Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON JUNE 13, 2011 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph Moloughney Mr. Edward Carboni Vice-Chairman Clarence Badgley Ms. Sharon Gariepy Mr. Jake Dumesnil ABSENT: Mr. Mark DeFruscio CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 9, 2011 MEETING Chairman Moloughney asked that the month be changed from April to May on the minutes. Member Carboni moved to approve the minutes as conditioned. Member Gariepy seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A POOL AT 8 ARLINGTON ROAD The applicant proposes a 27’ round above ground pool 25’ from the street and fenced in with wrought iron fencing. Chairman Moloughney pointed out that the setbacks for a pool are 50’ from the front and 10’ from the side and rear property lines. The applicant agreed to obtain a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). Member Gariepy moved to approve the special use permit conditioned on obtaining a variance from setback requirements. Member Carboni seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A POOL AT 65 MCELWAIN AVENUE The applicant proposed installing an 18’ round pool 6’ from the side property line and 4’ from the rear. She had already applied for a variance and is on the agenda for the ZBA’s June 22nd, 2011 meeting. Member Carboni questioned why the applicant could not move the pool into the 30’ setback shown on the other side of the property. The applicant described the yard as having three large trees on that side of the yard. Chairman Moloughney asked where water will drain if the pool fails. The applicant indicated it would flow toward the oak tree in the 30’ setback. Chairman Moloughney asked why the applicant could not move the pool toward the house to avoid the 4’ rear setback. She explained that they have a stamped concrete patio. Member Gariepy moved to approve the application conditioned on obtaining variances. Member Carboni seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND AT THE INTERSECTION OF GANSEVOORT AND CONTINENTAL AVENUES As a result of the WatersView project, the City decided to subdivide and sell off a landlocked parcel between the existing townhouses and the new project. Each adjacent property owner would be able to purchase the subdivided parcel. The final portion, adjacent to a jointly owned parking area, would be merged with the existing parking lot. Member Dumesnil moved to approve the subdivision. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION AT 4 TREMONT STREET Mike Molesky owns 4 Tremont Street which has a single family home. He also owns an adjacent lot which has a garage. The garage encroaches on the parcel containing the single family home. Therefore he proposes subdividing 10’ off the single family home property to merge with the garage’s property. Chairman Moloughney commented that it is difficult to obtain a mortgage for a property that encroaches on an adjacent property. Member Gariepy moved to approve the subdivision. Member Carboni seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A POOL AT 12 TAYLOR STREET Nancy Denis owns a single family home at 12 Taylor Street. She has an existing inground pool on the property that needs a new liner. She cannot afford a new liner at this time. Therefore she proposes installing an above ground pool for the season until she can either afford to repair the inground pool or fill it in. Member Dumesnil asked if the second pool is a temporary structure. Mrs. Denis confirmed that the 20’ pool is plastic pvc meant for removal at the end of the swim season. Member Dumesnil asked about setbacks for the new pool which Mrs. Denis confirmed would be 10’ from the side and rear property lines. Chairman Moloughney expressed concern about whether the applicant will properly maintain the second pool. Member Carboni questioned the visual for neighbors. Mrs. Denis described two 6’ privacy fences along the side and rear property lines. Randy Koniowka of 142 Second Avenue commented that he has known the family for years and that the family has always taken good care of the property. Member Gariepy moved to approve the special use permit contingent on a two year maximum to decide whether the fill in or repair the inground pool and that only one pool should be functioning at any given time. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed three to two. Member Carboni expressed concern that the condition would not be enforced due to the timeframe. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A POOL AT 209 VLIET STREET The applicant requested approval for a 20’ pool 5’ from the sideyard property line and 23’ from the front. She averred that moving the pool closer to the home would preclude maintenance of the pool and cause flooding of the home in case of failure. She explained that there are hedges along the side property line where she also has a chain link fence. Eventually she would like to replace it with privacy stockade fencing. Chairman Moloughney suggested that a variance would be required and the standard is normally for an undue hardship not self-created. In this case, a smaller pool would resolve the problem. He also asked where water will drain if the pool fails or is emptied. The applicant indicates water will flow toward the house. Member Gariepy asked how close the pool will be to the neighbor’s house. Member Carboni questioned whether the applicant has a driveway for the garage. The applicant confirmed the garage has a driveway and described the pool as 30’ from the neighbor’s house. Member Gariepy moved to approve the application for a pool contingent on obtaining a variance. Member Carboni seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A PARKING WAIVER FOR AN EXPANSION OF USE AT 96 REMSEN STREET The applicant sought approval for expanding the use of the building. Currently the building is approved through the assessor’s records for one business and one apartment. The applicant proposes dividing the first floor to create a second commercial space and renovating the upstairs to accommodate two apartments. Chairman Moloughney asked if the second business would have a kitchen as well. The applicant explained it is only 500 sq ft and would most likely be rented out as office space. Chairman Moloughney pointed out that increasing the building’s use would increase not only parking but garbage. He asked what plan the applicant had for handling both issues. The applicant indicated she would continue Salvation Army’s practice of leaving the garbage cans in front of the building. Member Gariepy suggested a dumpster instead. She pointed out that there is a walkway between 96 Remsen Street and Uncle John’s diner that would provide access to the rear of the building. She recommended reaching out to the neighboring property owner to arrange an agreement for either sharing a dumpster or placing the dumpster on a neighboring property. The restaurant alone would generate more garbage than the Salvation Army. Member Gariepy also expressed concerns about parking for the apartments and the commercial uses. Chairman Moloughney requested the applicant apply for a parking variance and asked that the applicant revise garbage disposal plans and resubmit for next month. Member Carboni moved to table the item in the interim. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A COMMUNITY ROOM AND PARKING AT 421 COLUMBIA STREET Northeast Eddy submitted an application for a 4,000 sq ft community room at last month’s meeting. The Planning Board passed their intent to declare lead agency at the May 9th, 2011 meeting. In the meantime, Planning Board Engineer Thomas McGrath, P.E. reviewed and approved the plans and revised SWPPP. As a result, Member Gariepy moved to declare lead agency. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT Member Carboni moved to make a negative declaration for SEQR purposes. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT Member Carboni moved to approve the site plan. Member Gariepy seconded the motion which passed unanimously.  YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni X Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A REVISED PARKING PLAN FOR 31 ONTARIO STREET Tony D’Adamo of Capital Architecture received approval of a site plan for renovating the old mill building into apartments. The approval called for an extension of Jackson Avenue to Delaware Avenue and a right turn only out of the parking areas. However, once the trees were removed for the bike trail project it became apparent that the slope between the existing Jackson Avenue to Delaware Avenue is too steep to pave. Therefore, Mr. D’Adamo proposes capping off the western most parking lot so that traffic cannot turn onto Jackson Avenue. Chairman Moloughney outlined three conditions to approval of this site plan: 1) Since the access road was also consideration for the lease of city land formerly known as Railroad Avenue, the applicant must provide $20,000 to a Community Fund account for community improvements; 2) The final approval shall be contingent on the Fire Chief’s review of parking spaces 45 and 46 which block a fire hydrant; and 3) The applicant must obtain Traffic Commission approval. As a result, Member Carboni moved to conditionally approve the site plan preliminarily. Member Dumesnil seconded the motion which passed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF A CARPORT AT 1 NIVER STREET The applicant was asked at the May 9th, 2011 meeting to submit a thorough site plan showing landscaping elements and proposed signage as well as the carport. The applicant did not submit the items as of yet and did not appear before the Board. CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN FOR 100 COLUMBIA STREET Chris Boyea of Bohler Engineering updated the Board that he responded to Traffic Commission concerns and the Planning Board Engineer’s comments. Since the project lost substantial time in the review process he is hoping for final approval of the building’s architecture next month. He submitted two renderings showing the building with or without wainscoting. Member Gariepy asked what the wainscoting is made out of. Mr. Boyea described it as brick veneer made of half bricks. Member Gariepy asked why the applicant doesn’t make the building all brick. Mr. Boyea indicated that the wainscoting is to provide visual interest and break up a blank wall. He also added transom or fake windows to the structure for the same reason in response to the Board’s concerns that the building seems utilitarian and does not fit in the neighborhood. Chairman Moloughney pointed out the building still is not proportionate to the remainder of the neighborhood. It seems monolithic compared to the residential homes and recently constructed commercial settings that mimic residential style. Member Gariepy added that the property is in a major gateway to Cohoes and that the City will be stuck with the building forever. Member Dumesnil asked whether the building could easily be altered in the future: install real windows, etc. Mr. Boyea explained it is stick built, so it can easily be modified. Vice Chairman Badgley commented that most Dollar General stores are in strip malls. Member Carboni asked if there are any freestanding Dollar General stores in the area. Mr. Boyea responded that the few in existence look like the original submission. Mr. Boyea was surprised the Board was not more accepting of the design because he asked the Board for suggestions at the last attended meeting. Chairman Moloughney recalled that he had warned Mr. Boyea at the time about design by committee. Although the Board members could suggest items to make the building appear more residential, it was up to an architect to design a building that fit the neighborhood as several board members recommended months ago. Councilwoman Diane Nolin reiterated her concerns about traffic, appearance, pedestrian safety and stormwater handling. Randy Koniowka of 142 Second Avenue described a Rite Aid in Round Lake that altered the building. He also countered Mr. Boyea’s comment that he asked for design suggestions from the Board by pointing out that the Board has consistently recommended that the architect visit the neighborhood, read the Route 470 and Western Gateway Studies to gain a sense of the place. Any new construction should fit in with those concepts. Member Dumesnil moved to adjourn at 8:30pm. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously.