Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON MARCH 11, 2013 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chairman Clarence Badgley Chairman Joseph Moloughney Ms. Sharon Gariepy Mr. Jake Dumesnil Mr. Mark DeFruscio ABSENT: Mr. Edward Carboni ALSO PRESENT: Melissa Ashline-Heil, Director of Building and Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 11th, 2013 MEETING Member Dumesnil moved to approve the minutes. Member DeFruscio seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni ABSENT Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio X CONSIDERATION OF A SUBDIVISION AT 42 and 44 LEVERSEE AVENUE Surveyor Fred Metzger proposed subdividing a vacant lot behind 42 and 44 Leversee Avenue which the owners would merge with each lot respectively. The lot line adjustments would improve the non-conformance of each home in terms of setbacks. Chairman Moloughney added that the proposal meets all other zoning requirements. As a result Member Gariepy moved to approve the subdivision. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni ABSENT Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 94 COLUMBIA STREET Stewarts proposed a 700 sq ft addition with newly created parking on City land used for the Fire Department. Tom Lewis explained that the company looks for stores with high volume sales for expansion projects. The proposal also adds landscaping. Member Dumesnil asked about the landscaping on the corner requested at the last meeting. However, Stewarts found that the portion is small and plantings might interfere with cars pulling out. Chairman Moloughney added that two curb cuts lead straight to the intersection. Mr. Lewis explained that it is a tight lot. Chairman Moloughney suggested that the store widen access at Sandusky. Mr. Lewis agreed to attend the next month’s meeting after reviewing the Board’s request. The Board agreed to table the item until next month’s meeting. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni ABSENT Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN FOR 65 CONGRESS STREET Dan O’Neill sought final site plan approval for assembly use at 65 Congress Street. He is willing to limit his hours of operation to 12midnight. Member DeFruscio asked about trash removal and snow storage. Mr. O’Neill explained that he was able to store 7” of snow fall on the grassy area of the property this past season. As to trash he is willing to purchase two more cans. Member DeFruscio pointed out that the proposed use is event based and attendees may need those overflow parking spaces. Council member Fred Turcotte added that the City developed a map of the municipal parking lots in the downtown area. He described public lots behind 130 and 122 Remsen Street as well as a private lot behind 134 Remsen Street. Ed Tremblay, Community and Economic Development Director, added that Sargent Street has a significant lot. Chairman Moloughney explained that excessive reliance on municipal lots also creates wear and tear. In addition the Planning Board is authorized to require the developer to place money in escrow or make improvements to the municipal lot(s). The Sargent Street lot needs work and Lancaster Street lot needs potholes filled. Chairman Moloughney commented that it would be difficult to assess an appropriate contribution at this time since there is great uncertainty about how much the applicant will depend on the lots and the number of events he will attract to his facility. The applicant’s contribution to the lot maintenance or improvement should be commensurate with his use of them. Member Gariepy suggested checking in at six month intervals to assess use and lots’ needs. Mr. O’Neill responded that paving a lot is expensive and suggested a nominal surcharge per event ticket could be assessed that he would place in escrow for lot improvements and maintenance Councilwoman Diane Nolin questioned the maximum occupancy of the space. Chairman Moloughney explained that code requirements would normally determine occupancy. He explained that the concern isn’t necessary building occupancy, but the size of any given event or gathering at the facility and the commensurate impacts such a crowd would have on the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. O’Neill added that the parking space variance is based on the number of people. Over 100 people requires valet parking at a municipal lot cleared by the City on a case by case basis. The 6400 sq ft assembly area at 7 sq ft per person according to the code would allow up to 778-1200 people, depending on seating arrangements. Chairman Moloughney pointed out that 800-1200 people leaving an event and emptying directly into a residential neighborhood could be problematic. This is especially true in his case when most of the facility’s parking needs will be satisfied by distant municipal lots. Chairman Moloughney also discussed his concern that such a large and possibly noisy and disruptive crowd would be leaving an event at midnight, possibly creating a significant negate impact on the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. O’Neill does not want to limit the capacity at all. He also stated he does not want to reapply for expanded use. However the Board was uncomfortable authorizing that many people in that space without adequate precautions. Chairman Moloughney and Member Dumesnil proposed approval at 400 people with the caveat the applicant could return any time in the future if he wanted to amend his approval for expanded attendance. Otherwise the Board is not only authorized, but is responsible for weighing the site specifics to determine and require mitigation of any potential nuisances. Mr. O’Neill offered limiting his event sizes to 600 people. Councilman Turcotte added that City of Cohoes has had to close several clubs due to problems. Chairman Moloughney added that while the building’s safe occupancy may be 1200 people, the parking variance is not for 1200 people, as there aren’t 1200 parking spaces available in the municipal lots. Where would the applicant propose parking all of the extra cars if he had an event that large? Member DeFruscio suggested setting a limit and requiring a permit for larger events. However, Mr. O’Neill did not want to return to the Board. Member Gariepy pointed out the neighborhood might not be able to withstand that kind of event without mitigation. Councilwoman Nolin reminded the applicant and the Board that at the ZBA meeting the applicant proposed weddings with a maximum of 200 people. Mr. O’Neill explained that weddings would require tables and would not use the stage area. Chairman Moloughney offered that the Board could vote on 400, 600 or table the application. Mr. O’Neill did not want to limit occupancy to 400. Ms. Ashline-Heil explained that if the Board voted and denied the application he would be barred from reapplication for a period of one year. Therefore, Mr. O’Neill agreed to table the request. However he questioned what additional information he would need to provide. Member Dumesnil explained that the request is unprecedented and the impact to the City is not entirely clear at this meeting. Therefore the request needs additional research. Ms. Ashline-Heil added the applicant should count the available parking spaces in municipal lots. He should also answer the questions posed at tonight’s meeting: What is the maximum attendance proposed? How would the applicant handle any nuisances? As a result, Member DeFruscio moved to table the request. Member Gariepy seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni ABSENT Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN FOR LEXINGTON HILLS Developer Bill Hoblock and Landscape Architect Joe Dannible described the project. It would contain 408 luxury rental units in 35 buildings. Each building will contain 10-12 units. Each unit would have an interior garage and 1044 parking spaces which equals 2.5 spaces per unit. Sixty three acres would remain a no-disturbance buffer between neighboring residential areas and the project. In the past nine months the developer has been ironing out engineering issues, which have been resolved. The project received County Planning Board approval. The developer submitted the Traffic Study. The developer is replacing a CSO at Lancaster Street to fix an overflow problem. He intends to start construction of the project next spring. The project would involve three phases. In the first phase 198 units would be constructed along with the clubhouse. The second phase would involve 120 units and a maintenance building. The final phase would involve 90 units and the fitness center. Chairman Moloughney explained that the major issue remaining based on review engineer Thomas McGrath’s last letter is how to calculate stormwater impacts and the appropriate sizing of the practices. Chairman Moloughney, Tom McGrath, the City Engineer, and the developer’s engineer met during the previous week to discuss the storm water system and the interpretation of DEC’s new standards. Chairman Moloughney is satisfied that the developer has reasonably interpreted the DEC standards and has designed a system in compliance with DEC requirements. The applicant will respond to Tom’s letter. Mr. Hoblock added that the regulation is relatively new so it’s a grey area. However, the site plan has remained the same. In addition, the developer is improving the City’s system in the water quality sewer separation project on Lancaster Street. Councilwoman Nolin asked where the project will connect for water and sewer on Western Avenue. Mr. Hoblock described the sewer connection at Eagle’s Nest Ravine Interceptor and the water connection at the Columbia Street and Baker Avenue Interceptor. Member Gariepy asked how else the project benefits the City. Chairman Moloughney explained that the developer will pay property taxes, while increasing the sales tax revenue by increasing the City’s population. Finally, the street will remain private which means the developer will incur any maintenance costs and provide private trash pick-up. Therefore the project does not cost the City in terms of services. Member DeFruscio moved to approve the project with a condition that the design engineer respond to review engineer Tom McGrath’s letter of February 19, 2013. Member Gariepy seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Joseph Moloughney X Leo Badgley X Edward Carboni ABSENT Jake Dumesnil X Sharon Gariepy X Mark DeFruscio X Member Dumesnil moved to adjourn at 8:15pm. Vice Chairman Badgley seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Please note the next meeting will take place April 8, 2012.