Planning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COHOES PLANNING BOARD HELD AT 97 MOHAWK STREET 2ND FLOOR COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUGUST 9, 2021 at 6:30PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Mark DeFruscio, Chairperson Mr. Jack Carroll, Vice Chairperson Mr. Joseph Nadeau Ms. Stephanie Couture Ms. Kizzy Williams ABSENT: Mr. Bob Bucher ALSO PRESENT: Joseph Seman-Graves, City Planner Sharon Butler, Administrative Assistant Chairperson DeFruscio called the meeting to order at 6:32 pm and asked for roll call. Roll Call; Member Bucher absent CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FROM THE July 12, 2021 MEETING Chairperson DeFruscio; 1st item on agenda is consideration of the July 12, 2021meeting minutes. Everyone has a copy and had time to review them, are there any additions, changes or a motion to accept the minutes as submitted? Vice Chair Carroll made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted which Member Couture seconded and the motion carried unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X Kizzy Williams X CONSIDERATION OF AN EXTERIOR LIGHTED SIGN AT 218 COLUMBIA STREET Chairperson DeFruscio; next item on the agenda is an application to install a self-illuminated channel letter sign on the gas station at 218 Columbia Street. It’ll read Cohoes ValueMart. I believe everybody has a copy of the application, an example of what it is going to look like, the proposed signage. We don’t have anybody here representing that location at this point in time or the sign company. Did anybody have any questions regarding the sign? Vice Chair Carroll; I’ve looked at it, it’s going to fit nicely. They’ve got enough room for it Joe Seman-Graves; told the board that there have been several complaints regarding the lights on the building now, even though this sign wouldn’t create any issues, he wanted the board to know about the complaints received Vice Chair Carroll; this sign is going to be kitty corner where it’s going to be pointed and there’s nobody there. Joe Seman-Graves; it does fit all the size requirements Vice Chair Carroll; what time do they close at night? Joe Seman-Graves; 11PM Vice Chair Carroll; 11PM so they’ll have it on in the coming months at most 6 to 6 ½ hours a day Chairperson DeFruscio; yes during the winter at 5 o’clock. Any other questions or comments? So I’m looking for a motion to either accept or deny the application for the sign on the Cohoes ValueMart at 218 Columbia Street. I haven’t heard of any changes or additions that we want to make to it, it meets all the criteria Joe said for the size and everything else. Member Couture; based on all the regulations that it meets, I’ll make a motion to approve, which Vice Chair Carroll 2nd and the motion carried unanimously. YES NO Bob Bucher ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X Kizzy Williams X CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF A FINDINGS STATEMENT AND FINAL DETERMINATON ON SEQR AND DETERMINATION OF A PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT 178-182 ONTARIO STREET Chairperson DeFruscio; the next item on the agenda is consideration on the issuance of SEQR and consideration on the determination of a proposed site plan for 178-182 Ontario Street. Do any of you gentlemen want to make any comments, any summary or anything at this point in time? We’ve gone through pretty much the entire SEQR process, we’ve gotten to the point where we’ve got the finding statement and that’s one of the first things we’re going to be addressing is approvals on the finding statement. Jesse Batus; that’s right Mr. Chairman and members of the board, we appreciate all the consideration given to us. You’ve been very responsive and we look forward to moving on. Chairperson DeFruscio; do any members of the board have any comment or observations on the finding statement? We’ve had the opportunity to go over it and there isn’t anything outstanding as far as I know. I know the neighbors are still concerned about traffic there, I believe that’s a minor issue at this point in time. Joe Seman-Graves; just to clarify if the board does approve the draft finding statement, and it’s signed in this form it will show that there are no significate findings Chairperson DeFruscio; there were some comments, did you happen to get the email from Bob Joe Seman-Graves; Bob did send an email. The first part of it was about SEQR and he finds that he’s fine with the SEQR part. I can save the 2nd part until the second item. Chairperson DeFruscio; ok. I’ll open it up to comments from the public now. We had provided this SEQR statement to the public and asked for comments, there were comments that were provided, and they were incorporated into the documents. I personally believe that some people thought they had already voiced their opinion so they didn’t bother to comment during the public comment period, there’s nothing we can do about that. So if there is anybody from the public that wants to make any comments, we’d be happy to listen. Ok, based on the fact that I don’t see any comments from the public, I’m looking for a motion to approve the finding statement as completed or not approve the finding statement as completed. Vice Chair Carroll; I make a motion that we approve the finding statement as completed, 2nd by Member Williams motion carried unanimously YES NO Bob Bucher ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X Kizzy Williams X Chairperson DeFruscio; ok so the final SEQR statement has been accepted and approved and it will be filed accordingly. So we want to move onto review of the site plan, final approval of the site plan? Joe can you read Bob’s portion on that? Joe Seman-Graves; read the email from Member Bucher (absent from meeting) regarding the site plan (email attached to minutes). Chairperson DeFruscio; I will second his comment regarding the retail space on Ontario Street. We understand it is a function of the financing used for this project that you are unable to give us more than we asked than you have at this point in time. We understand that you are going to use it as office space and you’ve made some modifications there. I guess I would like your comments and opinion on whether or not you could do something as to what Bob brought up on the apartment space on Ontario Street. Jesse Batus; asked for clarification on what is exactly being asked and what Member Bucher is looking for on Ontario Street stating that there may be things they could entertain. If we can get some clarity on Ontario it might be something that we could entertain. Joe Seman-Graves gave Mr. Batus the email from Member Bucher for them to read and review for their response. Chairperson DeFruscio; I’ll give you a few minutes. Do any other members of the board have any questions or comments regarding the site plan? We’ve addressed the snow storage, trash storage, parking there’s 26 no there’s 36 apartments and 34 off street parking spaces. Jesse Batus; questioned about the increased glass that Member Bucher had in his email and asked if they could go back on the screen so they can look at it to get a better idea of what Member Bucher was asking. They weren’t sure where he was looking to have increased glass. Joe Seman-Graves; he referenced the apartments in the email. Chairperson DeFruscio; what’s on the Pershing Avenue I think he was referencing what is on the Pershing side. There’s not balconies on the Pershing side correct? Joe Seman-Graves; I don’t want to put words in his mouth, as he is not here, if the board wants to consider the comments and whatever you want to approve pending another meeting where Bob can speak to these comments. Jesse Batus; stated that because of the noise and the comments they received most were against it (balconies). Susan McCann; pointing at the plan on the screen asked; is he talking about here? Joe Seman-Graves; he also references more patio, greenery and lighting. I think if I had to guess this might be what he’s talking about over here (referenced on the screen) further down on the Ontario Street side. Susan McCann; we can do whatever needs to be done with the glass within reason, but with lighting we don’t want to infringe on people’s apartments, additional landscaping wouldn’t be an issue. She also discussed areas for more lighting There was a discussion regarding the area that Member Bucher wanted improvements indicated in his email. Mr. Batus; commented that they would be comfortable moving forward with increased landscaping allowed by setbacks. Lighting is going to take a little more, I’m concerned with the question about the store front because it was already 10 units. There was discussion on the residential units and store front and putting in another store front window. Members of the Board discussed patios with enclosures. Mr. Batus; told the board that some of the design was to try to limit the impacts on the neighbors. We understand that you want some areas where people can sit and outdoor areas and it is something that we might be able to entertain, it’s just contrary to some of the comments that we received. Ms. McCann; expressed that the residents like to have the sitting areas in the back of the buildings and not in the front. Chairperson DeFruscio; asked if any other board members had questions or comments Member Couture; asked why there are no balconies Mr. Batus; addressed the question stating they already considered that but the balconies would be facing neighbors and based on the initial feedback they took those out. Ms. McCann; stated that they were originally for it but the public comments were against them so they removed it from the design. Member Williams; I think it’s a good idea on the added landscaping Chairperson DeFruscio; I’m going to open it up to public comments. Member Couture; asked if they ever did any type of flower boxes with greenery that drapes down Mr. Batus; yes we have done that before Chairperson DeFruscio; I’m going to close the public comment section. What we could do is preliminary approval of the site plan with an opportunity to ask them to come back for one more meeting just to clear up any questions on the shrubbery and things of that nature that they are willing to change. Does that sound ok, contingent just to come back for one meeting Joe Seman-Graves; are the boards concerns right now landscaping, lighting Chairperson DeFruscio; yes Joe Seman-Graves; is there anything else besides that Mr. Batus; just one question to clarify, that would be a conditional site plan approval with them submitting lighting and landscaping Chairperson DeFruscio; yes, we’re conditionally approving the site plan with an opportunity for you to come back for one more meeting for us to discuss some little details, the lighting and landscaping primarily Member Nadeau; I don’t know how that changes things Joe Seman-Graves; it’s conditional upon landscaping and lighting plans, the board provides me with comments then I forward them to the applicant so they can address them at the next meeting Chairperson DeFruscio; I know Bob has some specific points and we’re having a hard time interpreting them without him here and I think there not major points there just points for some improvement on the Ontario side of the structure just window dressing, nothing constructional Joe Seman-Graves; is it the windows themselves that we are reviewing I just want to make sure. You still have concerns about the size of the windows or is that something…. Chairperson DeFruscio; I don’t, but I don’t know what Bob’s point was with that. I don’t think that we’re going to push for any constructional Member Nadeau; if you change them on the first floor you will change all the others I don’t think those are good changes. He then asked the applicant if you change the windows on the first floor would you follow through on the 2nd floor as well. Mr. Batus; our preference would be not to There was a discussion regarding moving windows and the effect it would have on the rest of the building Joe Seman-Graves; are these interiors ok with the board? Chairperson DeFruscio; I just don’t know what he was focusing on, on the Pershing side, that isn’t on the Ontario side. There are no patios on the front or the sides, so I’m not sure what he is referencing Joe Seman-Graves; this was the second design proposed, we didn’t have any comments on the façade. Chairperson DeFruscio; I’m looking for a motion to approve the final site plan with the condition for an additional comment period for the lighting and the plantings. Vice Chair Carroll; asked when they would drop off the conditions and when they were expecting a full approval Mr. Batus; responded that they could do it in the next couple of days, but definitely by the next meeting. Chairperson DeFruscio; if not in between this meeting and the next meeting by the next meeting I’m saying that we’re going to give them approval now but with contingencies for one more review and minor changes Vice Chair Carroll; I just didn’t want the contingencies hanging out there. So I will make a motion for conditional approval Chairperson DeFruscio; there getting an approval with a condition just to meet one more time for the review of the lighting and plantings Vice Chair Carroll; couldn’t have said it better myself. Chairperson DeFruscio; 2nd? Member Williams; I 2nd the motion YES NO Bob Bucher ABSENT Joseph Nadeau X Mark DeFruscio X Jack Carroll X Stephanie Couture X Kizzy Williams X Chairperson DeFruscio; so you have site plan approval with one contingency to work out. Joe Seman-Graves; I’ll get all the comments from the board members including the one member not here and I’ll set up a time to go over the comments. Vice Chair Carroll; it’s an improvement over what is there now. What’s there now is an eye sore and has been for 20 years. Chairperson DeFruscio; this is definitely an improvement over empty space. Member Nadeau; I’ll go on the record; this is going to be the last time that I approve any multiple units or affordable housing until the City does some kind of overall plan on what the City has, what the mission is, before any other multiple units or affordable housing is brought to the table Vice Chair Carroll; you’re looking for a master plan Member Nadeau; I want a vision from the City before we do anymore housing in the City, before we have any more housing whether on Delaware Avenue, Remsen Street wherever, what do they bring to the City besides bodies? Because it costs us to have them here, what is the benefit, is there truly a benefit, in addition to we’re putting on more fire protection, more school, more police protection, what do we get back. Are they spending money here, are they not spending money here, it’s just something that’s been going on for years; let’s just get as many heads as we can in the City. Is that the right direction and is there anybody that knows that. I would like to know that before I continue to approve these. Member Couture; I agree with you Joe that’s fair. Member Williams; we need bodies in the City, with all the businesses in the City we need to bodies to support them. Vice Chair Carroll; the administration many years ago had a plan to get as many people into Cohoes as they could because the County wide sales tax revenue is divided up, so the more people you have the more tax revenue you get. That’s a real tangible benefit, but like you said at what cost, and what is the cost benefit Chairperson DeFruscio; I have 2 comments for the record 1. Yes we agree that we need a master plan and direction from the Mayor and the council on where they want to go, my 2nd comment is the function of this board is limited to certain things. And is it our task or assignment to decide whether or not what housing can be built on properties in the city when they have all the proper zoning and our primary function is site plan review and approval. Do we have any authority to disapprove projects because of the type of tenants that are being brought into the City? I’m not sure we have that authority. Member Nadeau; I understand what you’re saying Chairperson DeFruscio; I don’t know where that authority lies, I think it lies more in the Zoning Board and things like that. I believe that we have done our due diligence on this project to be sure that the citizen’s desires, comments, considerations have been mitigated as much as possible. It goes back to that same thing that if somebody buys a piece of property just exactly how much can we control on what they can put on that property. Vice Chair Carroll; some years ago they had a plan for about 30 empty lots throughout the city. What has become of that, where does that stand? Joe Seman-Graves; those properties, there was only 10 scattered sites with about 30 some odd units all together. They were originally tied with this approval and last year they separated those properties from this approval because they were already approved and they got it, they had approval on I believe 4 sets of their building plans of the 8 right now and they’re breaking ground. Joe Seman-Graves; one more thing for on the record. I completely understand where the boards opinions are coming from related to more housing in the City it is my view that we have a master plan and that was in 2017 and it was introduced with new zoning in the City so it specifically addressed Bridge, Ontario and Delaware and they were zoned for increased density. So that’s kind of what the dilemma the board is looking at and Mark referenced it, if the zoning is approved here can the board say no just because they feel they don’t like it or there’s too much housing, that’s a tough one that I don’t have the answer for. My opinion is if the zoning was approved through the democratic process, which is was in this City, the people elected, and the people who sit in these seats that we’re sitting in and zoning was approved by this board, the zoning board and the common council, that zoning increased density and it is my opinion is that is the density that you are approving. If there are issues with that overall zoning plan then I think the current administration needs to look at a new zoning plan Chairperson DeFruscio; and I would recommend the current administration to look at the zoning because the zoning changes made in 2017 were driven by a certain group, and I don’t believe there was much input from this board for that Chairperson DeFruscio; I’m looking for a motion to adjourn the meeting Member Couture; I’ll make that motion 2nd by Chairperson DeFruscio Meeting adjourned at 7:15PM