Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 10, 2010 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph Moloughney Mr. Edward Carboni Mr. Mark DeFruscio Mr. Jake Dumesnil Vice-Chairman Clarence Badgley ABSENT: Ms. Sharon Gariepy ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Melissa Ashline-Heil, City Planner CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AT 100 COLUMBIA STREET Chris Boyea of Bohler Engineering, representing the applicant, GBT Realty, described those items the applicant already agreed to in order to negotiate the retail use of the property in good faith. The applicant will: 1. Plant a row of trees to buffer the neighbors; 2. Install an 8’ privacy fence for which the applicant received an area variance; 3. Plant 3.5-4’ hedges along the Columbia Street side to buffer headlights; and 4. Handle the stormwater Stewart’s pipes onto the property; Other existing issues include: 1) access on Columbia Street; 2) trees between Stewart’s and the proposed project; and 3) the architecture of the proposed building. Member DeFruscio added that the Board also needs more information on how the applicant will handle stormwater on site. Chairman Moloughney asked if the applicant received comments from Tom McGrath, the Planning Board Engineer. Mr. Boyea indicated that although the engineer’s discussed Tom’s concerns with him, no formal comments were submitted as of yet. Member Carboni added that the Wet Pond raises the concern as to whether the water table is high enough to sustain the pond. Mr. Boyea explained that the soils support the wet pond concept. Member DeFruscio asked about snow storage. Mr. Boyea pointed out the ample space available for snow storage in the wet pond and surrounding green space. Chairman Moloughney asked why the project includes so much parking. Mr. Boyea described the facility as a neighborhood-based business that seeks to accommodate the customer who wants to stop for needed odds and ends. Although the project could succeed with fewer spaces, the applicant would like the business to extend a friendly welcome to customers. Member Carboni described the Latham locale as having fewer parking spaces, yet the lot never fills up. Mr. Boyea proposed land banking spaces for the future to accommodate both the applicant and the City. That way, if the lot never fills to capacity the land remains green, but the applicant retains the right to construct the banked spaces if the need arises. The applicant would remove the furthest spaces and would retain the right to construct those spaces without planning board approval if parking becomes an issue. Chairman Moloughney countered that the building’s architecture does not appear inviting, which is why the project reached an impasse. Mr. Boyea emphasized the applicant’s willingness to alter the finish or color of the building as well as add more landscaping elements. He added that a gabled roof would be expensive and may make the project economically unfeasible for the applicant. Mr. Boyea then displayed several architectural renderings of the building with: 1) a masonry veneer and wainscot on the bottom; 2) a lighter color scheme; and 3) pilasters to add dimension in the façade. Member DeFruscio commented that the colors did not matter to the board, rather the building itself appears industrial and does not fit in with the neighborhood. Several times Member DeFruscio recommended that the applicant study the surrounding homes – including commercial properties such as the Eddy and Columbia Gardens – and mimic those elements in the proposal. As the entry way to the City, the building’s appearance is important. Chairman Moloughney added that the Western Gateway Study may provide a good reference for the applicant as to what the City would like to create in the Gateway. He also described the Eddy and Columbia Crest as a good example of commercial uses with a suburban, residential feel. Mr. Boyea countered that CVS and Stewart’s both have a flat roof. Chairman Moloughney explained the City does not want to repeat the sins of the past, but create a better look for the future. Member Dumesnil asked about windows. Mr. Boyea explained that the applicant can install transom (or fake) windows on either side of the entrance, as well as cornices, trelisses and awnings. However, the applicant cannot install porches, columns or a gabled roof as these would not be feasible. Member Carboni asked if the national chain always built the same prototype. Some chains stores do construct custom structures to fit the surroundings. Mr. Boyea explained that most chains discontinued construction of custom stores because of low sales. Customers do not associate the custom buildings with the brand. The applicant has three prototypes, but each is based on the lot size, and do not differ significantly. In fact, the national chain prefers to reinvest in existing buildings than to build new construction. Diane Nolin, Fourth Ward Council Representative, reiterated that Columbia Crest should be the starting point for any proposal. She also has concerns about the safety of a wet pond on the site. Randy Koniowka added that any new construction should reflect the historic nature of the City. Mr. Boyea then unveiled the rendering that features a gabled roof with a standard seam, columns in front flanking the covered entryway and a wood clapboard façade. Chairman Moloughney found the gabled roof rendering most closely matched the neighborhood. He requested a window to break up the sidewall facing Monroe. Mr. Boyea recommended efis along the area adjacent to the roof line to break up the wall. However, residents in the audience also preferred windows. Some argued that the building still looks like a cement block, even with the gabled roof and windows. One resident suggested raised panels to create a warmer façade. Another resident questioned why the store needs the location since there are six other similar retail stores within driving distance. He also asked how the building will enrich Cohoes. A better looking building would have more staying power than the proposal. Alan Timberland suggested a professional office on the site. Chairman Moloughney clarified that the ZBA determines use; however he agreed that the City would prefer a building with staying power and reusability. Mr. Boyea countered that an office building would need at least two stories of rental space in order to recoup the cost of construction. Throughout the approval process neighbors have expressed concerns about strangers looking into their back yard. However, office workers would be facing the back yards of neighboring residents. Conversely, the proposal fits the lot size, shape and scale while having the ability to handle the site’s drawbacks. The developer is willing to install sidewalks and landscaping as well as bend on the building’s façade. He also pointed out that other proposals would not be able to afford the expensive stormwater requirements for the site. In this instance, the developer proposes a 20 year lease for one use operating from 7am to 11pm. Mr. Timberland admitted that of the proposals, this one constituted a better fit for the neighborhood and reduced the number of potential nuisances for the neighbors compared to the car wash and strip mall. Chairman Moloughney agreed that the gable option is 80% acceptable if the applicant agreed to other treatments to improve the residential feel of the structure. Mr. Boyea asked board members to brainstorm a wish list of items for the building. Members commented that: 1. The gabled roof fits in better with the neighborhood; 2. The structure needs windows on the front and side; 3. Efis along the top breaks up the wall; and 4. A masonry veneer would mimic homes along Columbia Street. Given these alterations, Chairman Moloughney, Vice Chairman Badgley, Member Carboni, Member DeFruscio and Member Dumesnil would support the project. Chairman Moloughney would like a response from Traffic Commission on the Columbia Street entrance. Mr. Boyea received comments from the Traffic Commission indicating a need to deter left turns from Columbia Street. Tim, of GBT Realty in Tennessee, agreed to the peaked roof, faux windows and wainscoting. He added that the developer has built only 2 chain stores with peaked roof; this would be the third. The peaked roof will cost the developer $40,000. Member Dumesnil made a motion to adjourn at 8:30pm. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion. Roll of call was taken and the motion passed unanimously.