Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2018 AT 6:30 PM IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairperson Jack Carroll Mr. Bob Bucher Ms. Stephanie Couture Mr. Joseph Nadeau ABSENT: Chairperson Mark DeFruscio ALSO PRESENT: Robyn Reynolds, Deputy Director of Economic Development and Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 13 MEETING Vice Chairperson Carroll opened the meeting at 6:30 pm and asked if any of the Planning Board members had any comments on the proposed minutes. There being no questions, Vice Chairperson Carroll made a motion to approve the minutes, which was seconded by Member Bucher and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A PRIVATE SWIMMING POOL AT 126 SIMMONS AVENUE Member Nadeau noted that the applicant needed a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Vice Chairperson Carroll noted that a main consideration of the Planning Board is where the water would drain if the pool were to collapse. The applicant noted that it would go in the side yard. Vice Chairperson Carroll confirmed that this would be an above-ground pool, which the applicant responded affirmatively to. Vice Chairperson Carroll noted that as there were no further questions or opposition, he requested that a motion be made. Member Couture made a motion to approve the special use permit, under condition that the variance was approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Member Nadeau seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO A SITE PLAN AT 77 ONTARIO The applicant noted that he was concerned that a plow would go through a vinyl fence or that it may shatter from extreme cold temperatures and was requesting that the material be changed to wood. Vice Chairperson Carroll noted that a plow may go through any material and Member Couture asked if the shattering from the cold weather was the only concern. The applicant noted that it was the only concern and that he’s willing to replace any material that’s damaged. Neighbor Dawn Juneau noted her concerns over the approval of wood versus vinyl and handed out materials to Board members. She stated that both she and her brother, who own the property next to 77 Ontario, are asking the Board to consider enforcing the original approval that was granted as part of the site plan review. The applicant noted he would install whichever material was approved and made sense. Ms. Juneau inquired why other elements that were part of the site plan weren’t installed and R. Reynolds noted that the bus stop which would trigger the installation of the additional elements has not yet been fully installed or implemented. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if a motion should be made to abide by the original conditions. Member Couture noted that it didn’t seem like there was a compromise in this situation. Member Bucher made a motion that the applicant should adhere to the original conditions of the site plan approval which included installing an 8’ vinyl privacy fence facing the neighbors at 75 Ontario Street. The motion was seconded by Member Nadeau and the motion passed unanimously. Ms. Juneau asked about the CDTA bus stop timeline and R. Reynolds noted she would look into it. Ms. Juneau inquired about the timeline for installation of the fence, which Vice Chairperson Carroll noted that it would need to be installed in a timely manner. YES NO Bob Bucher X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN AT 218 COLUMBIA STREET AND CONSIDERATION OF SEQR Vice Chairperson Carroll noted that this was a site plan review and special use permit consideration for the former site of Gerard’s Garage. Mr. Hennessey, representing the applicant Mr. Patel, gave an overview of the project, noting that the site was 1/3 of an acre and is situated at the corner of Mann Avenue and Columbia Street. The current proposal would be to demolish existing structures on site and construct a convenience store with three pumps instead of the original four pumps. Mr. Hennessey pointed out some design elements, such as the setback on the convenience store, and the layout of the canopy to allow for trucks to come in from Route 9 to service the underground storage tanks. Mr. Hennessey elaborated that they were eliminating a curb cut closer to the intersection to cut down on traffic conflicts and that they were also applying for sign site plan approval, subject to a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals, but that the sign was consistent with DOT standards. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked about the details of the sign and also asked if there was a specific brand yet – to which Mr. Hennessey noted that the buyer is to be determined. Member Nadeau asked about store hours, to which he requested a specific delivery schedule be submitted. Vice Chairperson Carroll inquired about the parking to which Mr. Hennessey noted there would be 11 in total while the code required 6 spaces. Member Couture asked about entrances and Mr. Hennessey noted that there would be a front entrance, with possible service doors in the back or side of the building. Councilperson Bill McCarthy asked about fencing and screening elements, which Mr. Hennessey pointed out on the site plans. Member Bucher asked about lighting and Mr. Hennessey noted the building-mounted lighting and stated there would be no pole-mounted lighting and that all lighting would be dark sky compliant. Member Nadeau asked about setbacks on the parcel and R. Reynolds noted this was zoned MU-1 and therefore there are different requirements than in the rest of the neighborhood. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if there were any questions from the audience or more Board comments. Member Nadeau asked about snow storage and Mr. Hennessey noted that snow storage would be in the green spaces in the back and sides of the property, but they may adjust the parking spaces to accommodate for snow. Board members raised some concern over stormwater drainage but acknowledged that this development would not add anything to the existing situation. A neighbor from 108 Simmons Avenue noted concerns about the location of the dumpster adjacent to her property and asked that there be more permanent barriers installed, such as concrete, which Mr. Hennessey noted is possible. Another neighbor noted concerns about snow storage and drainage and Member Bucher noted that as currently designed, there would be no impacts to the adjacent property. A neighbor asked about the sign and hours that the sign would be lit and the property owner, Mr. Patel, clarified this would only be on during business hours. Another neighbor noted that they would like to see additional fencing and screening elements such as arbor vitae in the side areas. Additional discussion on roof types was had between Board members and Mr. Hennessey. Ms. Kiehl, a representative of Shell and Mobile, noted that Mr. Patel is one of the most reputable dealers in the area that he maintains very well and that Mr. Patel always makes efforts to please people in the community. There being no further questions, Member Nadeau made a motion for the Planning Board to declare intent to declare lead agency for SEQR purposes. The motion was seconded by Member Couture and the motion passed unanimously.  YES NO Bob Bucher X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN AT 2 NORTH MOHAWK C. Dehmler noted that he would like to make some remarks about an application to renovate the property at 2 North Mohawk to be Rachste Inn. He noted that Bob Kurzon is the architect on the project and that he is expecting to have a full site plan at the October meeting, but that the supporting documents submitted explain the concept. Mr. Dehmler went on to explain that he had previously submitted an application for this project and that Buildings A and B on the property are ready to be rented as hotel rooms, but that significant work would need to be done on Building C. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if this was for the youth hostel, and that the Board had some concerns about that proposal. Mr. Dehmler noted that it would not be a hostel, but an upscale luxury accommodation for those coming through the City to see shows at the Music Hall. He pointed out some elements, such as needing easements from the City for some parking configurations and proposed fencing and screening. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if he had talked to the City about the easements and other concerns about the neighboring property, to which Mr. Dehmler noted he had been talking to Mr. Jacobson in the CED office about the proposal and removing trees from the neighboring property so that it could function as a walkway and recreation area as well as for snow storage. Vice Chairperson asked if the Board had any questions, to which Member Couture asked if this was already an Airbnb. Mr. Dehmler noted that he has been adhering to what’s in the City Code but that he has excellent ratings on Airbnb. R. Reynolds noted that a next step was to submit a full application. Member Bucher asked for floorplans, and Member Nadeau asked if Code Enforcement had been involved. Mr. Dehmler noted they already did a walkthrough. Member Couture asked about branding, and Mr. Dehmler noted that he would be advertising using Airbnb and VRBO as they had insurance and other safety mechanisms. Member Nadeau noted that the Board would need more finalized materials to review prior to making a determination and also asked who owned the entrance to the property, which Mr. Dehmler noted he would clarify. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if a title search had been done on the property yet, which Mr. Dehmler noted a survey may clarify this, but he had not done a title search yet. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if there were any additional questions to which Member Nadeau noted that it was difficult to make comment based on the scope. Vice Chairperson Carroll noted he would like to see visual components. CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN AT 385 SARATOGA STREET M. Cherubino presented on the final site plan. Vice Chairperson Carroll asked if she had gotten any feedback on concerns with the property, which she noted that it had been owned by the Canal Corporation and they were planning on cleaning up the property as they acquired it. R. Reynolds noted that the Planning Board had received recommendations from the Albany County Planning Board which should be incorporated into the final approval. Vice Chairperson Carroll made a motion to approve the site plan under the condition that there be a review by the NYSDOT for design of highway access, drainage, and assessment of road capacity due to the change in property use. Member Bucher seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO A RESOLUTION FOR A SUBDIVISION AT 299-401 SARATOGA STREET R. Reynolds noted that the resolution which was passed should have noted the conditional approval based on the variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. R. Reynolds also stated that this variance was passed by the Zoning Board of Appeals. There being no questions, Member Couture made a motion to amend the Resolution to state the conditional approval, based on the determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals, which was seconded by Member Nadeau. The motion passed unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher X Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X DISCUSSION There being no further business, Vice Chairperson Carroll made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:56 pm. Member Couture seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.