7 Cottonwood 27” Significant lean, not upright
#8 Cottonwood 36” Significant lean, not upright
#9 Cottonwood 19” Significant lean, not upright
#10 Silver maple 17” Large dead branch stub that will lead to heart rot decay. Poor form, sparse crown indicating decline and poor health, limited long-term potential
#11 Sumac Rhus 6” Not a true tree species, not a long lived species
#12 Elm Ulmus americana 14” Dying from Dutch elm disease
#13 Black cherry 15” Large dead branch stub which will result in heart rot decay and structural instability which will make the tree a hazard
#14 Box elder Acer negundo 15” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#15 Box elder 13” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#16 Elm 19” Will get Dutch elm disease and die, requiring removal in the future
#17 Elm. 10” Dead
#18 Mulberry 8”
#19 Box elder. 16” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#20 Box elder. 14” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#21 Cottonwood. 34” Poor form, dead branches, crown dieback, biologically overmature for the life expectancy of this species
#22 Cottonwood. 32” Stem decay leading to structural instability, tree will continue to decline and will eventually come down requiring clean up ATTACHMENT A – FORESTRY REPORT
#23 Elm. 12” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#24 Elm. 8” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#25 Elm. 11” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#26 Elm. 12” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#27 Elm. 17” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#28 Elm. 10” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#29 Elm. 10” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#30 Elm. 13” Dying, elm bark beetle infestation, Dutch elm disease likely present
#31 Tree of heaven Ailanthus 10” Undesirable invasive species
#32 Tree of heaven 8” Undesirable invasive species
#33 Tree of heaven 8” Undesirable invasive species
#34 Box elder 14” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#35 Cottonwood. 34” Large dead fork, will lead to heart rot and structural instability.
#36 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#37 Box elder. 14” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#38 Tree of heaven 8” Undesirable invasive species
#39 Box elder. 15” Stem broken in half
#40 Box elder. 17” Broken top
#41 Tree of heaven 6” Undesirable invasive species
#42 Tree of heaven 8” Undesirable invasive species
#43 Unknown species, 18” Dead
#44 Box elder. 11” Split in half
#45 Box elder. 14” Leaning
#46 Tree of heaven 10” Undesirable invasive species10
#47 Tree of heaven 8” Undesirable invasive species
#48 Box elder. 17” Bent over, crown dieback
#49 Box elder. 29” Crown dieback, hanging over trail
#50 Box elder. 16” Crown dieback, hanging over trail
#51 Box elder. 14” Broken top, crown dieback, hanging over trail ATTACHMENT A – FORESTRY REPORT
#52 Elm. 18” Broken top, will die eventually from Dutch elm disease already present on site
#53 Elm. 8” Dying from Dutch elm disease
#54 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#55 Box elder. 13” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#56 Buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica 8” Invasive species, shrub, not a tree, undesirable
#57 Elm. 18” Dead
#58 Box elder. 6” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#59 Box elder. 14” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean over trail
#60 Box elder. 10” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean over trail
#61 Box elder. 14” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#62 Box elder. 10” Poor form, crown dieback, not a desirable long-term species
#63 Box elder. 12” Poor form, crown dieback, not a desirable long-term species
#64 Box elder. 10” Poor form, crown dieback, not a desirable long-term species
#65 Buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica 8” Invasive species, shrub, not a tree, undesirable
#66 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean
#67 Buckthorn. 8” Invasive species, shrub, not a tree, undesirable
#68 Buckthorn 8” Invasive species, shrub, not a tree, undesirable
#69 Box elder. 12” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean
#70 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#71 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#72 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species
#73 Willow. 32” Growing near construction site
#74 Willow. 30” Growing near construction site
#75 Box elder. 10” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean
#76 Box elder. 12” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean
#77 Willow. 26” Growing near construction site
#78 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean, epicormic sprouts indicating stress ATTACHMENT A – FORESTRY REPORT
#79 Box elder. 10” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean, epicormic sprouts indicating stress
#80 Willow. 34” Growing near construction site, side stem dead
#81 Box elder. 10” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean
#82 Willow. 34” Growing near construction site, side stem dead
#83 Willow. 28” Growing near construction site, poor form
#84 Box elder. 13” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean13
#85 Willow. 45” Growing near construction site
#86 Willow 44” Growing near construction site
#87 Willow. 25” Growing near construction site
#88 Box elder. 8” Poor form, not a desirable long-term species, significant lean, epicormic sprouts indicating stress Project:
AQUEDUCT PARK
PETER LUIZZI & BROS. CONTRACTING, INC.
POTENTIAL 5-FOOT WIDE STONE DUST TRAIL TO SHORE (±240 LINEAR FEET)
EXISTING SCRUB/SHRUB TO BE TRIMMED/REMOVED OVERLOOK WITH PAVERS, WALL, RAILING AND INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE EXISTING TREE TO EXISTING SCRUB/SHRUB BE REMOVED (TYP.) TO BE TRIMMED/REMOVED EXISTING FOREST AREA TO REMAIN (TYP.) OVERLOOK WITH PAVERS, WALL, RAILING AND INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE POTENTIAL 8-FOOT WIDE STONE DUST TRAIL (±2,200 LINEAR FEET) Weston & Sampson PE, LS, LA, PC 1 Winners Circle, Suite 130 POTENTIAL FILL AREA TO Albany, NY 12205 EXISTING FOREST AREA TO ACCOMMODATE TRAIL 518.463.4400 800.SAMPSON WITH MAXIMUM 5% SLOPE BE REMOVED AND REPLACED 231.0 www.westonandsampson.com TW: 238.0 232.0 EXISTING TREE TO BW: 236.2 233.5 BE REMOVED (TYP.) 236.0 PROPOSED BLOCK Consultants: TW: 240.7 238.5 STORM OUTFLOW AREA TREATMENT C; BENCH (TYP.) BW: 236.0 STORM OUTFLOW AREA PROPOSED BLOCK ±165 LINEAR FEET 241.0 TREATMENT A; ± 2,600 RETAINING WALL LINEAR FEET FLUSH PROPOSED 5- 243.5 BLOCKS (TYP.) FOOT WIDE RAMP PROPOSED BLOCK TW: 246.0 TW: 245.50 STORM TREATMENT D; BW: 245.5 BW:236.00 OUTFLOW STACKS (TYP.) BW: 240.7 246.0 AREA TRAIL HEAD WITH PAVILION, PAVERS, AND INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE TW: 244.50 BW:244.00 BW: 242.3
TW: 244.50 Revisions: BW: 240.0 No. Date Description
_
PROPOSED BLOCK TREATMENT B; BERM/WALL (TYP.)
Seal:
A
PROPOSED COA: SECTION (SEE COPYRIGHT © 2020 BY WESTON & SAMPSON, PE, LS, CONCEPT DESIGN LA, PC THIS DRAWING IS AN INSTRUMENT OF MEMORANDUM) SERVICE AND IS THE PROPERTY OF WESTON & SAMPSON, PE, LS, LA, PC THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF WESTON & SAMPSON PE, LS, LA, PC
UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209. SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.
Issued For:
CONCEPT REVIEW LEGEND
POTENTIAL TRAIL HEAD Scale: AS NOTED
PAVILION Date: FEB. 14 2020
OVERLOOK Drawn By: ALM
POTENTIAL TRAIL ALIGNMENT Reviewed By: JWG
EXISTING PATHWAY Approved By: DPB
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL W&S Project No.: ENG20-003 PROPOSED RAMP W&S File No.:
PROPOSED BLOCK TREATMENT A (FLUSH) Drawing Title: PROPOSED BLOCK TREATMENT B (BERM/WALL)
PROPOSED BLOCK TREATMENT C (BENCH)
PROPOSED BLOCK TREATMENT D (STACKS)
EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED CONCEPT PLAN
PROPOSED VEGETATION TO REMAIN
EXISTING LIMIT OF VEGETATION
PARCEL LINE Sheet Number: WATERLINE
SCALE: SK-1 \\wse03.local\WSE\Projects\NY\Niskayuna, NY\200033-Luizzi-Aqueduct Park\CAD\PAS\SK-1 SKETCH PLAN.dwg Rev: 1.6 Date: 04/10/2019 SA
SA SITE LOCATION MAP
SA
SA SA
SITE
SA
ZONING MAP
SA
W
W
W W SA
SA
SA SA
W W SA SA
SA SA
SA
SA W W
SA
SA SA
SA W W
SA
SA
SA W
SA
W SA
SA Design of: CONSULTING IN - CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING & DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
W SA
MAP NOTES:
ZONING AND LAND USE:
TOWN OF NISKAYUNA SCALE : 1" = 60' SCHEDULE I-B MAP REFERENCE: R-1 DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS TOWN OF NISKAYUNA
MINIMUM LOT SIZE MAXIMUM MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS PERCENTAGE OF MINIMUM REQUIRED RENDERING DISTRICT USE COVERAGE BY OFF -STREET BUILDING AND SIDE PARKING SPACE(S) AREA WIDTH DEPTH FRONT REAR
(ALSO SEE 220-19) KELT'S FARM SUBDIVISION STRUCTURES 1 BOTH ST. NO. 2538 RIVER ROAD R-1 SINGLE FAMILY 18,000 SF 100 FT 125 FT 25 35 20 40 25 DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2019
(LOW-DENSITY COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY STATE NEW YORK RESIDENTIAL) DWELLING
AVERAGE DENSITY 9,000 SF 50 FT 62.5 FT 25 20 10 20 15 DEVELOPMENT (50% R-1) RND-2 \\ds1513serv\shared files\JOBS\Jobs 2019\#19186-2538 river road, j bisaillon\dwG\19186-AVG D1.2.dwg, 2/27/2020 2:17:36 PM, CADPC-1, 1:1