Planning Board - Regular Meeting

All right. Um, good evening. We are calling the meeting to order. Um it's now April April 7th, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. We have a five member board and we have four members present. Um one member we are still waiting for um to be appointed. So we do have a quorum. Um with us we have Sadi Kadivi, Rachel Breedster, um Paige Barnum, and I'm Glen Gillard and I'm the chair. Um, so we have a quorum and we're going to move forward with today's itiner agenda. So the first thing on the agenda is our consent agenda which is um application number DPR0165. It's a development plan review. The property address is 1361 Broadway. The applicant is Harmony Primo Lofts and the representing agent is Mr. Hersburg from Hersburg and Hersburg. So we can Mr. You want to move

for consent? No, you don't need to. You don't need to. I'm sorry. I don't want you to move. Okay. From here.

No. Went forward quite a while. Waiting for approval from New York State BC. Okay. Sewer extension. say now require if you're generating more than 2500 gallons per day they need and once we get that start all right um so right now the ex basically what you said what we're considering is an extension of approval for this project DPR0165 does anyone want to make a motion to approve the extension so moved anybody second second so it's been properly moved by Rachel Bster and seconded by Paige Barnum. Um any all in favor?

I. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Thank you. So now we'll move to the hearing agenda. We have one item under the hearing agenda which is our public hearing. Um this item is CU-2026-7 is for a conditional use permit for 581 Clinton Avenue. Um the applicant is JBT Solutions LLC. Um you have 10 minutes to present. Please state. Um so we'll go through the slides. So handing it over to you and please tell us your name and how you're um representing.

Danny Sanders, Harris Sanders Architects, architect for the um 581 Clinton Avenue project. And you are sir Jamar Thorne um a member for JBT Solutions. Okay.

So I can speak to uh the site uh being at 581 Clinton Avenue and existing re uh well twotory with basement uh project building. And these are the photos taken from the front and side. This was the um previous application, previous approach to the design for the um apartment, but um it did not meet the um natural light and ventilation requirements for the living space called the great space and the bedroom being in the front. So, it was revised to become a studio apartment. um similar um configuration for the exterior but no interior walls to break it up into bedroom and living space. So now the studio apartment as um shown meets the natural light and ventilation requirements for a living space. the approximate square footage is 850 and um the entrance way would remain the same. The exterior egress will remain the same and uh that's pretty much the approach that the owner elected to take for the conversion of the lower level lowest level. I don't know if there's anything else to add from our end. Um it's well maintained. You've had the building for um approximately since um September.

Yeah. Of last year. Yes. Um any questions from any members? I do. The last time that back room was listed as storage. It's no locker storage, right? On top the Lshape. Yes. It is still be a storage area. Yes. It's for the tenant. But and does it mean to be aggressive? It is a storage. Yes. There's two back doors back there. Um there's one that leads to the um to the storage area and there's one that goes outside the um there's yeah it still goes back through that room. I mean it's part of it's not really a storage room and that flammables or anything like that can be kept in it. It's just for the resident to have some additional space. I mean they're not it's not living space. So

it's not living space. No no. And so like what if there's something blocking it in terms of this storage? Um I don't think anything will be blocking. It's just um labeled that as storage. Um it's just the hot water tank and everything is over there and it's just the open space. So I was talking about the top part. Yeah, the egress the egress. So if you want the storage piece this L shape, but that right there is the door. Am I right? This correct that goes right that goes to the backyard. Correct. Yes. So they do have the DS. Yeah. But sometime I mean so typically Danny know this you can't have it eress with separate like you can't have stuff in front of an actual egress.

So you want to make sure there's um Oh that's possible. Yeah that's possible separation. Yes definitely because if someone ends up putting something there and because your windows don't meet the requirements from the front. So if there's something that someone needs to get out from the back and there's stuff blocking it because it's technically stored. You can't exit from put on the door. Is that right? Yeah, we can do that. But it's something we can use that work with the building department to note that on the Yeah, we can put the separation partitions between Yes. So for the egress is clear just to make it.

No, absolutely. That's good. Good point. I saw it last time locally storage. So it's really mechanical. Yeah. Settle for that on the right side and then storage on the left if you do that because that's water heaters in there. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Does it look like there's any any other questions from board? It doesn't any written or public comments. Does that change at all? All right. So do you have any comments left from the staff? I'm sorry. All right. I just have one more comment. Can you go back to the plan? Where are your trash bins collected?

Trash. Um, normally the tenants um well the tenants that's upstairs and um on the first floor and second floor, they put it outside on the side of their apartment. In the front? Yes. Not in the front, but not in the front, but it's on the side of the area. And um same thing with this here. It's an area in the back um in the backyard where they can place the trash cans at as well. You cannot put them in the notch in the back but behind the 9 foot dimension right here. Right here. Yes. I would just note that because you want to be considerate in terms of like people make trash. You want to make sure they have enough room to put it properly so it's not overflowing everywhere.

Oh, it's definitely a place to put it there. Where do they put it on the other tent? Yeah. On the side. On the right side. Okay. You want to go back to the photograph for a second? Let's go back to the photo because I I you have room on the right. Yeah, on the right side of the house they put pictures that over that area. Yes. Maybe on that side. They do have some space. Yeah, that's an open space. It's like um a local garden area. It's still there. Okay. That's the only concern I would have. Nice that you're using it.

Yes. So just keep on. Yeah. All right. Any other questions?

The staff notes quickly. U so this requires this particular use requires the change to add a unit. So it's going from a two to a three in this district requires a conditional use permit. Um the action itself is classified as a type two action under seeker. So no further actions required uh under seeker. They have about 25 feet of frontage along Pin Avenue. So again, they have they have some space on both sides of the actual dwelling itself. Um this project was referred to Alden County Planning Board and they defer to local consideration. Looking at the block of wind here and not including this particular property, we identified five single unit buildings, 12 two unit buildings, nine threeunit buildings, one multi-unit building, so generally four or more, and then 10 vacated parcels. So just establishing that there's already a good mix of um properties, specifically residential properties on this block to a unit and above for what they're looking to do. And then just for code compliance itself, the main considerations we looked at is that to check if it has the appropriate square footage, which it does, um, but it's not resulting in a total number of units above what the code currently allows, which it would be compliant with. Um, and that the any external alterations wouldn't be um out of character with the neighborhood. They're not really proposing any external changes. Um, and it would also require a certificate of appropriateness, which I believe is something that's already been underway.

Yes.

Um, they meet the requirements for the 50% of upgrade, the ceiling heights, um, designated containers located on the property, and we just talked about that being at the rear of the property. So, we'll note that on on many permits. Um and each unit would occupy one one floor of the building. Uh also a code requirement for uh compliance to have an additional unit. And with that uh we're recommending approval of the condition. So with that um any last questions? All right. Do we want to vote to approve the conditional use permit for project number CU 20-2026-7?

So moved. Okay. Second. All right. Moved by Rachel Greenster. Um seconded by S. Good evening. Shotty. Shotty. I'm sorry. Don't do it on purpose. Um all in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Hi.

All right. So, now we're going to go to our meeting agenda, which is our public meeting. And the first project on the agenda is application number CP 20226-30. This is um they're looking for a waiver for off streetet parking. They're also looking for the conditional use permit and development plan review. The address is 135 Ontario Street. The applicant is Patrick Chu of Upstate General Construction and representing them is Danny Hersburg of Hersburg and Hersburg. So, thank you, Madam Chairman. Very very nice to see you there.

Uh the project was before this board three about three months ago. Um and uh they haven't changed the plan very much. It's pretty much the same plan. This is the existing building which sort of sets the stage for what we're doing. That building on the corner is a little taller and a little a little more massive. And the building down the side is is a one-story warehouse with some variable roof lines. Um so that's who we had to work with and I think essentially we could they had some methods of getting it more beautiful than it is now. Dan, you want me to speak to the to it a little bit? You're all right. You want me?

Dan Sanders to come up and interrupt me all you want.

Yes. So, the um putting the addition on the building uh when we reviewed some of the um concerns is that we work with uh some of the existing fenistration on the building and uh develop off of that vertically. So as we build up this was required um to present an existing building elevation and showing the scope of the work for sort of not really a rhythm of windows or openings that's there because it's been a series of openings over the time. So it's going to be a you know a challenge. So what we did on the next slide was show the front And that's sort of turning the corner. Um, but then do you have the the proposed elevations?

Yeah, post elevations come next. Come next. Okay. After we get done with the engineering drawings, erosion sediment control, which everybody's always interested in, I'm sure, but it's a plan we have to develop. New York State requires on every project. Now I think we have there's the floor.

Okay. So the plans are pretty much working with the configuration of the building that's existing and the uh allowable areas to add windows potentially if it's nearby a property line or setbacks. And then um so fortunately there is some open area where we can put some windows per code. But the other challenge is we've got um alleyways and the like that would be it difficult to add some windows. So generally we put windows only where we could. I don't have to get into the details of it but as you go through the plans um that's what these plans reflect and when we get uh the total number of units are noted at

there two two bedrooms and it's shown on the other chart. Yeah. Yeah. There's two two bedrooms on each floor. A total of 34. Why is that bottom one in red? Just by accident. That was the um I believe that was that may have been You made it red so we can reproduce it in red. Yeah, I don't remember why that was. Was there something about it? Okay. Yeah, we do have to do What about the rental units? Was that maybe where it was the the exclusionary that Yeah, those

I think that's what they were. Yeah. So, we'll check the code on our um key, but getting to the elevations. So, what we did is um create work with some of the openings on the ground floor, center the windows where we could above those, the Juliet balconies, and um maintaining the masonry on the lower level, which because of all the openings and and infills and everything like that, we propose to um paint. Um it's been painted several times. And then to kind of uh scale it down a little bit in terms of a three-story building, again, we're adding the two floors on top of it, but from a material standpoint, breaking it down to um the brick and then a siding on the third level. So, it's a challenge in terms of creating an elevation and working with some of the openings. But not only that, from a material standpoint, not making it look so too institutional and breaking it up horizontally um with the material break onto the from the second floor to the third floor. And then that's really in the um on the west side. So, it's not as I would say apparent being in the We get back to that on the plan where that is, but that's in the uh less seen areas. Okay. And the rear elevation of course is the south side. So, I will leave it up. Okay. You've got enough site stuff to probably present too, right? So, I'll leave it back.

Not really. again that the floor the uh the site plan really because the building occupies this the entire site was the building plan. So Dan did a good job of presenting that. Here's where we show it. We we uh we do have uh some street trees that we added. We discussed it with uh the city forester Jay Lavine. Uh and uh we picked the tree that they wanted and they we originally had five trees. He said they didn't want the fifth tree. It was too close to a power pole. We ended up with four new trees and uh other than that they uh a bike storage. What's that? Bike storage.

Oh yeah. In internal rebuilding we have bike storage and we have a bike rack. So we meet we meet that requirement with the with the internal storage down that corridor is a bike rack and a trash room. We have a fitness room for the residents. And then on the upper um level. And what do you mean by inclus inclusionary unit? Is that someone that's 88 rental? Affordable. Got it. Affordable. Sorry. It's called inclusionary under code. Okay.

I guess it includes more people who can rent them. And then the third floor right there is pretty much identical, but they're on they split on the two floors, the inclusionary units. Um, can you speak to the the fence and then also the design of the I know if you just go back to the rendering of the I think it's the side view. Um, maybe. Yeah, right here. Just uh why there's no windows there with the residential property next to it. Oh, because it's attached to something. It's it's very close, but yeah, it's it's within 10 ft.

Yeah. So, that's really not permitted here, right? And then the other is stairwell. I'm not sure which area specifically, but yes, that that's the the challenge was on the rear elevation. We couldn't have because it's it's cut back sort of and and at that area it's within the 10 ft which is restriction putting any windows on a property within 10 ft of a property line. Is that why there's no lights on the east on the south and west elevations too? No lighting pictures.

Yes. Right now, unless that's something that you want to have include, we didn't have that. The only place we show. It seems like a nice opportunity if it is such a out like you're going to have those spaces in shape. Which sides are you looking at? This one, the south and west. South and west. South. But how close are they to your neighbors? Cuz that's the only concern that I have. The homeowners came the first time around, right? Because this is like their backyard that all of that looks into, right? And now we have lighting on this side here, right? Minimizing with no lighting on on this side because it's it's it's neighboring other property, right? Because they're right on the property.

Really? Yeah. The closest building would be right here. So I guess anything at night. Is that lot where your cursor is, is that part of that the homeowner is that private? Yeah. Yeah, it looks like a backyard. Okay, that's their that's their back pool, right? So, that makes sense because there's no alleyway or anything. No, not really. I mean, that's a main thing. But the other part is there's not a lot of windows over there either because of the property. But yeah, that is tight

because if you go back to the south elevation, if I'm understanding it correctly, like all so this dark gray part is what's immediately adjacent to the residential building, right? And then all of those windows are in their backyard. Oh, they're there now. They're they're set back a little bit. That's But it's still facing their backyard. Yes. Yeah. That's like I was just like thinking about like, oh, there's our pool in our backyard and these low windows. These low windows and these people that are not right our family are like it's like they're closer than you and I. And right, I don't think it's that. I mean, I understand why you've done it that way. At first, I thought there was an alleyway behind it. Not that side.

Yeah. But the other the side that is has lighting. No, only Bradford and Ontario have light fixture. Two two side facing the street, right? Yeah. So, that side Bradford and Ontario. Okay. Now, what's behind there, though? Well, that's his other building that he just renovated on the left. Okay. Those are apartments also. Okay. 260 Bradford that right there. It looks like there may be a alleyway between those two. There's some space between them. Again, it's right on the our building is right on the property line, right? Brad 260 Bradford is is width of a normal width of it's like 1 foot 10 in. Yeah. I can't get down that alleyway. Right.

That alleyway now. But the windows are set at what height like like can a kid over like what is it? What are people looking at? probably about 3 ft off off the ground off the floor. Well, that's why there's there's a proposed 6 foot fence for the rear. That's why that's why you have to talk about Okay. Wait, where is where's the fence? Fence all the way around, isn't it? I think it might have been added to the next to like the most recent plans, but it basically be over here. Yeah. So, the windows look at a fence for this section just for the bottom. Yeah. But there's nothing separating the tenants that would be on that. Yeah. Right. Right there. Right. There's just like windows into a backyard. There is.

Is there a fence there, too? That That's That's my big concern. Yeah. I don't think we called it on our plan, but I would assume that my applicant would like to fence it off. I think that should be a fence so that we could add some sort of probably six foot uh privacy type fence along those two sides. Well, and then so what would be the diff? What would be the dimensions between this fence and the window that you're basically opening a window to a fence? Yeah. Right. Well, you're that not the south, the other, the west, you see. I mean, we could have those windows a little higher.

Could you have them as transom windows where they get cropped view of the skies, right? And that way at least like just in terms of like thinking about how someone uses the space internally, you're at least looking above the fence versus at a fence. I think yeah. See if it works out dimensionally. I'm just like really concerned about windows into like a private backyard like like the other on the south side. Yeah. But that's going to be fenced. That's going to be fenced. We should be working. What kind of fence though? Are you looking for a solid fence or a chain link? I a six foot privacy fence. So, it would be solid. Solid. Okay. Chain link is right. That's that's why I asked the question.

Well, we can review the window heights just in terms of elevation. Absolutely. Yeah. It's like at a height above where it's not like I'm watching our kids swim in a pool for fun. Well, that fence is going to be privacy as long as there's like fence. That's the non-issue. The other the other side is what you're saying is the fence that's not really looking into the pool. And if the windows are that high, does the fence need to be six feet? Right. Well, the six feet means that the the windows like 3 feet above the ground, the windows, somebody stand behind the window is

is looking out at the fence. So if you have it less than six foot high, it doesn't do anything visible with regard to the people can see into them and they can see out. We want to make sure you can make it six feet. It makes it more private for both sides, right? As long as like you're not getting a view of a fence from the inside. No, but if the window is higher off the floor like five and a half, six feet, and then it's about a three foot or two foot at least window. That's what you're saying. Yeah. If you have the You have the ceiling height. That's great. Yeah, we can do that just so you get some. And that's mainly on the south elevation because the other one's going to be looking

not an issue because they have a fence there which is privacy and they're not just in terms of access, right? Like uncomfortable. Well, yeah. Like you said, it's for both parties. Both parties. Pretty sure the person living on the other side would feel okay would not feel okay with somebody being peeping into their window. Yeah. At any time. and vice versa. Right. Yeah. Right. Sitting in my backyard watching what all of you are up to next door. That's a hard elevation. Yep. And a hard lot line. It's like any other thoughts or questions? I didn't see was in the plans. Is there a place for trash? Yes, there's trash rooms.

If you go back to the first floor, I can point out where it is. We have We have a bicycle storage. Bicycle storage fitness room, right? But there's a bicycle storage and trash room in that over to the right there. There's a trash room. And the trash room is on every floor. No, the trash room is repeating another floor, but the bicycle trash. Great. On the other floors, it' be like storage for Got it. Yes. Was there any study about the shadow the building having a whole new floor on it? It's going to cast on

adjacent properties. I mean, it's not the tallest. It's there was other two and a half stories. It's taller. I mean, there's Bradford right next door 260 is a twotory with a pitched roof. This is a threetory with a flat roof. So the overall heights I think we're within aren't we within the guidelines for the heights? Yeah, we we don't need a variance for height. Yeah. Yeah. As long as you're within the guidelines. And Bradford's fair. It's not a narrow street in terms of you know casting right on. There's no commercial or resil towers which is

very well the sun moving this direction would give you a light on the front and light on the back as it goes as it go as it traverses the sky. So again the only dark side is the alley on the uh between us and 260. That's that's going to be really dark. Right. Any other questions? All right. Do we It doesn't look like we have anybody for any comments. So, we're going to go into um staff recommendation.

Um so, the multi-age is requires the conditional use permit because of the area that it's in a form based regulating plan which is the general. Uh under seeker, this is classified as an unlisted action. Um but the coordinated review is not required in this instance. Uh we do have the parts one and two of the short environmental form. Um we'd be looking for the negative declaration on seeker before any other motions. Uh this was referred to the county planning board and we received the advisory and recommendation notes um that are shown here. So for the advisory they noted they for recommendation rather they noted the local fire department should evaluate for public safety to service access water availability and any sprint system that might be required by building code under the advisory the city should consider the precedent setting nature of allowing the construction of buildings with property line without allowing for adequate setback and that the board request that the applicant the county planning board request that the applicant submit a revised site and clearly identifying access points for apartments one, two, and three as discrepancies are noted between the first floor plan and site plan details. Um now we having gone over these we do have some issues uh or concerns with the advisory and recommendation comments. Um go to the next slide. So it's already noted that all all of these have to get routed to departments of just fire and water already. they are going through the perceived sign off. Uh water is still pending. That' be a condition of the approval. Um additionally, the development plan review, which is what's before us today,

um is typically is typically going to precede any of the building and regulatory compliance or code reviews. Um although codes is part of the technical review committee that would flag any major issues with the project beforehand, none were identified. Um and then just regulatory process note that we have is that in accordance with the general municipal law, uh we're looking to go over rule recommendation from the county planning board has to be a majority plus one. So in this case it be would be need four four members um to go to override the county um recommendation and advisory notes. In this case, we are recommending that the planning board, the city's planning board incorporates the decision to overrule the county planning board's recommendations in the final decision um as their recommendations already met through the standard referral process outlined in the code uh and our general review application procedures. Um and then in if you go back one more um in regards to the advisory notes about the precedent setting nature of allowing the setbacks or not really sure what that means given that setbacks here are allowed to be up to the um they're allowed zero foot setbacks but also it's an existing buildings

existing building setbacks we didn't want to change those right uh so it's not really applicable in this case

um and then the final final site plans and stamp plans for actual um building permits would be pending these stamped plans after the water department issues their their final permits as well. General code compliance under the zoning code. So they have met the requirements for the indoor outdoor um passive active recreation. They also have the laundry facilities outlined on the plans. Um confirm that the rooftop mechanical equipment will have the adequate screening uh so that's not visible. Revised floor plans um showing additional pictures and first floor window replacement because we can just note that there was a request for um additional reision revisions for the window transom um

on the on the south side.

Yeah. Thank you. See, I'm sorry. Go back just one more. And then as noted by the applicant, DGS and the city arburous did recommend there be a reduction in the street trees. Um for a variety of reasons with utility complex, curve cuts, things like that. Uh and then our latest revised elevations include the coach lights and security lights with the required cut offs. Uh as for department reviews uh from engineering they all the comments have been addressed and they uh provided their approval March 25th. Uh department of general services provided um their approval January 30th. Fire provided their approval February 2nd and water has um been working with the applicant to go through additional utility comments but nothing that would change the the elements discussed before the board tonight. Um, and therefore we would recommend conditional approval with pending the water department's um final approval for the project. So there's a bunch of different parts of this um this approval. So the first thing would be declaring a negative declaration under secret for this this whole project. Um, additionally, we would recommend approval of the commission use permit, approval of the waiver for off- street parking requirements and subsequently the approval for the development plan review. Uh, with the development plan review, we are listing two conditions. One of them for prior to the issuance of the building permit, final approval shall be obtained from the department of water and water supply. And the second being prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall implement an affordable housing

compliance plan with the prevailing section of the USDO or zoning code. That's in regards to that um that requirement. I believe right now they're they're showing the three units on the plan which is in compliance. Um but there are pending updates to the to the city code in that regard. So we just want to make sure that when it's actually constructed, it complies with the affordable housing requirement. If there's any questions on the various items, you suggest we vote on it one by one. Yeah. And specifically the the seeker um negative declaration.

Not at all. I do have a question regarding the off street parking. Um I know we talked about it the last time that this came before us. They're waving having to have any off street parking because of just where it's located near the bus stop. All of those conditions are are met. Correct. Correct. Y yeah. So there's a variety of provisions in the code to establish the minimum parking. Um

first we take the reduction from the change of what it used to be to now. Basically we get down to that. Then we also subtract the amount because of its proximity to um to high frequency bus stops. And then there's also reduction for uh or credit towards the on-site parking which we counted at least 11 on Ontario and Bradford. But also noting that there's additional parking spots along the street that tend to be open and a lot of the um adjacent parking lots and parking garages tend to be empty as well. Okay. So unless there's any other comments or questions, we're going to go through each one one by one. Um so the first recommendation is to declare um a negative declaration under seeker for this project. Do we um do we have anybody to make a motion for this?

So moved. Okay. Seconded. All right. It's been properly moved and seconded. All in favor? I. Okay. The second is the chief planning official recommends approval of the conditional use permit on this project. Um any motions for that? Second. All right. Um properly moved and seconded. Any um if all in favor please say I. I. Any opposition? Okay. The third one is um approving the recommendation of the from the chief planning official a waiver for off streetet parking and do we have a motion for this?

So moved. Second. All right. All in favor? I. Any oppose. All right. And then the last one is the approval of the development plan review with the following conditions. Uh prior to the issuance of the building permit, there should be a final approval obtained from the um department of water and water supply. The second condition is um again prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall implement an affordable housing plan in compliance with the prevailing USDO section 375-415C. All in favor? Oh, I'll move it. You move. Okay. Second.

Second it. All right. All in favor? All right. It carries. Thank you. All right. Thank you. That last one is good. Yeah. All right. So, the next project we're going to discuss is DR26-1, which is a demolition review of 262 267 Second Street. The applicant is the Alurn County Land Bank. And can I'm assuming you're here on behalf of the land bank. Can you just introduce yourself? Sure. My name is Lynette Terret. I'm the director of operations at the bank. And uh I'm Jason Chcoy. I'm the development specialist at the Land Bank.

All right. Thank you. So you have 10 minutes to present starting now. Yeah. Thank you. And I just kind of grouped uh where I could um all three properties together just for the sake of time. So you'll see the the um the all the project numbers listed at the top of the first slide. Um and so we're so we're discussing uh 255 First Street, 256 sec First Street. Um those are the two properties here and then 267 2nd Street. Um so give me one second. Can we look at all of these together and make motions on these or do we have to separately?

Yes, they can go through them all some time and then we could do a motion on each one separately. Okay, not a problem.

No, thank you. That's it's helpful. Um, so yeah, you can see on the map they're all um they're all in the same they're all located in West Hill um within block approximately one another and they're all zoned uh R2 district. Next um so first uh 25 uh First Street um this was built in 1872. The land bank acquired the property in 2017. Um, and our estimated rehab cost right now, we we we looked at um four properties that we've rehabbed in the last two years, one of which is on Second Street um nearby. And so we're estimating rehab costs at 260 approximately $260 per square foot to get the estimated rehab costs. Um we've had structural evaluations done of all three properties. um they were included in our our application. Um and for 255 First Street, it noted significant damage um from roof leaking and water damage. So the the flooring is unstable um especially in the rear of the building is starting to collapse. Um we'll have pictures later on that kind of that that show that dam water damage. Um and then this will be the same for all three properties. um our proposed use for site for site post demolition. Um they're going to be included in our uh our our foot the block project is what we're terminating. So uh I think um the last time the land bank presented to the planning board was 2024 and we mentioned uh I I think we kind of uh referenced this project a little bit. Um so it is starting to to uh move ahead. Um we've submitted uh the application to homes and community renewal would be the funding source for this project. Um they've given us some edits back and we're working on those edits now and we are also in the middle of uh procurement

for architectural services. So it's um and so all three and I'll go into more detail on that on a few slides. Um and then um it's going to be the same for all three properties to to follow the uh the demolition debris diversion plan in the requirements that a minimum of 35% um of material is recycled or repurposed. All three properties have a lot of um damage um some fire damage on one of the properties but um they also all as as basses. So that's one of the one of the concerns. um we include this information um in the RFP and then the and then this requirement of meaning 35%. Um and then uh 256 first street um this is is across the street from 255 built in 1872. This property we we acquired in 2023. Um, so, uh, probably one of our more recent acquisitions. Um, and it's always been the the idea has been to include this property in the Flip the Block project from the start. Um, and again, we're estimating approximately $260 per square foot for for rehab. Um, this property, um, there's some fire damage and and that that we'll see on the interior slides. Um and uh because of this and because of the concerns noted in the structural evaluation um uh the city of Alb's condemned this property. So we I have a letter from uh March 16th condemning the property. Um as I noted this will be included in the in the flip the bond project as well. Um and then we'll see this later on. There's a concern with this site um because it is adjoining uh has an adjoining wall with

a neighbor. Um, so we we're we we've uh been in contact with that neighbor um the the the property owner. Um so we're going to do a site visit. We we have a date plan for a site visit um to look at the basement to see if the basements are joining and if there's any structural work that needs to be completed be prior to demolition. Um so we're going to follow up on that process. Um and um and then 267 2nd Street um is it's a existing single family property. Um it's a little bit smaller than the others, which is why we're estimating uh lower rehab costs um but still above the the cost that we can sell to a to a homeowner. Um and then there's the big issue with this property is there's structural concerns in the in the rear of the building um due due to water damage. the the back corner is starting to collapse. Um and then there's damage to foundational brick walls around the site or around the bottom of the the foundation. Um again, this is going to be included in our project. Um and uh due to this one has a larger lot size. So we're we're um planning a two family home on this site. Um and then with all three properties, uh we started the RFP process with demolition contractors. We did a walkthrough yesterday of of all the sites um and they they had some concerns about the the unsafe nature um of the property. We did we did obtain asbesa surveys um to see if it could be abated prior to demolition. Um but we were in um all all the contractors yesterday informed us that it was too unsafe to do abatement prior to demolition that um they recommended that we try to obtain uh get the buildings condemned. Um just so just

so they can follow that process just because it's too unsafe. Um so that was the suggestion that I think all of them.

Yep. And then for site restoration, um we included this in the RFP, um that all contractors, you know, demolition, uh removal of the entire structure, including the foundation, um and to fill with uh top soil and grass seed. Um again, we're planning this for redevelopment um hopefully within the next the next year or at least starting on construction in 2026. Um and I can talk more about that uh project really quickly. Um so this is kind of uh a new focus for the land bank. Um historically the the land bank has focused on um uh you know property management and and um you know selling vacant lots. Um and we're trying to move to a more communitydriven development model um and and starting to rehab and develop um new construction homes um where there's especially where there's vacant lots. Uh so this this project is is really the our our leaping off point of of that strategy. Um so I noted the map here of First and Second Street. You can see Clint at the bottom and Henry Johnson on the right side pointed vertically. Um and then all of the orange uh properties are plan two family sites. You'll know you'll see um I yeah we labeled 267 all three demolition sites and the the blue um lot blue sites are single family and that's primarily it's really due to lot size and just how how large of a home we can fit on the on on this on the parcel. Um but yes and you know and our and our goal is to meet the the our two standards of you know mixed um you know single and two family homes um in next hill. So that's and then uh the last

thing to note is 257 second street. I just we we also labeled that because um that was our first kind of step in the in this project. Uh it was a rehab that we completed and was sold to a homeowner uh last year. Um, so this is the external view of each of each property. So, um, starting with 255 First Street. Uh, the our our concern with this one, I didn't mention earlier, but our concern with this one is the tree out front. And you can see the power line is kind of going in between

um uh in between the the the branches. So, actually, and yesterday we could hear it kind of rubbing up against the tree. Um so we call National Grid today um to have someone come out and look uh at the site. Um so that that is the concern with that one. Um uh 256 First Street, you can see the adjoining uh the adjoining property. They you know they have the same roof line and approximately the same size. So there's questions kind of some thoughts yesterday that they might have been built at the same time or together. Um, so that's why we need to investigate further. Uh, we did, but like I said, we did contact the homeowner. He said it it like it kind of seemed like it wedges like it's wedged, so it's like there's more space in the back. Um, but we just need to investigate more um, and include that uh, in the RFP. We're going to update the RFP as we go and include that those findings before we start any demolition. Um and then um then moving to the interior photos. Um this is 255 First Street. You as you go through the prop the building um it it's worse as you go to towards the back, but you can see some of the flooring starting to degrade and the and the framing um just collapsing because of some water damage. Um And then 256 first um shows some of the ex like the fire damage. Um this one we did not enter yesterday and this is the one that's been condemned. Um but we haven't entered this this site in in a long time because just because the there's some holes in the flooring and it's just um unsafe to really enter the property. And then um the 267 um kind of

shows the back corner that's starting to collapse. Um, and it's there's water damage from the second floor down through the first floor. So, it's kind of all like rotting out and and collapsing. And um the other concern with this property is is uh we're not able to access the basement just because it's too unsafe. So, we're not able we we did a limited asbesus survey, but we don't have um an idea of if there's any what's located below. Um, so that's part of the part of the challenge with this property. But you can also just assume it's all friable and positive, right? Yeah. And when you demo according to those standards.

Exactly. Yep. Yeah. When when we can't when we can't reach it, we just assume that. Yep. So, we don't have anybody listed for public comment. Um, unless that's changed. No, we're good. All right. board. Do we have any public? I'm sorry. My name is I No. Are you Are you commenting on this project? Yes. Okay. You can come up here and when you do, can you please give us your name and your address? My name is uh Brian Lesley. Okay. I'm at 274 Second Street. Okay.

I'm adjacent to um I would say opposite 267. Can you go back to Is that the one for demolition? The first one. Second Street. 267 Second Street. Is that going to go back so we can see? Let me just see. Yep. That one. Okay. So, you're right next to Well, I'm across the road. Across the street. Across the street. Okay. Literally about um I would say 50 ft. Okay.

Yeah. So, um just just just a concern I had um with the uh demolition cuz I I want to believe that the um the building it's it's as best as containing material mostly the sidings. I can look at it and I can tell. So I was concerned if um we would be notified as to when this will be done when the um demolition is staged for you know at least give give the residents or give persons that living close by um a heads up as to when this is going to be taking place and what are some of the steps that will be taken to contain the um asbestos. Right. It might be fryable material. Yes, but if it's crumbled, I know it's asbesto as containing a slate on the outside composite. So, um, we would like to know.

Yeah. So, that's something that we don't cover here as to answering those specific questions. Okay. We do cover, you know, one of the things that we do cover here is, you know, if you have questions about the project itself and you have a really great question, it's just that's just not within our scope. Okay. Um, one of the questions that um, Shottni did ask is how they were going to demo, which was to make sure and assume that there's freeable asbestous that can get out in the air. So, they're going to de he confirmed that they're going to demo with that in mind.

Okay. Statements and so on. I would definitely connect with them after our hearing today and they should be able to provide you hopefully with their contact information so you can ask them more questions about their process and when they're going to do this and how they're going to do this. So who's the contact person with Al Bank? Yep. They're right here. So after here connect with them. Okay. And then you know hopefully they'll give you a way to contact them. Okay. So you can answer those types of questions as to when it's going to be and stuff like that and what to expect. Yeah. I'm literally, as I said, 50 ft away from that. No, understood.

You know, yeah. So, um, yeah, that was my only concern. Understood. Thank you. Thank you very much. No problem. Yeah. Question. You have questions for the applicant. Okay. Can I ask a quick question? Are there demolition requests?

Um, for when someone pulls. So, there's um there's requirements for when it comes to a board, but not when someone goes to pull the actual permit to do the demolition. Is that a building department? Yeah, you can use I mean you'd have to do a little bit of research yourself, I guess. I imagine they'll inform people, but you would be able to see the permit online if you were to go to the online portal. Hi, we we still have questions for

Thank you. So um my first question I just and it's gentleman left but somewhat related to to his question. If I understood correctly did you say that all of the contractors said it wouldn't be possible to remove the asbestous prior to demolition? Yes. I guess my concern is so what is how do you carry out a demolition that ensures that the asbestous is completely contained and not exposing neighbors and and workers to that if it's not abaded first. Um

right. So I'll echo on what you're saying. So there's specific requirements per asbestous contractors to remove per lehip which is basically like if you look at the site there's playgrounds there's certain requirements that have to be followed per EPA and they are very regulated so if a contractor is saying like we're just going to contain it like I'd get some clarification on what that containment is um because there's per code rule in New York state your demo contractor would know this but there's specific requirements so I was just looking on the site plan. Um there's the playground. Those are like very critical spaces. Yeah. And absolutely we would take every precaution to make sure that we're doing this.

I feel like that they would, but that's something to echo. Absolutely. I think I mean I remember in my last house when I needed to have renovations done and I had several contractors tell me like we we can't we can't work with the asbestous. And I was like but you have to. And it was like I I felt like I had to like fight a little bit. And I know you guys do this for a living. You're not a single homeowner, but it just it it raises like a little red flag to me that they're saying like we can't contain it prior to demolition. Oh, no. So, what's happening is that they're saying that the structure itself is not safe enough for them to go in and do the abatement work. And are they saying that we're just going to sue the whole thing?

Yes. All and a standard to which they're going to I just wanted to make sure. That's what I thought I heard. Oh yeah. No, absolutely. Treat it as it's loaded for the most part. So, we're going to take every precaution to ensure that, you know, it's safety first.

So, my my question goes back to the building you've had since 2017. You know, um you've had it for almost 10 years and so it doesn't sound like much has been done with it since it was acquired and now we want to demolish it. I I know that in looking at the photos, there's really nothing you can do now, but what can be done? So once you acquire a building, we're not having it sit and rot for 10 years because that's not helpful to the neighborhood or the community.

Absolutely. So, in the past, I think um Jason mentioned their their process was mostly focusing on property management and real estate transactional like transactions, just acquiring the property and selling them to um bring them back to productive use. But we've shifted, we're a brand new team.

Um we've been in place like um Sean Magcguire who's our executive director, he's been there for now two years and the rest of us we've joined after that, but we're shifting more into that communitydriven development model. So, we actually want to take the properties that we have and, you know, with grant funding and rehab that because we know that we can do that with grant funds. A lot of these um development projects, you'll see they they cost a lot of money, 500,000, 600,000.

The average person doesn't have that much money to put into it and then try to sell it, you know, to uh to some to make it affordable. Um it's just it's impossible to do it that way. But we can. We know that we can. So that's the whole purpose of like flip the block program. We have all of these vacant lots. We have buildings like these that are, you know, something probably should have been done at some point, but again, their focus was just different than um where we're focused right now. So um yeah, we we definitely assure you that moving forward that's not going to happen because as we acquire properties, we're going to program them or put them up for sale. Um and we have some other ideas too though on that.

Yeah, I was just going to add that um I I know just you know through our understanding that um especially back in 2017 um but through you know probably the last couple years the land bank had a lot more properties than it does now. Um and and and um you know the properties that were sold uh to to either um developers or home buyers um were usually the the properties in better condition that were easier to rehab. Um so we're at the point now where uh we're either left with properties that were not did not receive much interest. Um so there was attempts to to this property was put up for sale. Um but uh that that's the challenge is so now we're and now we have less properties just simply because the the the county's process uh has changed and it has to go through the auction they have to go through the auction process. So we're focusing now on the properties that we do have. How do we make the best use out of them? Um you know can we build junior builds? Can we rehab them? Um and so the proposed the proposed use of funds um for the demolitions, part of that is funding the demolitions, but the other u majority of that grant would be to rehab properties. Um some of that in West Hill, some in the south end.

And what's the timeline of this? Yeah, we we just uh are we just um as I mentioned started the RFP process. Um that's due, you know, by the end of April. Um our walkth through with the property owner at 258 First Street would occur after that. So we would ideally do that with the the contractor. Um and so we're thinking probably maybe a May, you know, May start may start by May demo. Uh yeah, I would say towards the end of like end of May. End of May. Yeah, we want to make sure that again we take all the precautions.

A lot of it depends on the amount of work that would need to be done to structurally to 258 um first street to, you know, make make sure that's short up before we start any of this work. Um and then our and then the other I don't think we mentioned this but um uh 258 First Street any adjoining wall we want to make sure is we've done this with other demolitions um but we will make sure that it's uh weathertight and insulated um so that wall's protected going forward. I definitely think it's great that there is a plan when things get demoed because that's where the gap happens in terms of as you can see it's very hard to rebuild at that cost per square foot.

So it's really important to maintain that and that's very exciting to see. I just hope it initiates momentum to where you can see it through. I do have a question for staff or maybe the applicant. Um, you know, these homes are very old. Is this is this in a historic district? Do they need to is it's not um but they did did um survey this to the state um

yes the office of parks, Recreation, Historic Preservation. um which determined both there are no no properties including archaeological and or historic um resources listed in or eligible for New York State or National Registers of Historic Places that'll be impacted by this project. Um so that was that was for all three of these these demos. I imagine for the other properties in the um for the block project as well. But Clinton Avenue is Clinton Avenue. Clinton Avenue is definitely and Lexing parts of Lexington. Parts of Lexington are too. Yeah. A is only just a block away from

any other questions.

All right. Um staff notes. Um there are the nine criteria under the demolition of use standards. Um and just based on those applicant has has demonstrated that they they meet the requirements for the demolition. Um the property is again all all located in the R2 um zoning district. The demolitions would encompass the entire structure for all three. Um these would be classified as unlisted actions under seeker. So again we have the um parts two and three prepared as well. Um be recommending a negative declaration for each of those. Uh and while none of the projects are specifically tied to a development plan review as of yet um because they haven't been submitted, we are expecting that those properties would be submitted for redevelopment. um and the the outcome of the of the grants. Um go to the next slide. Just noting that the comp plan does call for the stabilization and the use of existing structures essentially when possible. Um but in this case noting that they've they've noted the extensive structural damage um provided reports from structural engineer and then just the conversation with the contractors as well. Um in addition to one of the one one of the structures being um condemned by the city's building department um the land bank has also attempted to sell all three of the properties at various points um unfortunately unsuccessfully. the estimated cost to rehab uh which we looked at from different projects um and other some prior applications for the

land bank as well appear to be too high to actually rehab these properties. They're complying with the degree diversion plans and the requirements of the zoning code. Um, we've also noted uh potentially if there's any materials that are um they're able to reuse or recycle essentially having those be salvaged and providing them to appropriate authorities. Um, so here we'll just go into some of the staff on on the specific properties themselves. We noted with 256 First Street, the building was registered as vacant since at least 2017. Um, as the case with all three of these, we noted that they largely vacant prior to the county and then the land bank taking possession of them. Um, we have the note about the asbestous testing. So for 256 First Street, we would have a condition, we would recommend a condition that the variance from the state TC be obtained prior to the actual building permit issued. That's that's in relation to the assumed asbesus. We got a um county planning board recommendation back just deferring to local consideration. And then for this properties of 26 first um the engineer reported that the first the first floor was had curated flooring um significant fire damage and no access to the second floor at the time of the inspection. This one for 267 second street. Um here also listed as register as a vacant

property. Images that we could find indicate it may have been vacant at least on and off since about 20 uh since about 2007. Again, this one actually did not require a referral to the county planning board. Uh and that's just based on like its proximity. Some some do, some don't. um similar notes from the structural engineer, but knowing that it's not um that there is significant damage to the brick foundation, the walls, uh we also know there's a building permit filed in at the end of uh 2024 with the replacement of stairs and railing after there was a auto accident. Um but that work did not not appear to actually be completed. I think just based on the overall uh condition of the of the building. And then lastly for 255 street um again registered since at least 2017 uh appears to have been vacant before that as well. This one was referred to the county planning board got the same recommendation back which is to defer to local consideration and then the um structural engineer report noting challenges with the property flooring. Uh there's foundation for this one as well. Framing um the back half of the f of the first and second floor significantly deteriorated and not safe. Basement stairs are not safe. So our recommended actions would be declaring a negative declaration under secret for really be for for each of these demolition reviews and then approving the demolition review. Um that'll be the same recommendation for all three, but specifically for 256 first street, we would just know we would have a condition that the issuance of the building permit for the demolition itself not be approved until

DC approves the the variance for the assess. So do you have a um slide like this for all three of them or this slide? Just let's go. You do? Okay, perfect. All right. So before we get to moving any other questions, comments from the board. All right. So the first part, the first one we're looking um at is project number DR 2025-13 which is 256 First Street. And I need a motion declaring a negative negative negative declaration under SECA seeker. So second

it's been moved and seconded. All in favor? Um, please say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. So, the next um we're looking for a motion to approve the demolition review um with the following conditions prior to the issu issuance of the board of the building permit for demolition. Nice deck approval um for demolition would need to be in place for assumed asbestous. Um and when you say will be provided that means back to back to the building building department. Okay. Um do we have a motion for this? So moved. Seconded. All right. All in favor? I I. Any oppose?

All right. So we're moving forward. The next project is DR-2026-1 for 267 street. We um we need a motion to declare a negative secret de declaration on this project. So moved. Okay. Second. All right. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Okay. And we also need um have a motion on the floor. Need a motion on the floor. Sorry. To approve the demolition review for this project. So moved. Second. All right. And um all in favor?

I. Any opposed? Okay. And the last project is DR 2026-2 255 1st Street. Uh we need a motion to declare a negative declaration under speaker. So moved. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? And then we also need a motion to approve the demolition review. Um, anyone moves? Move to move. Second. Okay. All in favor? I.

Any oppose? All right. So, everything pass. All right. We now need a motion to adjourn. Thank you. And we've adjourned the meeting at 7:13 p.m. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So, do you want to go over