Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON MARCH 9, 2009 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph Moloughney Mr. Jake Dumesnil Mr. Edward Carboni Vice-Chairman Clarence Badgley Ms. Sharon Gariepy MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Mark DeFruscio ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Melissa Ashline-Heil, Planner CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 2, 2009 MEETING Chairman Moloughney called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Chairman asked the planner to take attendance call. Chairman asked the Board to decide whether to approve the minutes from the March 2, 2009 meeting. Member Carboni made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 2nd, 2009 meeting. Member Dumesnil seconded the motion, roll of call was taken and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Edward Carboni X Leo Badgley X Sharon Gariepy X Jake Dumesnil X CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A PARKING LOT AND BANK AT 35 NIVER STREET Sue Commanda of Hudson River Credit Union (hereinafter, HRCU) and her engineer, John Latsko, presented plans for a 2704 square foot bank with drive thru facilities and parking proposed for 35 Niver Street. The drive-thru would run counter clockwise, with an ATM facility closest to the building for safety. The owners would buffer all wetlands, which would not be touched during construction. The stormwater runoff would drain to the lake and wetlands along a swale after purifying the water. Two and a half feet of fill will build the land up out of the flood plain. Member Carboni asked if the flood plain would be disturbed. Mr. Lasko replied that it would not be disturbed. Mr. Lasko also discussed that the building would be decorative stone at its base. The parking lot would be asphalt on a concrete pad to avoid ruts. Member Carboni asked the percentage of greenspace. Mr. Lasko indicated that the building and parking combined take up less than 50%. Sue Commanda clarified that it is 2.2 acres and the building with parking take up ¾ of an acre. Chairman Moloughney asked how many employees would work at the branch. Eight employees would require parking spaces according to Mr. Lasko. Another two spaces should be dedicated for handicap accessibility. That leaves another 9 spaces for customers without disabilities. Chairman Moloughney asked about overflow parking. Ms. Commanda indicated that since 50% of the business is drive thru, the amount of parking proposed works. She also added that the branch currently exists on that street in the Zandri building with less parking and no drive thru. Member Dumesnil replied that the existing parking is overcrowded and the Pig Pit will open this spring. He also pointed out that another business will take the bank’s old space. Ms. Commanda indicated that the Court will take the space. Member Gariepy pointed out that the narrow road means no onstreet parking is available. A resident in attendance offered that grass pavers could be installed to handle overflow parking. Member Dumesnil then commented that the turns onto Dyke and Niver are both dangerous. He asked if the width of the road was an issue. Mr. Lasko replied that the width of the proposed facility’s access point is adequate based on the survey. However, the survey did not look at the width of Niver Street. Member Carboni indicated that the street width is listed as 17’. Chairman Moloughney pointed out that the pump station is on one side of the street. At the Chairman’s request, Ms. Commanda and Mr. Lasko both agreed to provide in writing a summary of the adequacy of the parking and street widths by showing the typical number of spaces for branches designed by the same firm. He plans to show peak traffic numbers for a similar branch. Mr. Lasko also offered that employee parking could be separate from the customer parking. Member Carboni asked if the bank would place a dumpster in the parking lot. Mr. Lasko answered “no” because the bank typically has a service empty the trash once a day. Ms. Commanda added that the bank handles confidential information and therefore does not store garbage outside. Member Carboni asked about snow storage. Mr. Lasko averred that the snow would be plowed onto the surrounding green space. Vice Chairman Badgley asked about signage for the business. Mr. Lasko did not yet have a set of drawings for proposed signage. However, the bank plans on placing a wall sign on the front of the building and a monument sign at the front of the property. Chairman Moloughney indicated he prefers to have the documentation on signage as part of the site plan review. Chairman Moloughney then referred to the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) submitted for the project. On page 5 the EAF indicated only 18 parking spaces instead of the 19 listed on the plans. Page 8 of the EAF does not list any zoning approvals required for the project. He also referred to the site plans. Sheets 5 – 6 show a culvert that is not there at this time. Mr. Lasko indicated that the culvert would be installed to stop water from flowing onto Niver Street. Chairman Moloughney then asked about the pond proposed. Mr. Lasko replied that the pond would treat the water runoff. Chairman Moloughney then asked for specifics on landscaping. He was concerned about whether grass would be fertilized and the chemicals would run into the river during a storm. He also asked how the water would be treated. Mr. Lasko pointed out that the bank plans to use natural landscaping methods and would not place top soil. Ms. Commanda added that the land would be cleaned up at most. Chairman Moloughney asked about the possibility of using roof drains, rain gardens and swales to handle stormwater runoff. Mr. Lasko indicated that the swales alone will adequately treat the water according to engineer’s numbers. Chairman Moloughney replied that swales require a pretreatment method and that the full SWPPP should show those numbers. Chairman Moloughney asked where the nearest fire hydrant was located. Ms. Commanda answered that there is one in front of the office. Mr. Lasko replied that it was within an adequate distance from the building. Member Gariepy moved to declare intent to take lead agency status. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion, roll of call was taken and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Edward Carboni X Leo Badgley X Sharon Gariepy X Jake Dumesnil X CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A PARKING LOT AT 55 MOHAWK STREET Mike Schafer, project design engineer, explained that the only outstanding issue to his knowledge concerned ownership of Canvass Street. Chairman Moloughney then commented that the engineer dye tested the stormwater system to determine the place of discharge. Mr. Schafer replied that the system discharges into the river. Chairman Moloughney described the parking for the building as the lots at both 55 and 77 Mohawk Street. Mr. Schafer added that the owner is still working with the neighbor of 77 Mohawk Street to share parking. The owner is also working with the owner of 40 Oneida Street to obtain sidewalk access. Chairman Molougney then clarified the parking availability at both lots. The 55 Mohawk Street parking lot provides 250 spaces; the 77 Mohawk Street lot provides another 30 to 40 spaces. Yet the proposal requires 395 parking spaces. Mr. Schafer explained that the owner attempted to purchase adjacent lots to entice the potential client, a state agency. Chairman Molougney proposed capping occupancy, which Mr. Schafer indicated he would need to ask his client whether they would agree to cap occupancy to 325. Chairman Moloughney proposed requiring the owner to obtain more parking if occupancy is more than 110% of parking need. Member Gariepy suggested that some lots in the area remain empty, such as the bank parking and the lot behind Ogden Mills. Mr. Schafer offered that the infill building’s courtyard will be removed and may not be rebuilt due to foundation problems. Chairman Moloughney pointed out that the project is 100 spaces deficient between both proposed lots, which means only 75% of parking needs are met. Mr. Schafer will check on the proposed cap with the owner. Then he can make other arrangements should the need arise for additional parking. Member Gariepy moved to approve the project as conditioned for parking and pending final resolution with the review engineer. Member Carboni seconded the motion. Roll of call was taken and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Edward Carboni X Leo Badgley X Sharon Gariepy X Jake Dumesnil X CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A PARKING LOT AND RETAIL DEVELOPMENTAT 100 COLUMBIA STREET Chris Boyea of Bohler Engineering and owner/developer Paul Bonacquisti sought conditional approval of a site plan for retail development at 100 Columbia Street. Mr. Boyea described the plans as conceptually the same. His firm added landscaping, lighting, drainage and other elements requested by neighbors and the City. For example, the engineer added a concrete sidewalk parallel to Columbia Street, and a buffer of pine trees in the rear with all season coverage: 6-7’ pines, 7-8’ blue spruces and 6-7’ eastern pines. Member Gariepy asked if the developer discussed landscaping with the neighbors. Mr. Boyea replied that the landscaping was based on suggestions from neighbors. He also indicated that the developer plans to install a drainage pipe with catch basins along the rear of the property to relieve ponding water on residential properties behind the proposed project. The developer will maintain the pipe, which lies underground and is self-contained in order to minimize neighbor’s disturbance. Member Gariepy asked how often the catch basins would clog. Mr. Boyea responded that it would be part of the periodic maintenance included in the SWPPP and would be the sole responsibility of the owner, not the City. Chairman Moloughney asked if the developer would treat that water separately. Mr. Boyea stated that the water would sheet flow over the grass. Member Dumesnil asked how the flow from Stewart’s would be handled. Mr. Boyea replied that the catch basins along the rear tie to a pipe underground and ties into the City’s system. The water does not leave in a greater volume than currently exists. He stated that the developer cannot provide a detention pond because there is no room on the property. Instead, the pipes store and release water slowly. Member Carboni asked about the drive thru: who will use it and how much noise will it generate? Mr. Boyea replied that either a bank or a light food service would use the facility. Mr. Bonacquisti added that he will not build a drive thru unless a tenant requires it. Mr. Boyea commented that it is located at the far end where there is more room and to provide 160’ of room for stacking 8-9 cars. Chairman Moloughney asked if a tenant changes the partitions in the building whether the owner would need to come before the Planning Board again. The City Planner, Melissa Ashline-Heil, did not think so. The site plan review focuses more on the parking lot, stormwater and footprint of the building. Chairman Moloughney commented that a preliminary approval normally requires a completed SWPPP. However, the meeting generated good discussion of the proposal. Chairman Moloughney expressed the following concerns: First, the driveway onto Columbia Street across from CVS creates an unsafe condition because cars turning left out of the subject property and out of the CVS lot at the same time could collide. He suggested “no left turn” out of the Columbia Street driveway and those who need to turn left could exit onto Monroe Street. The Traffic Commission Chairman had required the driveway to be directly across from the CVS lot for the same safety reasons. However, he had not required a limitation on turns. Mr. Boyea added that four way is safer as a standard. Second, Chairman Moloughney questioned the amount of parking – it exceeds code requirements. Instead, he would rather see less parking which would mean less stormwater volume. He added that CVS is always empty and suggested that the owner remove the spaces along Columbia Street. Section 285-88I of the code requires 12-15 spaces per 1,000 square foot of restaurant space and 3 per 1,000 square foot of retail space. Third, Chairman Moloughney questioned the time limit on the drive thru. Previous meetings with the Zoning Board of Appeals and with neighbors limited the drive thru and deliveries to the same hours of operation as the Stewart’s and CVS: 6am to 11pm. Mr. Boyea added that the drive thru is buffered to reduce noise for neighbors. Fourth, Chairman Moloughney questioned the use of filter cartridges for the underground treatment because owners do not change filters, they clog and cease operating. He requested that either a different system be used or a different product. Mr. Boyea offered that the resolution could be conditioned to require periodic filter changes. Fifth, Chairman Moloughney asked if the water would discharge to a Combined Sewer (CSO). Mr. Boyea indicated that it would not. Storm water will discharge to a stormsewer, back through the development and creek. Sixth, Chairman Moloughney asked about lighting. The plans showed 20’ light poles. Mr. Boyea indicated these would only be placed in front of the project. Vice Chairman Badgley asked if the back doors to the retail shops would have lighting for deliveries. Mr. Boyea confirmed that would be the case, but the 100 watt lights, installed over the back doors for safety, would be downcast. Seventh, Chairman Moloughney asked about signage. Mr. Boyea did not have the specific proposals yet because the owner does not yet have tenants. However, the developer plans on placing one monument sign that would serve the building. Eighth, Chairman Moloughney asked why the developer did not place a sidewalk along Monroe Street. Member Carboni commented that many residents in the development behind the project take recreational walks. The sidewalk would protect them from vehicular traffic. It is also part of the Route 470 Study proposal to create a walkable community. Member Dumesnil then commented that the dumpster would be inconvenient for the light food service retail. However, the placement of the dumpster is buffered by its current location. In addition, it is near Stewart’s dumpster. Member Carboni asked how the spaces along Columbia Street would be buffered. Mr. Boyea replied that a continuous concrete curb would buffer vehicles. Member Carboni also asked about snow storage. Mr. Boyea answered that sufficient green space is available for storage without blocking sight distance. Inlets will treat the water as the snow melts. Chairman Molougney added that the snow should not cover or block the drainage. Chairman Molougney asked about the landscaping on Columbia Street. Mr. Boyea replied that the developer planned to place top soil and seed. Chairman Molougney prefers a curb for pedestrian safety. Mr. Boyea countered that Columbia Street does not have any catch basins so stormwater would become stuck on the curb instead of running onto the existing grass. He suggested “no standing” signs instead. Chairman Moloughney countered with trees, which were also recommended in the Route 470 Study of the area. Mr. Boyea replied that trees create liability issues when planted on a right of way (ROW). Planting trees properly can be costly and problematic. Chairman Moloughney asked Chris to list the conditions: 1) angle the exit onto Monroe Street to discourage right turns; 2) match the hours of operation to the surrounding businesses’ from 6am to 11pm; 3) replace the stormwater cartridges on a regular basis to prevent blockage; 4) install two sidewalks along Columbia and Monroe Streets; 5) install a curb along Columbia Street; 6) plant trees along the streetscape. Member Gariepy asked if the lighting could be moved out a little more. Mr. Boyea suggested placing money in escrow for the City to install the sidewalks and further pursue the Route 470 Study. Councilwoman Dianne Nolin asked if the rear fence would be 8’ tall. Mr. Boyea responded yes, and it replaces the berm. Councilwoman Nolin also asked if the snow deposits would be unsightly. Mr. Boyea indicated that the snow would not be visible to the neighbors. Neighbor Ross Goodman asked about the landscaping behind the proposal, the traffic, drive thru, dumpster and the large trees. Mr. Boyea replied that the dumpster is buffered and next to the Stewart’s dumpster. He asked if the neighbor would like additional trees on his property. The drive-thru would be limited in hours of operation. Member Dumesnil moved to approve the project as conditioned. Member Gariepy seconded the motion. Roll of call was taken and the motion passed three to two. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Edward Carboni X Leo Badgley X Sharon Gariepy X Jake Dumesnil X Member Carboni moved to adjourn at 9:30pm; Member Gariepy seconded the motion. Roll of call was taken and the motion passed unanimously.