Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 8, 2016 AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Bob Bucher Mrs. Debbie Jacques Mr. Joseph Nadeau Ms. Stephanie Couture Mr. Jack Carroll Chairman Mark DeFruscio ALSO PRESENT: Melissa Cherubino, Director of Building and Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 9th, 2015 MEETING Chairman opened the meeting at 6:30pm and asked the recording secretary to take roll call. Member Nadeau moved to approve the minutes. Member Couture seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Debbie Jacques ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING AT 120 SIMMONS AVENUE Craig Davin requested a special use permit to construct an accessory dwelling in his existing detached garage. However, the principal structure is a two-family and the code permits one accessory dwelling per single family home. The applicant claimed to have sufficient off-street parking: two in the garage, an existing driveway and space to the right of the garage that could be used for parking. In response, board members expressed concerns about parking and density in that stretch of Simmons Avenue. During a site visit one board member found three trucks parked in the driveway. Member Nadeau also questioned green space, impact on the neighborhood and lighting for the accessory dwelling. Board members could not make a determination because the applicant did not submit a site plan detailing the available parking. In addition he needs a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals since the principal structure is a two-family. As a result, Member Carroll moved to table the request. Member Bucher seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Debbie Jacques ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR SERVING ALCOHOL AT 133 REMSEN STREET Rob Langley sought approval to serve alcohol at the Breakfast Spot, his new restaurant at 133 Remsen Street first floor. He makes most of his profits from the limited food menu. However he sought a beer and wine license to serve mimosas and other breakfast or brunch drinks. In the future he would revisit any approval in order to propose two sidewalk café tables. The Board needs a site plan with dimensions in order to consider sidewalk eating. Board members asked if he would have music and the hours of operation. At this time recorded music would be played indoors. The restaurant is open 8am to 2pm. Based on those parameters, 8am to 2pm hours of operation and all activities take place indoors, Member Couture moved to approve the special use permit to serve alcohol at the Breakfast Spot in 133 Remsen St first floor. Member Carroll seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Debbie Jacques ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN FOR AN EIGHT UNIT TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT AT 9 AND 11 SURPRENANT WAY Ted DeLucia and Luigi Palleschi, P.E. proposed constructing eight townhomes at 9 and 11 Surprenant Way. The applicant would abut the townhomes to an existing single family home at 9 and merge the two lots. An ancillary parking area with eighteen spaces facing the townhomes would provide sufficient parking. The developer did address neighbors concerns by limiting the parking to one linear lot and removing the excess four spaces abutting the existing single family home. The proposal includes landscaping detail, but 42.3% greenspace while 50% is required. In order to resolve the greenspace issue and to rotate the townhouses to face Surprenant Way the developer attempted to purchase the adjacent garage. However the garage owner was not interested in selling. The 60’ frontage of the vacant lot combined with the 60’ frontage of the existing single family lot would not provide adequate space to construct eight units given placement of the existing single family home. Member Carroll suggested removing one unit particularly to create a recreation area; however Mr. Palleschi argues that the cost of the lost and development requires the number of units in order to obtain financing for the investment property. Member Nadeau questioned accessibility around the building and proximity to the bike path. Members were concerned about emergency vehicle access as well as the slope stability with the townhouse on the edge of a plateau. Mr. Palleschi and Member Carroll measured approximately 100’ from the corner of the last unit to the bike path. The immediate drop off is 4’, necessitating a retaining wall. Mr. Palleschi suggested either moving the building 10’ to the south side property line instead of the current 20’ setback OR moving the retaining wall 4’ back. Although originally questioned as a safety access issue, board members preferred moving the retaining wall 4’ and creating pedestrian access. The 20’ side setback would suffice for vehicle access if necessary. Member Carroll questioned the use of dry-wells given the Class C and D soils in the City of Cohoes. He questioned the discharge location of 6” pvc piping listed on the plans. Mr. Palleschi did not know the soil classification, but countered that the dry-wells would not overflow. The 6” pipes interconnect the dry-wells. If dry-wells won’t work given the soil classes, Mr. Palleschi would add underground storage that would weep overflow to the ravine. At the last meeting the Planning Board declared an intent to act as lead agency. After providing notice to the involved agencies, the Planning Board can declare lead agency for SEQR purposes. Board members wanted an additional month to consider SEQR before making a positive or negative declaration. In the meantime, board members questioned handling of the property management and custodial activities. The caretaker would live in the existing single family home and provide lawn maintenance and snow plowing. The shed drawn in on previous submissions would not longer be installed on the property. Instead equipment storage will take place inside the existing single family home. Member Couture questioned whether the parking lot lighting would remain in effect throughout the night. Mr. Palleschi proposed 6-8’ light posts which will sit lower than the tree-lined buffer. Downcast shoe-box lights would remain on ideally, but the applicant is open to suggestions. The proposed lighting is residential in nature, not the typical parking lot lighting. Member Bucher requested a lighting plan and spec sheet prior to subsequent meetings. Chairman DeFruscio asked for a revised plan that includes elevations. Member Bucher’s lighting details should be included in that revision. The new retaining wall location, access around the building and soil testing results are also required. Krug will perform the tests monitored under ABD. Member Bucher also questioned whether the R2 buildings will require sprinklers. Mr. DeLucia suggested that fire rated walls may suffice. Member Carroll moved to declare the planning board lead agency for SEQR purposes. Member Bucher seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Debbie Jacques ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 24 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY AT 30 DELAWARE AVENUE Scott Lansing, PE represented the developer in a 24 unit multi-family at 30 Delaware Avenue. The proposal received SEQR approval and area variances from height, number of units and green space. Therefore the applicant currently seeks preliminary approval of the site plan and elevation drawings. The 1.79 acre property located in the MU-2 mixed use waterfront zoning district contains archeologically sensitive artifacts that SHPO and the Native American Federation approved encapsulating with a parking lot. As a waterfront property the ground floor of the structure will sit at 29.5’ allowing elevator access to the garages’ 51 parking spaces. In addition, the proposal includes 43 outdoor parking spaces. At the ZBA meeting seven spaces were banked, or left green. The proposal includes a pool, recreational facility and existing boat launch. Board members questioned boat launch access. Mr. Lansing indicated emergency services rely on the water access. However it is believed that only the residents and emergency personnel would be able to use the launch. Alana Matulis questioned the façade color and material. She would like to see color and materials that match the natural landscape. Mr. Lansing explained that landscaping would surround the project. However Mrs. Matulis did not believe that a tree would hide the four story structure. Member Bucher asked about lighting which was not shown on the plans. In addition, the City had asked for a public access walkway adjacent to the River. Member Bucher questioned what type of fencing would be installed around the pool. Melissa Cherubino with the Building and Planning Department relayed the Community and Economic Development Director’s concern that the entrance appears too institutional and not residential. As a result of the foregoing the board conditionally approved the project with the expectation that the requested materials would be submitted at a subsequent meeting. Member Carroll moved to approve as conditioned and Member Nadeau seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Debbie Jacques ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X Member Nadeau moved to adjourn at 8:24pm. Member Couture seconded the motion which passed unanimously.