Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

for attending tonight is uh tonight's Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. Today is Wednesday, December 3rd. Uh it's just about 6 PM. There are three different projects being um discussed tonight at the meeting. Uh the first meeting on the agenda tonight is project UG 25 2025 number five. If the applicant could come up um okay yeah um you can just kind of walk us through um you know the obligation the proposal and mainly kind of walk us through the criteria. I don't know if you prepared the PowerPoint.

Yeah, I did. Yeah. Well, walk us through that. I did all the stuff. So, okay, perfect.

It's uh currently um someone does a guest house Airbnb, 12bedroom, 13b. Um it's been vacant for 5 years as far as I know and but lived in by, you know, squires and stuff. So, we're proposing to turn it into a seven unit apartment building. It has eight parking spaces, but one of those would be for trash. Um, we'll be putting a couple of EV chargers. Um, the plans uh are there. We just upgraded the power to threephase and we're upgrading the water right now. Um, and I've done a few of these in in Troy and just around the corner on Spring Street. We're just wrapping up one where we did a two family double lot and we did a one family single lot. So, taking units away from the neighborhood as well, I guess. Um, so and the owner and the GC. Um, so any any questions?

Um, do you mind just walking through the criteras for as part of the presentation? Um, kind of I guess so this is Yeah. Or I'll let you talk a little bit that this is a modification of a

Yeah, it's a modification. It's it's a historic building and we want to keep as much of the character inside. We've had S square through and historic TR and we host an event there and just show examples of what we've done. I love historic buildings and I when I did the event I showed everybody what we've done in other buildings but also we have to make it functional you know so that's the trade-off um functional financially is what I mean um but I'm not interested in building micro apartments or anything like that because there's loads of those developments going up right now and it's just not my space

so um if you want me to talk towards the type of units or like not sure I haven't done this before with you guys where you want me to go with it, but I I spend a lot I spend too much money on these um for sure. That's what my accountant tells me.

Um but I I believe in building a good product. Um like sell like lots of examples. It's not my first time. Um there places I live with my kids, you know, so they have central air, they have laundry, all that stuff. We take the gas out every time and all our company drives EVs, so it's something we believe in. um uh and what's keeping the character. It's a challenge, but we figured that out, you know, so it's got a grand stairc that's my take. So Okay.

Um can you walk us through a little bit on like So there's three floor three floors, four floors. That is three and a half. say three floors and a like a garden level basement uh with like full windows and stuff like that. So um I can't honestly I can't. So there's three floors. So we'll call it three and a half floors. So it'll be two apartments on each of the upper floors and then one apartment at the lower level. Once again I call it garden because it's got windows and it's got access and stuff like that. And then a storage space in the back and bathroom for my workers. Seven apartments, right? Seven apartments. Yeah. Okay. So you said two the two top floors,

two in the top, two on the third, two in the second, two on the first, and one in the basement. Okay. Six. Okay. Yeah. And it's already fully sprinted, but we just have to the building's been unclimized, so we have to redo it, you know. So that's why we're bringing in new water. So we already upgraded the power. Um,

you said the building is being unwar. it was it was left vacant and without climate control for four or five years. So there's definitely been bus pipes and stuff like that and you know so um you know so I mean we always go from the street in every time new power new sewer new water new everything so so I'm not going back later when there's a tenant and it's like making their life hell you know so it'll be a new roof we'll restore the windows that need the windows are actually in pretty good condition windows are really good condition Um uh

do you want to say a little bit about how this reduces the intensity of the current variance like

Yeah. So the current variance is a is a 12bedroom hotel. So that means you've got I'm assuming in this market would be Airbnbs. I know a few of those Airbnbers in Abony. So you'd have a transient population. Um you know and it's profitable. That's why people do it. But you got different people coming in and coming out. I want to build I do build I say I have a confident I build nice apartments where people stay. So maybe you're increasing the density but I also have parking. So you're not increasing no one's going to be looking for permits. One car per place. I mean they may well be I can't say that's not strike that I have no idea. So but yeah. So but there is plenty of square footage in the building. So there's no density in the building. I know that's not what you're saying, but adding seven apartments to that neighborhood of of a higher quality uh with off streetet parking, I I don't see an effect um personally, but but I would say that I've invested interest in saying that and I've talked to neighbors about so on so forth. They're all pretty excited about it. So, um

what about how this new proposed seven unit um kind of fits into the character of the neighborhood? like this that's kind of in line with what you know.

Yeah. I mean the buildings along that street are are all apartments so that's the way they are. I mean this house was built in 1890 it was a single family residence. Um but you know there's not I know there's on Chestnut there's a lot of single family residents but on State Street I mean all along it it's all multifamilies. I don't know they're legal multifamilies or whatever. That's for me to know, but it is all uh chopped up buildings. Um I mean this, as I said, this was a hotel up until 2019 or something like that. Um so there was a density there. I don't I don't think that I don't I personally don't think that fits in the neighborhood at all with the idea of adding I've done this and try the idea of adding a higher quality units especially by the standard of the neighborhood and getting more foot traffic in the neighborhood as a result is just I think it's it's a win for everybody you know so more business for more people going to local businesses that kind of stuff and I've done this I've done this tried several times and it does work you know so for the neighborhood Um, and you're taking an abandoned building off I don't want off the table, I guess, or whatever, you know.

Uh, are there questions from the board? Have you already begun any of the work to No, we haven't we have a demo permit. We haven't started yet. We're finishing up the building on Spring Street. So, but we haven't begun the permit a couple of weeks ago. Um, but we did pull a permit and upgrade the electricity because we wanted to make sure we had heat in the building for the winter regardless if we start work or not. It's just these buildings if you don't put heat in them, goes wrong, you know. Also built in 1898. Oh, yeah. You know. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah, we're doing Have you spoken to the neighborhood association? And I know your your immediate neighbor is the church. Yes. Um, and your surrounding neighbor.

So, it's a landlord on the other side. Um, sorry, excuse me. It's it's Greek name. He he stole the building originally. He's still um I've talked to Central Square. Um and I'm I'm fairly active in historically histori um so and whenever yeah I talk to people all the time. I'm Irish. I can't stop. So then and I go to Belinder a lot not because I like to drink but because I think it's important to the community, you know. So yeah.

Thank you. Um, my remaining questions are actually for staff. Uh, I want to get a little bit of clarity. Uh, because as far as I can tell, and maybe I'm wrong, the UB the zoning district is already this is already a permitted use. Is this not currently permitted use in that district? I don't think. Correct. Yeah. So, it's zoned it's zoned as RT which does not Yeah. would allow uh one, two, and three unit town homes, but does not allow for multif family units. Multif family. There are certain exceptions. However, this building does not qualify for those exceptions. Okay. What are

uh those exceptions would be if it was originally designed as a uh multi-unit or non-residential building, which in this case it wasn't. Um so the case, yeah, if that was the case, you would be eligible for a conditional use permit, but that's not the case here. Okay. And this I I know the original variance is is 30 plus years old but right so the original variance was what exact what kind of variant I guess I just I want to understand procedurally what we are being asked to do so what was the variance granted in 1991 to the extent that we have that information

yeah so it's a a use variance and specifically um it notes for uh bed and breakfast with I believe It's 12 guest rooms and the two full dwelling units that you see there. But at the time in 1991 in the code, there is no there's no specific use defined or listed in the table as a bed breakfast. So essentially so some sort of like conditional commercial use.

Yeah, it's basically saying this residential the semi-residential commercial use is allowed and then it provided certain conditions. Um, part of those were basically had to come back. The use variance was conditional pending that they come back to the board of zoning appeals three straight years and show that it's not been a hindrance to the neighborhood, which they did. And then the PZA at the third meeting uh issued it as a um non-temporary permanent use variance. So in this case what um applicant is requesting is a modification

of that use variance. So it's not a new use variance with the same use variance criteria. Essentially it's really just like the reasonleness standard. And then just because I'm I'm personally familiar working down the street from this location that there are a lot of whether legal or not um multifamily units around. Do we have any information on whether or not those are grandfathered in before the changes to the code or if those have been granted variances since? Yeah. Can you go to the things on one of the steps with the number of maps?

Um, so these this is just an example. These are the ones on that same street. The property in green is the subject property. These are all multi-unit dwellings that are highlighted on the map. There's at least 14 of them. Is that the also in the same Yes, that's Dub and State. Okay. Um those are all also in the same zoning district. The zoning district changes a little bit to the right.

Um yeah, as far as we can tell, there's no there's no new use variances. They're either legally non-conforming or grandfathered or they had qualified um as originally being constructed for the multi-unit or non-residential purpose. So I when I saw this init this list I was confused by the multi-unit dwelling the two and three unit. Now I understand it's because the two or three unit town houses piece is an allowed use in this district. Is there a difference between the multi-unit dwelling and the converted residential apartments?

Um it's just the converted residential apartment that's part of like a property tax code. It's a little bit hard to know like the exact details of them. From what I could tell, two of those three have three units and one of them has four. So, you could consider it a multi-unit dwelling also, but typically it means that there's some other office space or something that's non residential associated with it. It's a little hard for us to know exactly.

Thank you. So, um I just made notes I guess maybe um the the total beds and total bats in one of 15 beds, nine bathrooms because some of them have two bathrooms. um seven parking spots draw each six two EV charging and if you were in the neighborhood you walk around the spring street you can see charging were very consistent with that um if it was a 12 bed then it would be 12 bedrooms 12 bathrooms so you know I know it's three bedrooms less but I I feel like the density is more because of the transients with the guest house

what's the anticipated square footage of each of the seven apartments that it's on the So, we got one unit at 886, another one at 1134, 920 square ft, another one at 1,14 almost 1300 and then another uh two at uh 1,400 ft. Did modifying um your request to modify did it affect the parking spaces at all since we're going from 12 to seven?

Well, no. I'm I'm taking one parking space. It's not lying, right? I'm taking one away because I need some place to put trash. It's not just been b been shove shoved out a corner someplace. It's something that I can't stand. So, so um so, so it's it's seven comfortably. Okay.

It was nine at some point. Um and you could squeeze nine there for sure. I mean, but um it'll be seven, you know, without many fender benders. and you know it has an egress from the street to the back because it's part of the property. So just driveway there.

Other questions from the work there is public comments as well. So thank you for now you can uh step back into Y. Um we're going to move to public comment on this. Uh just as a reminder of the rules. Um, so we ask that all public comment be addressed to the board. Um, please provide your name and address. You don't just overall open the address, I guess. Uh, when you come up to speak, uh, and every person from the public gets three minutes to speak. There's a timer and staff will interrupt you um, to stop speaking if you go over the few minutes. Thank you. Um, Michelle Burke. Hello. Just give us a second.

You can go.

Okay. Um, hello. My name is Michelle Brock. I live at 64 Chestnut Street and I am a 20-year resident of Center Square Neighborhood and Historic Albany Foundation board member and a recently retired Center Association board member for 12 years. I'm here to support the variance for 281 State Street. Allowing this variance will improve the current situation and ensure the successful future of this grand historic and beautiful house which has been empty for too long. I researched the history of the house along with my friend Bonnie and can tell you 281 state has a long history of being lived in and loved. Past homeowners include Albert Wing, a prominent Albby Grosser and his family, and Dr. Samuel Ward, who was President Grover Cleveland's physician and friend. The house deserves to be called at home once again. I have interacted with James Kennedy in my board of director roles at CSA in historic Albany and as a nearby neighbor and he has always been responsive and has followed through. He reached out to CSA and met up to discuss his plans before I even closed on the house and the folks who toured to a different state including CSA president, a real estate agent, architect, a planner, all determined seven units was a responsible number for the house. Mr. Kennedy also came to a center square meeting to discuss his project with neighbors and answer any questions. I believe Mr. Kennedy appreciates the history and significance of Center Square and has already made a positive impact on the neighborhood with his renovation of two Spring Street and I'm looking forward to seeing his 281 State Street project come to fruition. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Uh, David Hinch. Sorry, butchering. Yes.

Hi, my name is David Henchin. I'm um an immediate up butter, the other side of the church, 261 State Street. Um, I've uh been very concerned about this building for a number of years, it being vacant. Um, it's been broken into a number of times. We've had to call the police. Um there's been a real concern that there would be someone starting a fire. The the the access point into the basement was a weak spot and um it had to be secured quite often. Um before it was vacant, it was it was um basically being operated as a rooming house. Um I think this use is much more preferable um given how large the building is uh over 11,000 square feet. um seven apartments uh I think is very reasonable. Um Mr. Kennedy made a great presentation to the Center Square Neighborhood Association. Uh really explained all the aspects of the project and um and the other projects he's done in Troy. The Spring Street project um I hear is very impressive, very good quality and um it's really important to have this building occupied. Um the previous owner was attempting to do 10 units and um uh from what I could tell was not going to do a very quality job. So um this is probably the best shot we're going to see. Um so um so as a as a nearby neighbor, I'm uh I'm very positive about it. So um I guess that's all I have to say.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, is there anyone else here tonight who would like to speak on this matter? If you can come up, please. Yeah, thank you. The meeting is recorded, so we just want to make sure everyone can hear. Yeah.

Hi, my name is Jackie Powell. Um, I be over in that area sometimes. I have friends over there. I was just wondering um is it going to be fair market rent for the people? Um is there going to be like couple of like low income apartment for some people just if you can just you can keep asking your question the board uh you get an opportunity to respond to anything afterwards. Thank you.

Okay. So, so those was my concern because, you know, the homeless population in Auburn is out of control and I was just wondering if it's, you know, one or two apartment will be available like for maybe one of the veterans or a low income person that's trying to get on their feet. That's all. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, anyone else? Is there anyone? Okay. Uh, if you don't mind if you can come back up.

We don't. Yeah, they're just in the record. I think we stopped reading just so many of them. Yeah, there is. Yes. Uh there is a a comment that was submitted in rating. It's part of the public record. So anyone feel free to go read that. Thank you.

So I mean it's a terrible answer, but the answer is no. The numbers don't work financially. Um it's all you have to model it out. You have it has to work. Um coincidentally, I did talk to Tindory at the AHA today about a property on living things Livingston Street and another property on Titan Street, another property on Dove Street that I got the auction today. Um, so we have a meeting potentially next week about low-inccome housing. Um, I was homeless for a brief period in my life, so I get it. Um, mostly because I was a medium to be honest with you. But, um, I went to the public meeting. Um, speech.

So, it's something I do care about, but the numbers have to work, you know? So, I can be a crusader and lose everything and it'll go back to where it is now. And again, I hear myself saying that. I know let's get I have vested interest and whatever but it's just number. So any last questions? Thank you very much. Uh any discussion from the board or any motions? I move to approve the request as a modification to the 1991 use variance based on all the factors that we've heard here tonight.

I would just um add that it's an unlisted action. So yeah, you do it first. Yeah, we do it first. Uh I move for a negative declaration for the unlisted action under seeker. Second, how' you vote? Yes. Um Celeste, how' you vote? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. It's on the seeker on the termination. Do you want to revisit your variance or your motion? Rease my motion to approve the request as a modification of the 91 use. Second. Yes. Yes. Vote. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Adriana. Yes. So, the um modification is granted. Thank you very much. Oh, thanks guys. appreciate it. You'll get a formal decision um next week.

Okay. So, project area be 2025-9. Um that's the property address is 30 all day street. The applicant is Fred Vargas uh for Habitat for Humanity District. The zoning district is residential townhouse. The proposal is new construction with a 7 foot sight yard setback where the maximum permitted is 2.5 ft. Um the barren request there's one um to allow for 7 foot sideyard setback where the maximum per minute is 3.5 ft in the R2 zone industri. Hi.

So yeah, if you can just kind of walk us through the application and through the the PowerPoint.

Sure. So, uh, 30 Albany Street is the proposed site of a, uh, attached four bedroomedroom, two bath, single family home. Uh, the entire site we're going to do a a total of four identical homes, just different elevations. Um, I've been building with Habitat in the city of Albany for the last 13 years. And um I always uh look at what other people do. And uh in one instance when we were building out Sheran Hollow uh because of setback rules, the uh contractor got too close to an existing home, older home. Um a number of things happened and it was a winter, thawed out. Next thing you know, they had to tear the house down because the foundation crumbled. So that left an impression in my mind. So, I always try to uh when dealing in tight spaces, I always try to give ourselves as much um distance from an existing foundation as possible. Three and a half uh when digging a foundation, you need three feet over a 3-ft overdig. So, that means only a half of, you know, six inches would be uh protecting the existing home. So I think 7 feet uh would allow us to uh safely dig um and preserve primarily the existing foundation. So that's that's the only reason for this uh this request. Um the neighborhood um Albany Street, Mohawk Street, and everything in in that area, there are number of homes that have larger um I'm sorry, larger sideyards. some of them due to uh vacant homes that were demolished. People use them as sideyards. So, this doesn't affect the character in any way. It's uh actually

we're adding to the uh to the character of the neighborhood with the four homes that we're bringing in. uh alternatives. There really wasn't to be honest with you just because again we're we're really it's more of a safety thing for both during construction and and during the construction process. So we really would like to have uh at least another three and a half ft in order to be able to safely uh uh construct the foundations. Um, I think I mentioned a little bit about this um about the area. Again, there are multiple properties that have larger sideyards again due to vacant properties that were once demolished. Uh, or honestly, some of them I'm not sure how it happened, but uh maybe this um this requirement was dated and some of the homes that have larger sideyards predate that. So, uh, but this doesn't mesh, this doesn't, uh, affect the, uh, the look and feel and character of the neighborhood. No impact on the environment whatsoever. Uh, we use, uh, uh, good construction practices. So, um, yeah, we have great oversight on site, so it's not an issue at all.

And it's usually a self-created difficulty. Yeah. Okay. Um, thank you. Um, questions from the board. Yeah. Hi, how are you? Uh, I just want to be clear because it makes a lot of sense to me, but I just want to make sure I'm understanding it correctly. So, we're looking at four lots. Uh, and ultimately the seven ft will but will really only be on the one single lot, but it'll it's made to accommodate the construction of the four adjacent or the total of the four.

The total of the four. And you mentioned really quickly that uh the main use or the main purpose is for safety during construction and the building process. What will the space look like after construction is over? Uh we'll most likely put a fence there. So you probably won't even see it. And this is more curiosity. Uh all four lots will be owned by Habitat or the land bank? They are they're currently owned by the land bank. We're in partnership with Habitat, but they'll be sold to individual homeowners through Habitat or through Habitat. Yes. Thank you. Sure.

So, fruit of photos and can you just fruit of photos? Can you jump between this and like the map and stuff? Can you just explain exactly? Okay. So, looking at this one, two, three, those are the four lots. Well, I we should probably look at theite site map here. If we look at the site map, I can probably explain a little bit better is the Yeah. So, so the yellow the shaded area is the house. The unshaded area to the right is the proposed space. And if you show the uh the picture view, the I'm sorry, the uh ground level. Okay. So where the trash cans are.

Mhm. Uh basically we would be 7 ft from that. And so that's to protect the house that's on the left. Correct. Separately owned and has nothing to do with this project. Correct. Okay. But then when it's done, it'll be like a little sideyard with like It'll be a sideyard with a fence. Yes. Yeah. Just be clear that where the red outline is, that's the entirety of the lot, not seven feet. Yeah. Right. Right.

I have a question. So, does this encroach on the property that's vacant that it's adjacent to to our right? Looking at it this way, I mean, as in like you're robbing Peter to PayPal. So, are you going to diminish the value of the immediate parcel adjacent to it? Like, will it be buildable if you're going to make it thinner? Like, what are we going to do with that other adjacent property? Which one? The existing home? No, no, no, the one to the right. When you look at the ground, we're building off We're building on all all four just so you're not going to like Okay. So, it's not going to be squeezed. vac space was almost like 7 ft. It's accounting for the whole All all four houses being built the same width to the point you're making kind of. Yeah, they're they're exactly the same width the houses.

Yes. That we're not left with any weird weird space just sitting there and people dump their trash like just as a planner like just thinking about it's it's usable space. it's all being somewhat equally distributed that you know there's going to have have good egress, good access, decent step back which it appears it does from the

absolutely and and the biggest thing and you mentioned the key word there trash. That's always one of the things, one of the things that we've done in our designs is right on the stoop, we create a little closet before you get into the front door. And sometimes when we're tight, when we don't have sideyards, we create a trash closet so that way it's not visible. Large enough for recyclables and and regular trash. In this instance, once we have the sideyards and we put a fence behind it, perfect location for the homeowner not to have to um go up and down the stairs with the trash cans. They just store it right behind the fence. Okay. So, and it's the same thing on on all four homes.

That's a great design. Each house is on its own specific lot. Yes. So, how come this how is it possible that this house is not smaller than the others? Like are are the other houses not the full width of the lots? It's honestly it's just a math. We had to re we had to subdivide we subdivided the lots to accommodate the homes.

So when you do the math it just so happened to work out that way. So where you know we have a set we have a set number of uh or set design uh width designs for various homes. So once we sort of like you know it's like a puzzle we put it together and we're like oh we've got three and a half left and that's why we're here. Okay.

So to kind of answer that the part of the requirements in this district there's different um dimensional standard requirements setbacks. So, um, Bren and Habitat have been very responsive to some of the comments we had from the initial submission, um, such as they had to bring some of the buildings up or to the side, um, along Pearl that also created then more distance stacked somewhere else. So, it's kind of trading initially it might have been several more variances including like a use variance based on some of the other definitions. Um by doing it this way they kind of eliminated like four other variances including these variants but there still have that remaining gap in between.

Yeah. Our initial submission uh had two home designs. So we had a threebedroom uh adjacent to a four bedroomedroom. Uh but that would create that situation that you mentioned an o an oddsized lot. So unusable unusable. I think it was you know maybe 16 feet wide. So, we uh just changed up our unit mix and we're able to make it work. And so, just on just so I fully understand on the site plan, is there a space like the the two houses on the left are share a wall, but then there's a space between house number two,

right? So, there's uh next to the sh to the left of the shaded u property, that's another house. Then there's a three and a half foot gap to the property line. Then another three and a half foot gap to the house. So we're meeting the site setback requirements on each go through here. So that's why that meet the requirement there is both the use and the setbacks. Then they're moving it here. So these are both three and a half combined and then this would have it right down. Okay. Thank you. So it's three and a half in between

each and to the property line but it's a standard it's 70 on this side total but it's three and a half for each to the property library. So, in your example earlier where you said that a house needed to be demolished due to being too close to another home, you said something happened with the foundation. Do you recall what the uh side yard set back was in that situation? I think it's it was it was in a townhouse neighborhood on Sheran A. So I believe it might have been three and a half as well

because I'm wondering if there is an issue in terms of you know you said that the goal was to preserve the existing foundation um and to avoid an issue like that happening which obviously nobody wants that to happen and I'm wondering is 3.5 being the maximum. Is that something that you should look at in terms of like increasing that going forward that another time? Yeah, definitely something we can take a look at. I mean I think it it's partially based on historical the layout of properties. Um, in some areas of the city, it's better suited than others. Here, there's a little more space. In other areas, your properties are very close together.

There's other factors also, the age of the home. If it's an existing home that the foundation, you know, been compromised over time, that's a higher risk. But if we were to build the same home next to a home that we built last year, we wouldn't have a problem with it at all. It's in good shape. You have all these homes from 1890. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, I I see those and I run.

Um can I ask one more question because I I um it came up in the last thing during public comment. So, uh just to answer a question that people may be having. Uh I think I already know this, but uh can you speak to when these houses are eventually built uh the sort of uh sellers that they'll be offered to or the way that they would um appear on the market? Yeah. Um I don't quote me. I think they're sold already.

Um or at least three I know for a fact are sold. And the way we do it, we have a mailing list of people that have uh you know reached out to Habitat Humanity. Uh I believe these are 80% AMI uh requirements. So they are on our affordable scale. Uh sale price um maybe 160 to one. They're not 170, so it's in the 160s. Um, so but yes, in in terms of uh in terms of marketing, one of the things that we do is uh we open up an application period and um and that's, you know, through a number of housing agencies, uh existing people that are on our mailing list. we send them out and then people have a certain amount of potential purchases have a certain amount of time to respond a few weeks with information and um I don't think we did a lottery for this it was first first come that's uh approved uh gets the purchase

just going back to kind of the seven in uh foot 7 foot inches that would be way too small. Yeah, a little tight.

Um, so I don't know if you can speak a little bit of how the 7 foot was determined. Like I understand that you're saying that 3.5 is too tight, but then why not 5 foot or 6.5 or whatever. And like uh you're you're talking about like how you need space for m construction machinery to kind of come through and like turn around and move around. So, I don't know how how wide these machines are, if that was a factor. How did you determine, you know, how did you come up with the seven? I guess, you know, if it was six, I would be asking for six feet, you know. Um, to be honest with you, the further the further the better.

Well, it's because of the size of the house that's set to seven.

Right. Right. Right. Uh, in some instances, we've had to do this in Troy and I think we were five feet. you know, it it our uh excavator gets a little anxious, you know, at that point. Um, so it, you know, a lot of uh there there's other ways to secure the uh foundation of an existing home, but it's costly. There's shoring. Uh I believe there are some issues right here on Clinton Avenue. Um house moved an inch. It's a big deal for an inch. Can you talk about um I guess any concerns or issues with I guess the house that last house that's on that lot like if you were to like I guess reasons why to not make it wider so that the variance is not needed. Is it just because that to have all the houses be the same size? Is it more expensive to make the house wider? Um,

one of the ways that we're able to remain efficient is that we have standard home designs. So, we have a 21-footer, we have a 24-footer, we have a 19footer. So, um, every time we design a home, it's a complete re-engineering of the, you know, new architectural drawings and it just costs more to do that. So, we've determined that the majority of the lots in Albany can fit uh homes within, you know, majority of lots are around 25 ft. So, we base our designs on that. In some instances, we found lots that are like 20 ft or 21 ft. So, we can pull things off the shelves. And that's why one of the main reasons we uh we subdivide we move we do our lot line adjustments in order to help us um find a design that works suits the area uh but doesn't disrupt things too much. So, we've been lucky over the last few years, haven't had to have a uh a variance, but in this case, and we don't have a house that's a foot wider or two feet wider in order to reduce that. Regardless, we would have to ask for a variance because once we're within that three foot, three and a half foot mark, uh it's too risky. It's way too risky. And I'd rather ask for a variance as opposed to negating it and not put a house there.

Wait. Um, and so these are how these are the 21 27. These are the 20 Gez. I think they are 24s if I'm not mistaken. 27. Yeah. Yeah. 24.

Yeah, they're 24s. And Audi, you said that there were already extensive modifications to the plan to limit the number of varants. So this I guess this one house could be wider to a little bit wider potentially to limit the variance to a lower level than the seven that would need multiple variances that I mean

potentially could have ripple effects to the rest of the project. Uh it's possible. It kind of depends on the design, but essentially um you know, starting from the property at the corner based on them trying to limit expenses and other other elements, keeping the same size buildings, that's basically the the leftover that they're they're kind of stuck with. So if they were to shift they shift things down a little bit, you're then asking for variances possibly between the properties. Um there's also requirements for the uh for the use itself in order to be classified as a townhouse that it has to be within 4 ft of adjacent structure. Um so that was part of the issue previously whereas they I believe they met that setback but then they didn't meet the forplay setback where becomes a different type of use that's not allowed in the in the district. Yeah, I think to Serena's earlier point, this is because I this is not the first time we've come upon this sort of issue and it does seem like maybe in some of these areas there's room to consider the setback uh and the impact that it has on these other issues because I do recall we had a an issue a couple months back where somebody needed u a variance to get set back because otherwise they would run into construction issues. Yeah, I will say this is one of the more one of the more common if not most common setbacks specifically for sideyards.

Thank you. Any other questions from the board? Uh thank you very much. If you don't mind uh sitting back in the public just open it up to public comments. Thank you. Uh any public comments? Yes. Yes, please.

Again, my name is Jackie Powell and um I was just wondering if they're going to be similar to the other Habitat home that was already built there. And um also what time do y'all plan on starting and what time will they be finished during the day and how do they plan to direct traffic? I live on that block. So that's that's all I wanted to ask. Thank you. Thank you.

Uh any other public comments? Uh if you don't mind, you can come back up. Sure. Um if you have answers to the questions that were asked.

Sure. So, uh in regards to um work times, just I'd say uh 7:30 or 8 8 to to 3:30 to 4 will be our typical workday. Uh we're expecting to start first quarter of uh of next year. Uh these homes will be modular construction, so it'll go by relatively quick. Uh the majority of the disruption will probably be during the uh foundation phase. Um well, this this is this now I think about it, this is going to be slightly unique uh just because there are power lines on Albany Street. So we'll have to bring in the homes off of Pearl Street. So we'll literally have to do one h one foundation at a time. So we'll do one foundation, place the home, come back and do another foundation. And so we'll do that four times, but that's going to go by relatively quickly. So my estimation because of that, the entire project could probably take around six to seven months uh to complete from uh from start. Uh in regards to traffic, the only time there'll be a need for uh uh for traffic um divergence or anything would be during the setting of the home and that would be no more than a day if well a few hours to be honest with you. So other than that, minimal disruption.

Did I answer everything? Yes. I was just asking because there's a lot of school buses and stuff that go through the area. So, I was wondering how is this going to affect the children that be out there on the bus stop? Yeah. So, the as part of the permit, it's required like they'll work with the traffic engineer for anything that's within like the rightway or would um you know, disrupt traffic, anything like that. And then anything on the sidewalk of the rightway, they have to get a sidewalk barricade. So that's noted as well. Um, in terms of hours, you know, everything that Rev is saying would align with the code. The hours for building operations is any you're allowed to operate from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.

Thank you very much. Sure. Thank you. Any other points of discussion in the board or anything? A motion say that they seem to meet the character of the neighborhood prong alternatives considered and definitely impact on the environment. There's none. So those three factors in our favor. Is there a secret? So type two. Thank you. So, so there's nothing else. I will move to approve area variance 2025-9. Second Serena, how do you vote? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. All in favor? The motion is granted. Thank you very much. Okay. The last project for the evening is project area variance 2025-17. The property address is 581 central a. Uh it's the MUFC mixeduse form base central avenue zoning district. The proposal is to the construction of a 32 foot post sign with a height of 15 ft where 5t is the maximum height limited in the MUFC district. Um,

good good evening. Uh, Sam Burden with Bowler Engineering. Uh, here on behalf of the applicant, Hospitality Syracuse, Inc., uh, Mike McCracken here with me. He's traveled from Syracuse to be here tonight, representative of the applicant. Um, project uh, 581 Central Avenue. um former Walgreens site if you remember that. Our client has recently reinvested in the property with a new Taco Bell with walk up window as well as drive-thru. Um there is a retail space and a retail component to it that's vacant currently. Um so major investment that they made in the community for this site uh with a part of it was with the drive-thru. the drive-through component postcoid has become such a valuable um portion of any project for any quick service restaurant. So, the applicants here tonight uh seeking an area variance for a new post and panel sign that was previously not allowed during the time that the project was permitted and approved through the city. Um the code has since changed and a detached sign is now allowed. Um, we sat with planning to talk about the applicant's proposal and the feasibility of a new post and panel sign with what's out there. Um, it's a very unique site with the building that we took and what we were trying to do. Uh, I think that the applicant did a great job with the construction of it being so unique with having the right slip lane traveling northish on central coming out of the city. You have that right slip lane that you can go into the drive-thru. you have the signalized intersection with uh the shared parking. So that hatched area you see on the screen is actually shared parking and shared access with the church. And then you have a separate frontage on Hunter A off the rear. So we

talked uh with Abby and planning just about what the potential is here and how it would um how a new posting panel could be achieved. you know, with the separate second frontage, we could have two potentially, but that's not what the applicant is looking for. They're looking to remove the existing ground sign that's out there, which is the former Walgreens sign. You can see that there's a Taco Bell emblem actually out there today that's fit within the confines of that, but it's blocked for all tra uh traffic traveling into the city uh on Central Avenue. The church is set very close to Central Avenue. The homes uh just to the south are also set very close to the road. You have a unique property line that runs on Central Avenue. You can see where the frontage becomes very shallow to very deep and there's an extensive right away. So, what we're looking to do is get a new post and panel sign for the Taco Bell um that would allow for traffic traveling into the city to see the Taco Bell branding and Taco Bell signage before they pass that intersection because we know once they pass that intersection, they're not going to turn around and come back into our site. Um, one of the biggest things that quickserve restaurants just in general, they're not a destination use. They rely on pass by traffic. That's somebody on their lunch break saying, "I want to stop and go." Okay, there's a Taco Bell here. So essentially we're looking um to secure a variance for 10 feet above the allowed five feet for a 15 foot post and panel sign that would include signage for the Taco Bell 4x8 and then a uh signage for a potential tenant. One of the things that a tenant is looking for in this type of uh you know this unique

building is some you know brand recognition at the front. um they're the furthest set back portion of the of the property. Um so that would definitely help with securing a tenant for that second space. And Mike can probably talk a little bit more about the success of the restaurant so far. I think that also plays into why we're here tonight. Um but with that, yeah, happy to answer any questions, but definitely um think that the granting of this variance would be definitely beneficial to the to the property and the long-term success of this building as a whole. You got to go ahead.

Well, I could. Yeah, thank you. I'm Mike McGracken from Hospitality Syracuse. I'm from Binsville, New York, nearby Syracuse. Um we found this building. I'm also a broker for the company. I kind of have two hats. I developed the property, but I also find the property. So, there was a long extensive negotiation with Walgreens to try to get this secured, the site secured and the landlord that owned it. It was a pretty expensive property. We really we did uh you know, it was a leap of faith. We were at 1010 Central. Uh and that site was just doing marginally well and it had some of the same problems. Unfortunately, it was set back. Uh the trees had grown really large in front of the building so we you really couldn't see it. Um we went down here thinking we got all kinds of great access. We're at a traffic light. We've got access in the rear. It's got, you know, all kinds of what we've seen is perceived benefits, but we did know that the building was set back a little bit. We knew we'd be closer to the rooftops. And today's business does do a much greater percentage of business with uh delivery. So, as expected, we've had a lot of delivery, actually way more delivery than traditional business. But the problem is we have no traditional business. We have almost zero dining in and very low drive-through use. So, we're pretty confident that a lot of that is that the pastors by are just not seeing the building till it's too late. I miss it myself and I've been there dozens of times and I'll drive down and I'll just I see so many churches and I know it's after one of them and I'll just drive right by it and then I've got to go around the back. So, you know, where we had the uh opportunity to add a sign, it has made a significant impact on the business. Um and and we're hopeful that you could consider it uh for this site, too. And typically we would use a larger sign and a big pylon sign, but this I think Sam's done a pretty good job of trying to keep that in the same character of some of the other signs that are around it so that it wouldn't uh detract from the neighborhood. But the biggest thing is that we feel we're so far back that uh we're getting missed by all that nice

traffic that's out front. Can you show where the sign would be on this uh image here?

Yeah. So, pretty much where the post or pretty much where the ground sign is, um, it would be just slightly closer to the sidewalk still on our property, but we're still meeting the 5-ft setback requirement. And you can see it, we just have a dimension on there to the right. It's 104t from the edge of curb to where that um, you know, building sign would be. So, think of that. Traffic's actually on the other side of that. So another 24 another 24 feet beyond that to the center line. So very deep frontage, very unique parcel. Something just I think to take into consideration.

I have a comment, but you're still going through the factor. Yeah. No, that's uh I don't even think I read through the Oh, you did. I think there's four more factors to go through.

Gotcha. Um, yeah. So, I think this is all part of kind of what we talked about. I think I more or less laid out it all out there as part of the presentation, but um, yeah, quick service restaurant dependent on pass by traffic, whether it's substantial. You know, we did list a couple different um facilities in the area that have um similar signage that's already beyond the what what was approved. So, you know, the precedent is there um all located within the same zone. Specifically, I think the one that's closest would be Hoffman's car wash next door. Um unique building there. But it almost feels like that the idea is that a majority of the buildings on this block of Central Avenue are close up to the road. That's why they have that 5- foot restriction because you'd have building signage that was there. I love New York Pizza. Um, but if you look like a like a like a Burger King down the street a little bit further, they're right up on the road, but they still have a pull sign that's, you know, pretty significant. And uh I think

they're in a different zoning district. They're on the same the MC MUFC I believe on Central Avenue. Yeah. Apologies. No, it's all good. Spend a lot of time at fast food places. No, I was thinking of the Yazi's market case, but I'll let you continue because I think you still have a couple more.

Oh, yeah. This is u requested variance surrounding neighborhoods. I think it's in it's uh the increase in uh height will also allow for a better sight distance. So that's one thing that we didn't talk about. So with the location of where the sign would be. We also um with ingress and egress out of the intersection, we want to make sure that that sign is up high enough so every anybody maneuvering in or out of the site um it doesn't impact their line of sight coming out. Um I think that's part of it as well. And then as for uh self-created, yes, it is self-created, but it would promote the overall long-term success of the business.

And then I just included a couple of the different uh is the that the Yazies market, the 651 Central. This sign is slightly different now. That looks It's not like that anymore. It says Yazzies instead of Yeah. Oh, okay. Sounds like a point of contention. uh did you speak to the character of the neighborhood outside of those uh three examples because this is a more residential neighborhood. So I just want to hear a little bit about uh your perspective on that particular factor.

Yeah. Um I do think that it it does fall in similar uses. I think I reference all of those uh commercial uses that are within the area. Understanding that there is a good amount of residential uses. We don't think it would impact them. Uh I think it would be it would fit within the characteristic of the neighborhood. Um we're trying to maintain the rest of the setbacks and other requirements as part of it. Uh it wouldn't impede pedestrian travel. Um I think that's is it illuminated?

So it is proposed to be back lit. So none of the the none of the lights on the actual signage would be projected outwards. They essentially illuminate that black background. And I don't think that this rendering does it justice. Uh it's actually called halo lighting. So uh there's like a hue on the lighting, but none of the letters have any transparency to them. It essentially lights the background to bring out the the uh the color of the the white lettering. None of it has any transparency. Actually, I think it will say there will be back black lit and non-transucent. Yeah, those

I'd love to know how bright it is. If I'm living next to that, is that going to go into my window? Is that going to impede my ability to sleep? Is that going to be a distraction? Is that something that's going to devalue my my property? Yeah, I think that we have we still maintain the buffer of trees between the residential property and where we are and I think it would be fur far enough away that I would think that it wouldn't. Um the other side obviously the institutional use uh commercial across the street there's a pretty significantly large frontage along Central Avenue that I don't think that it would impede the uh commercial use or the residential uses of operation yeah what are the hours

yeah I think you 10 or well typically we are I think I think we're 1:00 a.m. the drive-thru, but we're out we're closed at 10:00 for the dining business. And then on the weekends, I think it's 1:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. Would you turn off the light when it's after? We typically set them so that they go out an hour after we close. If I could speak to the halo lighting, though, we we um we installed that same sign in in Malta. Malta has a pretty strict uh restriction on that type of and they were real happy with it in that area. And it's not real. It's it's very low intensity. It's very low intensity. It's just more or less a glow around the letters. It doesn't project.

When you look at site plans, there's often not always, but there's often illumination. Like so there's but not necessarily for signs, but if they're electrified, I often want to see when I look at a site plan, I want to see the illumination, like how the patterning, how far it's going to go and what kind of impact that is. I would think based on just my experience of doing site phototric plans, um I would think that your one foot candle line the basis of what dark sky compliancy what the the guidelines are for, you know, and based on IE files that I've worked with, this would not project beyond the property. Uh maybe slightly beyond the property line, but not into the right away where it would impact traffic. Yeah,

that's just my professional opinion. It would be well well under the.3 foot candle spillover. That's that's the max requirement under the code. Yeah. Now, if it was like if it was a a typical box sign, you know, with the internal lighting, I could I could see that. But with the back lighting, it is very very mild. How long has the restaurant been open? A year and a half. Yeah. Between a year and a year and a half. Yeah. Yeah. And I noticed that the design is a little bit different, right? It's more residential looking. Like the colors are different. Is that on purpose?

Uh this last design set was more muted. They took away all the oranges and and the per and now it's more grays and uh muted colors, which yes, might also have an impact on it a little bit. You know, they've done some studies on that.

And that was part of like when we sat down with Brad to talk about the reuse of this building. And it's like it's got to fit into the neighborhood with the colors that brick and the the actual proposed sign here. One of the things that when we sat with Obby to talk about, it's tough. Actually, if you pull that picture back up, if you don't mind, please. We're going to add a landscaping bed at the bottom of it that matches the brick on the building. Um, so I mean those plants look a little lackluster in there, just that rendering, but I think it's something that we can do to really bring up the actual sign. and uh make it look more part of the development. And we and we've had a we've had a couple of uh potential tenants and it and it has come up. We Dollar General was right down to the last uh bet on it and then they did a uh all their urban new builds they completely stopped them. The shrinkage was too great. And then Dollar Tree, we went through the whole thing with Dollar Tree right down to uh about a few months ago. But now there's an international groceryer that's that's very interested in it. Um, it's 8,000 square feet. It's, you know, that that kind of use, I think there's probably a a demand for it in the city and it's walkable. So, it might make it more convenient for some of the residents out there.

So, Mike, just to be clear, I think I'm getting a little confused. Do you work for Taco Bell or do you work for the owner of the property? I work for both. So, I work for the Taco Bell Company, which is Hospitality Restaurant Group. I'm the director of real estate development. I see. And then Fairland Drive LLC and East Chiron LLC is the uh family that owns most of the dirt under all of them. And I'm their real estate broker. Okay. So, there's a potential for this sign to not just be for Taco Bell that they could also sell the property. Well, lease it or sub or lease it.

Lease it. Yeah. Lease the 8,000 square feet next door. Yeah. We we put in separate uh there separate 600 amp services. There was money invested into the building to make it usable for a second tenant and that should help our business too. Help the Taco Bell site as well once we get some extra foot traffic in the building. Yes. There's a space for this on the sign for two sides for the Taco Bell and there's a weight space for the another tenant in the building. Got it. Yeah. So part of what we the way it

part of what we had discussed as well is there while technically not a corner lot um the property kind of functions as a corner lot given the way that the vehicles enter and exit the site um there's a specific provision in the code to u not have any walls signs other structures that are at an elevation of three to six feet because it's very difficult to then see as are turning. Um, so that would kind of be the case here. So as you kind of pull a sign up or you try to have a slightly taller sign, you then kind of come to the issue where you essentially need to go to a certain height above that because you have to be able to see through the sign in order to see oncoming traffic or pedestrians.

So you're explaining the reason why it can't be kind of like or why it can't be six feet um or why it may need to be this high. Correct. Yeah, because it would it would cause a we would have concerns with um vehicle and pedestrian safety because of the turning. Um which is why you typically on this stretch you'll see a lot of the posting panel or you'll see a lot of signs that have a certain height so that the lower part of it you can actually see around. So negative space. Yeah. Correct.

So is the second piece like there's slight elevation. I drive this twice a day every day and there is some slight elevation. You've got backto-back lights between Clinton hitting hitting um central I mean I live off the south of Maine that has an AAD or annual average daily travel pattern of 7,500 cars a day. This part of central has at least 10 to 20,000 AAD. I didn't I can double check tomorrow when I'm at work, but like this has super high traffic volumes. It's a really funky lot. not the not the safest in or you know exiting egress. Um I'm really I am worried about the sightelines here because there is a very slight increase in elevation. People live right next to here like literally it's it's very residential and then you got the church on this like little lip and I just it makes me a little I just I drive it every day.

So the the planter box would be below that. The panels would be I think what 4 inch uh metal post and then the first I think if you go back to that so four five six you would have 9 ft clear or 7 feet clear which I think do spec is the 3 and 1/2t sight visibility for sitting in your vehicle. Check the htm the highway design manual.

Yeah, I'm almost positive that that's that's what it is. But the idea is to get that second panel and and that's part of the variance that we we we started with AIU that we were looking for a taller sign than this with a bigger square footage. We worked with planning to come down from our original proposal to something that fits in the more into the characteristic of the neighborhood. I don't think taking it down anymore would be of benefit to the site sight lines exactly like you're saying. And I think we found that sweet spot between the two where it's functional for the long-term success of the restaurant but also does not impact the traffic or pedestrian safety. And if you just look at that site plan as well, uh, or the our markup site plan, I think where we have it positioned is the best possible spot because vehicles are still able to creep forward to that stop bar that's out in the rightway before they cross the uh the crosswalk where it would not impact our sign. I think on here it's difficult to see that you're looking at more of a top down view where this is a very thin sign. This is not a cabinet. This isn't a stone base, you know, a big cabinet up in the sky or something that you'd see. It's going to be uh it's going to be pretty thin structure.

Has there been any engagement with the neighborhood association or the church? Not at this point. How has the level of service been impacted from traffic? Like so what's what's the grade? I don't know about the grade. I don't know who owns this jurisdictional road. It probably is the city. Even if it's a state road, the city owns it. And I'm just very curious how that level of service from all the cars coming in and out. How that impacts has changed from when we've been there to now. Super curious. It's only been a year and a half. And we collect those every three years typically at DOT.

Yeah. Yeah, I think that you're going from a large square footage to you took away 8,000 square ft for a more just more vehicles, more more usage, diminishing level of service. I don't know.

Um, so just going back to the side. Um, okay. So four manual space and 2.9. So really the the lower part of the bottom sign is at about 7 ft high is what we're saying. And what were you saying Abby about like what do we require for visual not to have it obstructed between three and six feet and you're on a site you're in a slight elevation which if you pulled up a map with too you'd see it.

So what does that mean? Sorry. So um it would it might actually impact sight line because it's on a slight incline. So it's up but you're still driving up. is going to impact my ability to see oncoming traffic when I'm trying to safely pull out onto sexual. You're saying low it? No, it might actually impede. Yeah. But you're saying it's too it should be lower like you know, I'm just I'm just saying like I just I think that it might just it should be a little bit higher, but I wouldn't personally want to live next to that. I think that's the benefit too of having that signalized intersection, right?

Again, you got back to back from Clinton to Central and you got the third one on North M on North Manning and you really high traffic. So then can you go back to the image where um where we see the actual the current sign that's there? It's fine as is like I mean I mean visually it's not it's not doesn't impede your sight line. Yeah. And so the current sign is how tall? Uh about 3 and 1/2 ft. Yeah. Three and a half four feet without any you can't really see to it but again it's back further but

it's it's back further but we are elevating our sign to get rid of the sight distance issue. So the two foot base, if if we got rid of the brick base and just had the the poles, would that be better if we just did a thinking or the brick base is what you're concerned that that could block you block your eyesight? I think it might help. The brick part even if it's that even if it's so low Oh, it would cover a car pulling out. Yeah. And you're coming up on an incline.

Okay. Or or it could. That's a really tricky and I wish I'd pulled the crash the clear crash database anything like I'm writing supporting supporting that right I'm just saying in general this is I think you're raising some very valid concerns but we don't have that concretely right it's just kind of what you're saying is all stuff that we actually we have to look into when we're proposing every

we don't want to create we don't want to create an obstacle or an impedment on an existing intersection that has existing traffic patterns with a high fine. We want to make sure that we're we're meeting all site distance requirements and our thought of lifting that sign up for that. If that sign was any closer to Central A or where we had it, I get what you're saying where that that could definitely be concerned because it's a cabinet. It's blocking sight distances. But lifting that up, if it's that stone base on the bottom, we could probably just do the landscaping bed around the bottom of it. Um, I don't know if that's really going to impact significantly, but if it's something that the board would would consider as a mitigation, I think

what's the box is there's like a box. That's a uh there's a large water line that runs through the sidewalk uh right there where that hydrant is. Um and that's actually our water service to our building. It's a heated cabinet. That's a heated water meter cabinet. So that's still there. That's not going anywhere. Yeah. So we don't want any water here on this view, but you can see it on the other. Yeah. that was uh required by the water department as part of our development because of the two services having to split internally.

Google Google just hasn't gotten around to updating all of these areas. Um okay, can we go back to this view the sign the proposed sign? So I like I feel like the so the the brick stuff planter I guess do you know how tall that is? two feet. But

so that's like under the three feet, but you're saying because of the elevation it might be close to the 3 ft, but it does it I I feel like I mean I guess its intent I don't know if it actually does it, but its intent is to make the whole thing look nicer and you know like more Yeah. nicer for the character of the neighborhood and for the residential. Oh,

could they do a one foot course and then a top stone or would that look ridiculous with the height? I we kind of want Yeah, I think the aesthetics was what we had in mind. And then being able to put the um the address on it, believe it or not, is an important thing to be able to see where 581 is. One other thing, we don't typically we'll have a directional sign right right by the road. So if you're coming down the road and you're traveling, you know, at the rate of traffic, you get an eyeball of where the Taco Bell is and you can start to slow down and make your lane change. This particular site, we have nothing out near the road at all. So you, you know, you could be coming down central, heading south, or whatever that is, heading east, and you might have to really slam the brakes on if you think you want to make that turn because you don't have a chance of that. That other one is a oneway in. Yeah, that was part of the planning process too that we looked at when we worked with traffic is, you know, we really had to keep what we were proposing away from the rightway um and keep it out within the confines of our site. So, we didn't make any modifications to the existing driveways uh besides the pavement up to the property line limits.

Right. Does it say school on top of photo enforce? So, this is from Montory. No, that's part of that Harvest City Church. There's there's an attached school to that. So there's a lot a lot of little kids running around there. Is there a slower speed required in this area because of the school? Yep. It's 20. So I imagine that that might weigh into, you know, the um safety of the area. The cars should be going slower. I know that that's not always the case. I live right by a school zone as well. Um so that might weigh in as well because are the cars going slower when they pass by the Taco Bell? Yeah, it it it could be that they are at least during school hours and it's

pretty late though. It goes to 7:00 p.m. that 6 starts at 7 in the morning. Well, around it goes to seven. It actually I'm right on Western. I'm by Eagle Point. It goes a little bit. What? I don't know if you've like thought about this, I guess, but what would signage look like without a variance?

What would signage look like without a variance? It would be um a 5 foot tall post and panel sign. It it wouldn't be practical. Um it would we would have nothing but sight distance issues. It would be pushed all the way to a far corner. we'd be in the same position that, you know, we were in now where, you know, even going back to the ground sign, uh, actually I'm not 100% sure under the new code if they're even allowed um, in this area or for a ground sign, a freestanding like a monument style sign. Yeah.

But I think it's the same the same size and same scope. That's the goal with trying to play into the success of the business is getting that sign up high for people mainly traveling into the city as well as coming out to be able to make that decision before they hit the intersection. Um, and give the give the brand some uh visibility as you approach because of just the uniqueness of the site. And then Oh god. I have anything else?

AI, you're planning I I have another question. Uh so the city obviously updated recently passed a new sign ordinance that was in the spring summer this year. this year, sometime this year, the city um went back again over the sign um rules which I assume included basically this the planning department is recommending approving this variance. I'm just kind of curious how that like um how you take like I guess what's the reasoning here from the city's planning department on you know the city just reconsidered all these rules and all these requirements when it comes to sign and I'll shut up but let you tell us what the reasons are but like is it this site it's designed so specifically kind of thing. Yeah.

Yeah. So um you know if you could go to back to the um the map image I guess. Yeah. So sites or yeah if you Yeah. So um previously so we had issued a variance um before the new sign code for the Yazzy's market. I think that might be it's probably close to about a 15 foot sign. But part of that they also needed um is that the signed height wasn't allowed. So with that in mind, we wanted to allow for buildings like this that are set back in certain districts, including this one, to be able to have a freestanding sign. Um so that's part of it. Definitely acknowledging that like businesses that are set back from the road are at a disadvantage because their wall signs just typically aren't as effective. Um, in terms of the height, I think that's just something we there's no perfect measurement. So, we're kind of trying out different elements. MFC is a little bit more residential, but it's still highly commercial. Um, it's kind of just a mix. The hard part is there's a lot of different there are different sections of central that fall into the MUFC that are a little bit different from each other, but we didn't want to carve out those the sign code into like tiny little segments everywhere because it gets very confusing. Um, but I think overall we kind of acknowledge the fact that the amended sign code isn't going to solve all issues for every property. Those will be unique circumstances. I think in this case, we generally felt that with our recommendation that um given where the given where the building is on the site um that a taller sign does make sense, it's

limited in terms of how close it can be to the roadway. Um and the type of sign with having like the post panel having that transparency would make it safer. typically what we've seen at other other locations and not aware of um traffic incidents or anything like that as a direct cause to them. But hope that somewhat answers it. Yeah, there's not really like a you know we tried to look at prior cases where there were variancees, what kind of uh was the underlying issue then trying to solve it that way. Uh, and just can we go back to the what's currently there? Are there I guess concerns? I guess I'm trying to figure out if any kind of signage that would be according to code. There are concerns that to handle the concerns Celeste raised of line of sight and so safety concerns with any signs that are up to the like basically if we don't grant a variance and keep things you know and and the property is required to keep signs at 5T or under. Is that really actually creating kind of more a more dangerous visibility issue than granting disparance is my question. I guess

from staff perspective would be yes. I think having a sign that's at like the 5t would be would be more dangerous just because it's more likely to block your actual vision. I mean, even if you look at where the car is kind of pulling out from, visualize where that sign is, that sign, we're talking about a 5 foot freestanding sign, not a monument sign. Um, are we suggesting the currently existing monument sign creates a sight line issue? So, if we're talking about a freestanding sign, I mean, if you had a post and panel, I think it would still be

I don't think realistically you would put a post and panel that low. Um, not something we typically see. I think it wouldn't really solve the sighteline issues if you did that. Um, but if you even just imagine pulling that sign forward a little bit, it would make it very difficult or more difficult for the car to and that would be allowable. Correct. Because it's a five foot posted panel sign that we could have 5 feet off of the property line or a ground sign, a monument sign that's essentially 5 to 10 feet closer. So, I think that's where we're trying to get with the additional height that would be the safest condition.

Yeah. The the other element, too, is they're trying to provide signage for potentially two two tenants. Um, and they'd only be allowed the one freestanding sign really. So, you then come to the issue of if it's too low or can't really accommodate a second sign, then like where are you going to put that other one? So by having it a little bit taller, you can fit it. The sign measurements like the square footage that they're proposing do meet the requirements. So that part's okay.

Wait. So going back, circling back, are we saying what's currently there? So the the current sign is a monument sign. It is we said it's about 3.5. So um that is allowed to go up to 5T. Yeah. And so the code doesn't and it could be anywhere on the property on the property. So it it could be moved like close to Yeah. It would it the setback would be the same that we under the definitions um the regulations in terms of like height and everything. We don't distinguish between like a monument versus post and panel. It's Yeah. If it's a detached sign, it's all the same requirements.

Thank you for that. I don't know. Celeste, going back to your security and your DOT experience. Um, I guess I'm curious how you think about that a little bit about like how I guess any weather postal panel or monument, right? Like the code currently allows them a 5 foot sign. It sounds to me like what you were saying and the concerns you were having is that what exists here and what they would be allowed to do on their own you find you you see as potentially more dangerous than allowing them

that sideline safety you know it's a tricky intersection extremely high traffic school next door

with a school directly adjacent and then really a whole line of town houses to the other side so it's 40 again, naturally high volume, mixed use, which is great. You know, good idea for a reuse on a tricky lot, and I drive through this every day, twice a day. And um it's it's it's, you know, I also wonder just about the the visual and the distractability when you're trying to drive and you're trying to navigate. Let's say you're not really used to this intersection and you know you're from Baldwinville and you're not used to it and you're like trying oh there's Taco Bell like and then pulling a UI which people do all the time on central and just or just you know just the the the trying to pay attention there's a lot already going on in this intersection funky egresses

I'm not clear on what are you think sight lines you you think what the code allows is on site to an extent Yes. And that the requested beds although maybe ugly makes it more safe. Maybe I think it's I mean I would prefer it as is. Sorry for the ugly. I know you guys try and make it pretty and stuff but like commercial signs are just generally ugly. It's not nothing against you. Sorry.

No. Well, to to the point of the the other sign, we we didn't have to spend a lot of money to change that panel. And I said, "Well, before we can figure this out, let's just change the panel at $600 and we'll have something there, but it's it's really it's really insignificant." And we would we knew we'd come back and try to do something. You know, if it if it meant moving it to the five foot step back and using a five foot sign, we would do the best we could with that. But we did talk about all of this with the sightelines and that's what that was the uh the whole topic of conversation to be able to not block you know the view and we in Malta for instance it's a it is a posted panel sign and it is on the ground and it's it's right out on the sidewalk

form based code so they have really really strict I mean they're like a kind of a gold standard for form based code. Yep. Yep. But but but that particular sign might actually be allowable with your code and that would sit just a little bit above the ground and there's no vision through it. It's completely, you know, this one allows you to at least see over over that little if we could take the brick out. I just thought it aesthetically it it added to it. Make it match the building. And yeah, I mean it comes down to sighteline. It comes down to safety. comes down to trying to avoid accidents at the end of the day. Like that's a huge push right now federally and with the New York State safety.

Thank you. Um any other comments, questions for the board?

Not so much a comment or a question. Just appreciate the uh application and the presentation. Big fan of Taco Bell. Spent a lot of time there. Um I don't have a problem with the sign. Um, but I I'll note and I I've I've been pretty consistent on this. I'm fairly certain I voted no on the Yasis market sign. Um, that I think, you know, there's a there's an issue I have an issue with uh the change to the character of the neighborhood. While this may be within the zone, the proper zoning district, I think this is a different end of Central Avenue than some of the other examples. I also think there are a myriad of alternatives that would not require um a variance of this sort, a three time uh the permitted height for the district. I think the conversation about sightelines, uh, perfectly reasonable conversation to be had, probably a conversation for the planning board and engineering to be talking about generally about sightelines, uh, which to me is a little bit outside of whether or not we should grant this variance. Um, I find the substant substanti substantiality excuse me, damn curs um significant. Um, and while I appreciate um the uh presentation, I I find this even though it's not obviously a um singular reason to deny, I find this to be uh fully self-created, especially in light of the alternatives. Uh and so, you know, appreciate you guys, but I will be voting no. Um regardless, we're voting to deny. Um before I guess we get to all this there's no one else in the room but there's no one online for public comment. Thank you Julisa for your full on reason. Uh anything else at this point. Let me just say the staff uh com staff notes don't uh present or don't state that there would be um this uh issue

this danger issue or an issue with safety. I should say a safety issue um based on the reasoning that we heard here today and I know that you all have worked very closely with planning on um coming up with this proposal. You've done it before um in a different city or saying Malta as well. Um I think that the solar driving speed helps the fact that it's a signalized intersection. Um I think that you can't in my view you can't see the sign at 5T. um and that that could cause more of a a safety issue based on how low the sign is. And I think a higher sign would actually make it easier and safer for drivers. Um I traverse that Central Avenue uh very often as well. Um and I I don't have the same concerns that that uh Celeste has when it comes to the the site. And also we don't have any numbers uh specifically speaking to that issue. Um, I don't know if it would be helpful to get something um, you know, that that's more concretely discusses whether or not the sighteline issue is is as much of a safety issue. Um, but based on what we have tonight, I would vote yes.

Is there any interest in anyone making the motion? I mean, just based on based on what we're hearing, I would request that if we could take a straw poll on this and maybe potentially uh just before a motion is had because if if that's the case, we'd rather table the application than have a formal vote and be denied. And I I mean if it came down to it, Mike, I think that we would prefer the sign in the position where it is, but I think to your point, we could put the sign right up on the road and put it right where it could be of concern. We're trying to mitigate the sighteline issues and trying to mitigate any safety issues. Us being the engineer and Mike being the owner applicant are representative of the two. Nobody wants to put their names on anything that is associated with a safety concern. As an engineer, we're ethically bound to not doing that. Um, I think that it we could potentially have that straw pole. We we may be able to talk about sliding that sign back a foot maybe if possible or something that would an in between. Um, but you know, this is a very important part of a quick serve restaurants business and we need to find something. If it's it's not this and we have to work within the confines of the code, I don't think it's going to be as safe as what we're proposing tonight.

Um, so I feel like you're I guess you're kind of saying, can we get a sense of where the vote is going? And if it's going towards the no, can we able so you can revisit? Uh I guess I don't even know procedurally if we can do that. I mean it's an open meeting. I guess we could. Um that doesn't bound anyone to any vote. Um say no in a second if she wants. So the fact that the existing code would be a safety concern, does this abrogate the self-created difficulty that it's not a self-created difficulty if it's reverse?

Well, I think to Serena's point, we don't know that that's I appreciate Celeste's particular um and very relevant experience. Apologies, I touched you. Um but I um but I I I take the position that I took when I made my statement which I I don't know that that's necessarily even relevant for this body to be considering. Um well I think it's certainly part of the conversation. Um I personally procedurally don't see it as a reason to hold off on a vote. It's certainly something that now that we've talked about it now I'm like interested in hearing what planning and engineering has to say

um as a general matter about whether or not their existing sign ordinance which was just changed. Sorry. Um creates um you know this this this sort of tricky uh safety versus zoning problem. But I think that's a honestly because you just said struggle that's kind of a strong man argument. I have numerous numerous issues with this, not just beyond safety. I would want next to this.

Um yeah, I mean I think um I think the zoning code was just changed and um I I understand the safety concerns, but I guess I am not sure that a sign that meets the requirement can't be figured out. that would still be safe. So I guess I know side to me

if we are tableabling um it would be helpful to get input from the church and from yana which is the upper Washington association I think it's their jurisdiction. Um, and yeah, I guess maybe revisiting was the city staff and traffic engineering. Um, I'd love to hear from the people who would live directly next to the sign. Okay, so we're tableling. Is that what's happening? Yeah. Okay, let's do that.

I mean, they are they're notified. I hear you. They're I would assume that they're receiving a postcard for living within a certain number of They were not that we table project 2025- 17. Second. Yes. Uh you vote on table. No. Vote on table. No. On table. Yes. Fine. Yeah. Fine. Yep. Go for it. Fine. Like no on this, but yeah. Yes.

Thank you all.

Everyone in favor? Yes. Thank you. Meeting is over. Uh Abby, do you try these because I write a lot of notes. Oh, yeah. You can I mean throw them out. Yeah. If you want to stay on the table saying just