Saratoga Springs City Council Rundown: UDO, Parking and Charter Changes

It was a long night in Saratoga Springs as the City Council held its normally scheduled meeting on the night of April 21.

On the docket were clarifications to parking rules, discussions of charter review, and the beginning of the process to change the cities Unified Development Ordinance. 

From parking to planning and everything in between: here is a rundown of the updates from City Hall.

Possible changes coming to the UDO 

The City of Saratoga Springs is set to begin review of its Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) after City Council vote 4-1 to approve a resolution initiating a review of the UDO and publishing a draft of proposed changes. 

The proposed changes mostly focused on the Design Review Board (DBR), one of three building-related boards in the City of Saratoga Springs. Under the proposed changes, the DBR’s role and abilities would be clarified. Among the more controversial changes is a change removing the ability of the DBR to prevent demolition of structures in the Architectural District for preservation purposes unless the structure had been designated a landmark by the City Council.

In addition, citizens would be able to appeal DBR ruling to the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Saratoga Springs Mayor John Safford said that the changes to the UDO were due to complaints he heard from citizens in dealing with the Design Review Board. Safford cited one instance where a resident was told by the DBR that if they didn’t want to pay for a slate roof, then they shouldn’t have bought a house in the architectural review district as well as several instances where businesses looking to modify or demolish structures were told no by the DBR. 

He also said that there was pressure to pass an updated UDO as it had become a “political” issue and was upset with the lone Democrat on the City Council, BK Keramati for voting against the ordinance proposing review of the UDO. 

During the meeting, Keramati had pressured the mayor for a list of specific reasons for the changes to the UDO prior to taking action on it. Keramati and Safford were seen talking after the meeting regarding his vote on the matter, with Safford expressing his displeasure with Keramati’s vote. 

The proposed changes were also met with push back by members of the public who protested the changes and cited Saratoga Springs’ historic character as a reason for people to move to and visit the city. Of the 14 speakers who gave public comment, eight spoke out against the changes. In addition, prior to the meeting, the Saratoga Springs Democratic Party had put out a public call for attendance at the meeting and voiced its opposition to the proposed changes.

Parking

Two bills clarifying parking regulations were passed during the meeting. The first of these bills set a two-hour limit on parking along Phila Street between Broadway and Henry Streets. The time limit is in effect between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. 

The second bill also impacted Phila Street, this time adding two commercial loading zones. The first of these zones will go from Broadway to Putnam Street on the North side of the street and be in effect on weekdays from 9 a.m.- 3 p.m.  The second loading zone will be    on the South side of Phila between Putnam and Henry Streets. 

Pushback on Charter Proposal 

A proposal to change the language of Saratoga Springs’ charter regarding the number of city supervisors elected to the Board of Supervisors was met with pushback during the meeting. Under the proposed change instead of establishing two supervisors the charter would allow for “One or more Supervisors, as may be established by County Law”

While the proposals were introduced back in December, several speakers took time during public comment to address this proposed change, arguing that it would potentially diminish Saratoga Springs’ representation at the county level if the county chose to reduce the number to one. 

In response to these comments, Mayor Safford asked for comments from the two current Saratoga Springs Supervisors — Sanghvi and Burger. Both asserted that they saw no need to change the charter when it came to the number of supervisors. Instead, Burger advocated for compensation from the city for Supervisors’ attendance at City Council meetings — something done by most other municipalities in the county. 

Chamber Fee Waiver rejected

A proposed fee waiver for the Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce was unanimously rejected by City Council. The waiver, which covered public safety related fees associated with several events held by the Chamber had been introduced by Coll after he said he met with the Chamber the week prior. Coll opposed the measure and said that approving the waiver might show favoritism to the group. He wasn’t alone as Finance Commissioner JoAnne Kiernan said the fee waiver as proposed would violate existing Finance Department policies.