DRB finds SB Manufacturing’s 233 Ballston Ave building historically significant; demolition review next step

The Saratoga Springs Development Review Board voted 4–1 on Aug. 6 that the structure known as the plating (pattern‑storage) building at 233 Ballston Ave, owned by SB Manufacturing, has historic and/or architectural significance.

Applicant James Davis told the board the building has not been used for plating in about 15 years and has most recently been used for cold storage. The applicant said the building “has served its life and is starting to degrade” and proposed demolishing the structure and converting the footprint to green space. Several board members and the Preservation Foundation (letter received the day of the meeting) noted that the building dates from the late 19th century, is one of a small number of mill/industrial-era structures remaining in the city, and contains distinctive masonry and a historic truss form internally.

After hearing about the building’s age, historical industrial use (pattern storage, casting and components for earlier manufacturing), and the applicant’s statement that parts of the interior were cleaned of plating debris and are now used for transformer and power-supply manufacture, the DRB concluded the building contributes to Saratoga Springs’ historic fabric. The board’s determination triggers the DRB’s demolition-review procedure: if the owner seeks a demolition permit, the applicant must demonstrate that the structure cannot be adapted for a reasonable return, document good‑faith efforts to find a purchaser, address relocation as an alternative where feasible, and provide acceptable post-demolition plans. The board staff explained that SECRA (City staff so referenced) and related environmental review must be completed prior to approving any demolition permit.

Board members emphasized that deterioration is largely due to water and paving adjacent to the exterior walls, and that some damage could be addressed by changing drainage and repaving; others pointed to the building’s notable brickwork and internal truss as reasons to consider adaptive reuse. Several board members said preservation precedent exists locally, citing similar industrial structures that have been retained and repurposed.

The board approved the significance finding 4–1 (vote tally recorded by chair), with staff to advise the applicant on required documentation for any subsequent demolition application. The applicant was told how to proceed with the five-step demolition justification packet (efforts to find alternatives/purchasers, cost/repair analyses, inability to adapt to permitted uses yielding a reasonable return, and proposed post-demolition plan) and that demolition cannot proceed until required environmental and code reviews are complete.

Public comment included observations about how runoff and roof drainage have accelerated exterior brick deterioration and a suggestion that repaving and drainage correction would reduce masonry failure. The applicant acknowledged these site conditions and said the paving and adjacent roof runoff will be considered as part of further project planning.

Next steps: DRB staff will send the applicant guidance on the demolition-review submittal requirements and the Preservation Foundation letter; if the applicant pursues demolition, submission of the five-step justification and SECRA/SEQR documentation will be required before the DRB will consider demolition approval.