Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON JUNE 8, 2015 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Edward Carboni Mr. Joseph Nadeau Chairman Mark DeFruscio Ms. Stephanie Couture ABSENT: Vice Chairman Clarence Badgley Mr. Jack Carroll ALSO PRESENT: Melissa Cherubino, Director of Building and Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 11th, 2015 MEETING Chairman DeFruscio opened the meeting at 6:30pm and asked the recording secretary to take roll call. Member Carboni moved to approve the minutes conditioned on removing Member Couture’s vote from approval of minutes. Member Nadeau seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A POOL AT 11 JEFFERSON AVENUE Mr. Brady requested approval to install a 27’ round above ground pool which meets all required setbacks in his backyard at 11 Jefferson Avenue. However, the drawing did not list side setbacks. Drainage would not impair neighbors’ properties. Both side neighbors also have pools. Councilman Ricard confirmed the setbacks exceed the local requirements and both neighbors have pools. Member Nadeau moved to approve the pool per plans submitted with the condition that the applicant provide side setbacks. Member Carboni seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Stephanie Couture X Jack Carroll ABSENT CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A POOL AT 1 SIMMONS AVENUE Ms. Connolly proposes installing a 21’ above ground pool in her backyard which abuts City land. Two catch basins abut the rear property line. Plans show the pool installation will meet setback requirements. Ms. Connolly installed a fence 10’ from the rear property line. The pool would be installed within the fenced–in area. Chairman DeFruscio asked if the land grades to City property, which Member Carboni confirmed from his site visit. As a result, Member Couture moved to approve the special use permit. Member Nadeau seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOME OCCUPATION AT 71 WASHINGTON AVENUE Jeff McAuley presented a proposal to make ice cream in an accessory structure at their primary residence located at 71 Washington Avenue. The couple proposes an office within the principal structure for bookkeeping and management of the business. Deliveries by dairy trucks would be made via the alleyway with a proposed expansion of the existing window into a garage door. Mr. McAuley upgraded the electrical service to accommodate the two storage freezers and two ice cream machines. Customers would not be purchasing product at the home. Instead the produced ice cream would be sold off-site. Member Carboni asked whether the applicant will need to meet health department standards since food is involved, which the applicants confirmed. In fact the couple will need to submit a floor plan layout to the County Health Department for approval and pass an inspection. Member Nadeau asked if the couple intends to hire any employees. However, the family members living in the home will be the only employees. Councilwoman Nolin questioned whether the couple also needs a variance to conduct a business at the site. However, the code permits home occupation with a special use permit from the Planning Board in the residential zoning district so long as 1) the principal structure’s primary use is as the home occupation applicant’s residence; and 2) the proposed home occupation does not create significant nuisances to the existing neighbors. As a result, Member Carboni moved to approve the special use permit as described. Member Couture seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A MULTI-FAMILY PROPOSAL AT 24 AMITY STREET Thomas Keaney of CK2 Properties reduced the proposed renovation of 24 Amity Street to 14 units with 28 off-street parking spaces sized 9X18 in accordance with the Cohoes Zoning Code, four of which are “banked” as recommended by NYSDEC green infrastructure practices as well as the City’s Zoning Code. Trash will be stored indoors; snow over 6” will be removed from the site; and the developer will install fixed blinds inside the bottom half of windows to preserve neighbor’s privacy. The developer has been working with the neighbors to develop a plan that works in the given location. Chairman DeFruscio concurred, adding that the applicant increased the green space, installed car stops in the south lot, and agreed to install a white vinyl fence at the rear property line along the existing 6’ wood privacy fencing owned by the neighbor. Member Carboni asked that the banked spaces would be assigned to apartments. Mr. Keaney added that the spaces would be paved should the need arise. Councilwoman Nolin asked whether any approval could be contingent on a lease restriction limiting parking to the site. Chairman DeFruscio pointed out that would be difficult to enforce. In fact, residents currently park in the private lot. However, once constructed those residents would be forced to park on-street and Chairman DeFruscio did not think the applicant should be held accountable for existing residents. Mr. Keaney agreed to keep a list of license plate numbers and car registrations for all tenants. Member Carboni asked about lighting as he would recommend replacing the existing lights with a shoebox or downcast product to preserve neighbors from glare. Chairman DeFruscio remarked that lighting will be installed over the doors – at two locations – on the building. He questioned whether the second egress would be on the south rear side of the building. Mr. Keaney will need to configure apartments first, but believes that to be the location. Installed lighting will be downcast and he is willing to convert outdoor lighting in the rear to motion sensor lighting after 11pm. Tim Ryan of 49 Amity Street disagreed with the unknown location of the second form of egress. He is also concerned that the applicant might build apartments with more bedrooms. As a result the board decided to condition approval on the south side back corner location for the second form of egress. Any change would need planning board review for approval. Member Nadeau moved to approve the final plans as conditioned. Member Couture seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN FOR A MULTI-FAMILY AT 9 AND 11 SURPRENANT WAY The applicant proposes constructing a 10 unit multi-family with a 20 space ancillary surface parking lot in front of the buildings. Jerry Krug constructed Eagle’s Nest development off James Street as well as twin homes on Masten Avenue. He purchased 9 and 11 Surprenant Way; 9 Surprenant Way contains a single family home his foreman would occupy and 11 is a vacant “L” shaped parcel where he proposes the 10 unit structure. Luigi Palleschi, P.E. drafted the plans and described the proposal as five two-family rowhouses on roughly .64 acres. The applicant will landscape the property, particularly with arbor vitae to block the garage on the north side next to the entrance. The applicant will disconnect roof drains to meet NYSDEC green infrastructure requirements. In addition, the applicant will make a lot line adjustment to broaden the frontage for 11 Surprenant Way. Finally, the application will require a use and several area variances the applicant will seek from the ZBA. However, at this meeting Mr. Krug seeks Planning Board’s intent to act as lead agency. Mr. Palleschi suggested that the proposal would include 1-2 bedroom units. The applicant will be adding green infrastructure practices and creating recreation area behind the building. The applicant will place totes at the curb for each unit, to be handled by his foreman who will live in the single family home. Although the proposal will require a use and area variances, the planning board also has latitude to approve the parking lot in the front property. Finally, the facades would be setback at different locations in 4’ increments with varying finishes to give the appearance of a little village. Neighbor Bill Murphy of 106 Vliet Street is concerned about the number of units for the location. The proposal is removing significant amounts of green space, adding lighting and does not fit the neighborhood character. He also questions whether the proposal can accommodate snow storage. Therefore he opposes the development. Councilwoman Nolin agreed that the proposal includes too many units. She finds the proposal inappropriate for the neighborhood. The parking lot, too close setbacks, number of units, type of structure, drainage and proximity to ravine all seem problematic for the neighbors. Yet the applicant can make economic use of the land with permitted uses of single, two-family or rowhouses. A neighbor added that so many variances are needed that one cannot argue that the proposal fits the neighborhood. She also pointed out that the property is not so unique or unbuildable that the variances are required. Member Carboni agreed and suggested that the ZBA take lead agency. Chairman DeFruscio questioned whether 6’ residential carriage lighting would create glare. He also questioned the lot line adjustment as it would create a side setback out of compliance. Although he appreciates the development Mr. Krug has constructed in Cohoes, he would like to see elevation drawings to determine whether the proposal retains the residential feel of the neighborhood. Member Couture thinks the proposal will increase noise pollution and negatively impact the character of the neighborhood. Member Nadeau questioned the 4’ drop in back of the buildings and whether the area would be usable for recreation. The applicant will install decks on both stories with a foundation poured at the base. Building footprint would equal 20X50 with a 8X15 deck within the 60’ behind the buildings. Member Nadeau moved to table the application. Member Carboni seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Chris Briggs X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN FOR 3 MCELWAIN AVENUE The applicant failed to show. Therefore Member Carboni moved to table. Member Couture seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Chris Briggs X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW OF 330 SARATOGA STREET Third Ward Councilman Bill Ricard is concerned about a use car sales business because the street is narrow. The applicant failed to appear. Therefore Member Couture moved to table. Member Carboni seconded which passed unanimously. YES NO Leo Badgley ABSENT Edward Carboni X Chris Briggs X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll ABSENT Stephanie Couture X Vice Chairman Badgley moved to adjourn at 8:10pm. Member Carboni seconded the motion which passed unanimously.