Planning Board - Regular Meeting

All right. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to City Council's Planning Board and our architectural review board meeting for July 1st, 2026. Nice to see all the smiling faces here. First order of business this evening is the approval, comments of approval of the meeting minutes for the June 3, 2026 meeting. Ms. Morales, do you have any comments?

No comment.

Mr. Landry? No comment. So therefore, I make a motion that we approve the minutes as they are from the June 3, 2026 meeting. Can I get a second? Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Okay. I think we'll make an announcement before we start with old business, new business, and really get into the things. I believe there's a lot of interest here this evening in our last item on the agenda tonight, and that is the Lawrence Street subdivision. There's no development or any assistance, an adjustment of lot lines in subdivision that is... has been applied for. We will not be making a decision on that this evening. We are just here tonight and we discussed it from here on the board to making that recommendation to the zoning. We will hear public comments because it was put out that way to the public. I love, I really like seeing people in attendance at our meetings because we are just volunteers to represent the people of the city. And I really like it when people are active in this, and how business is done. But again, we are not making a vote. That is up to the zoning board on whether that gets approved or not. We just are here to discuss it amongst us and to make a recommendation. I just want to say that up front, okay? So if everyone that's here for that knows. All right, the first business we have on the table this evening, site plan review SB26-015, Kelly Feldman, owner of 146 Maple Street, tax mountain number 303.17-11-27C site plan approval for the conversion of a two-unit structure to a four-unit structure with the addition of a rear deck and staircase to provide access to the upper floors. Can I get a motion to table that, please?

I'll make a motion to table. It's my understanding the applicant has submitted the additional items that we requested last month, so I make a motion to table seeking submission from the applicant.

Second. Second. All in favor? Aye. All right, second item. Architecture Review AR26-004 Carols, LLC, Lessee and 1 Warren Street, tax map number 310.5-2-6, seeks architecture review, approval for proposed renovations to the site.

And you are? Paul Morris, who's got more technology support. Carol is all behind. So I was here last month, took your comments and questions back to our design team and Burger King Corporate's design team. And I think we were able to make the changes that you had requested. So I believe you all have copies of the plans.

I really, you know, we've been here, I think, three times with us and I applaud the efforts from Burger King and from your company to work with Sunnyside. Again, it's in the center of our city and it really means a lot to the city. Thank you. But what we're able to do with this.

Take the new corners along the front. And along the main entrance and along the backside of the main entrance were able to put flatting up on top so there was a drinking. Yep. And we're able to wrap that line backstop of the building. And then the drive-thru comes around the side. And then the drive-thru that's not really good for folks from New York is building from the left.

You can look at it and see what's going on. Great. Ms. Morfis? Oh, Nita?

Yeah, I mean, I think you picked up a lot of the changes that people liked from the last time. And it's appreciated that you were able to take the I'm not bothered by the fact that it doesn't go all the way around the . And I think that the way you've taken the and taken the and bumped it up and down, that accentuating it breaks up the long building. it gives it a little bit of visual interest. And I think that black harness is sharp and sort of, you know, a little bit more elegant looking than what's there now.

I'm not bothered by the fact that you don't have those oversized harnesses.

They're not oversized with the larger cornices in the back. Again, that's where you don't really see anything. So I think it's a nice improvement overall. I had one question. In the originally presented side, A Burger King sign next to the side of the through on the wall. That was the last one.

Yeah, it's not there yet.

Okay.

So you got no signage on that side.

Probably going to be seen by anyone. If you're in the drive-thru already, you know where to go.

People with those windows probably know it's a Burger King.

And then my only other question was, and I believe you maybe talked about this briefly, but I don't know who was in the records, so maybe you guys can remind me. There's a future fun freezer that's shown on the site plan, and I'm curious how that would be clad, and I'm not sure if we can at this time ask that it's sort of

So you have to come back. Yeah, I think with this experience, the team knows what you're looking for. And we're coming up with something other than that. Like, right?

So you got a second and approval for that, but you're going to come back when you want. OK. I have no other comments to be able to offer.

Thank you. You're most welcome. Yeah, there is clearly a confusion past our last meeting, and we've cleared it up. And so that you've cleared up the confusion, and you're certainly approving us. um you know with us to come up with something that is a little more amenable with the downtown area and cladding the back segment addition. Like I say, other than that, I think it looks great. Mr. Brown?

I agree. I don't really have no comment. I think the change in the materials used on that side and continuing that really made a big difference. It actually makes it look like something a little more than it was with the last one. I have no issues.

Nothing to add to what was already said.

Okay.

So for me, and I'm sure a lot of people, our citizens, won't realize what the changes we made. It looks a lot better. It's still a Burger King, but it has some really cool architectural features, roof lines. I mean, we did make you guys a bunch of extra money, but did it really well, I think. I think the finished product is, it was a lot better. I like how the siding wraps around what we'll call the back, but it actually, like I said, in that spot, there is no back. You know, you face the arena and the other buildings. So I think overall, we did something pretty good.

i would like to make a motion that the glens hall planning board acting as the board of architectural review here by grant architectural is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this before we make a motion here okay and see there was type two no further action okay i'll start again I would like to make a motion that the Glens Falls Planning Board, acting as the Board of Architectural Review, hereby grant architectural approval for the project identified as Carols, LLC, lessee of 1 Warren Street, tax map number 310.5-2-6, for the proposed renovations at the site, based upon the final drawings submitted on today's meeting, July 1, 2026, with no additional I'm out.

We have a second? Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you very much, appreciate it. Next order of business is the Crosworth Permit. Susan Bolster, owner of 27 Crosstown Street, tax map number 303.17-15-14, seeks approval for Put an encroachment curb cut to install a second driveway pursuant to City of Munns Falls Zoning Code Chapter 220-13K-1. This requires an advisory opinion by the Planning Board to the Common Council.

And Ms. Glitzer has given permission to refer to the mother, Kathy Bunker, as the representative tonight.

Can you tell us about your project, if you want to add another driveway to the property?

Yeah, I'm Sarah's mother, and all right, everybody, I'm 72 years old. And when Sarah bought this house, there was a third bedroom downstairs and a bathroom. So I said, gee, that would be great. We can move in there when we get old. And so that idea, that's where the driveway request came from, My husband or I, one of us may pass away before the other and may not want to stay in our home. So therefore, we would take the bedroom and the bathroom downstairs and use, Sarah would probably make our meals at that point. But the fact would be if we went out at night, that walking from her driveway all the way down the sidewalk and then across the yard to go in the back door would not be very safe. And so that's why the driveway and she wanted to get, we wanted to get that part done.

How many cars fit in the driveway right now?

One.

One? It's a one car driveway that goes to the garage.

It's an attached garage to her house.

It's a single lane, but it's wide enough for her.

And she had this lot. um let's see the house was like this and her driveway is here and down on the right there's a entrance door to the basement that wants right out onto the lawn and so that would be the driveway right there um i have no the word or sexual comments other than the fact that i just say that

I think we want to or make recommendations suggesting that it should be far enough away from the bike paths to pull out and back up. It looks like there's, you've marked, the applicants marked 18 feet. There's a Google map that is 20 feet from the edge of the closed driveway to the bike path, or riding across on the driveway to say, you know, be sure that that's not an issue. That's out. my only thought would be that it would be nice to have some sort of planking zero fence or something blocking that driveway from bike path right next to bike path just thoughts and recommendations you know this is so important

There's no neighbors on that side other than the bike trail and the building on the other side of the bike trail. So I don't have any problem with that.

This is not a two family house, correct?

Well, I don't want to get in there.

Sure.

Was this referred to the county within 500 feet of the white house?

It was not. I did not think it was an action in that sense.

Or does it have to be referred before common council? Is that the thinking? Yeah, I can do that. Well, I'm not a fan of it. I'm not a fan of cutting up a lawn for another driveway when there's already a functioning driveway in the garage. So that's just my opinion.

Mr. Landry, is there a tree that's been taken down? I just heard a question.

Of the city's? No. But she had to take a tree down that was dead. And that is in front of, driveway would end before that tree was taken, where it was. I don't know if you can see the stump is still there because the guy said he was going to take the stump out, never came back.

Stormwater running to the street. So you're going to have to look into that. Make sure that it's designed at the driveway. If you do put a driveway in, then it has to train into the property, not out to the street. So I'm sure that it is. If that is not, I guess the only question is.

Mr. Sherman. Yeah, I kind of agree on it. Go ahead. some reservations to single family home, adding second driveways. So we'll have reservations for that. And one of the big concerns I have is we always ask for recommendations from our city departments. And we've got a pretty strong recommendation from both the superintendent and the city engineer regarding driveways. And the thing is that ultimately the recommendation is if you don't have to do it, don't. And if you do have to do it, then let's make sure that you're maintaining that storm water onsite. So I believe that this would be a difficulty and a huge expense. We talked about forest driveways and the upkeep and the maintenance to those, or having some kind of storm well put on the property. Those things would have to be a month as far as I'm concerned, especially since we're requesting letters from our city departments and they're coming back with strong recommendations on how to get more of those. The city department's really out of hand. Yeah, if you read his letter, that's pretty much about it. They have to do it, you know, they want the stormwater maintained, that's it.

Mr. Gosselin. Agreed. Essentially, I think if you're increasing the impervious surface, replacing grass with asphalt, we want to make sure the stormwater's managed, we're not creating a drainage issue downstream.

Visiting the site, It's a nice lawn. I'm not a fan. I don't know if that's totally for me to say, but of cutting that, another third cut there and put in a driveway because it already has the function of one. I can understand your position on why you want it and like it. It's just a really nice site and another driveway there that's natural. But it's not just my

However, you guys want to learn.

Oh, excuse me. Would someone from the public like to comment on this item? No.

I see it's an unbeatable.

It's this favor. Yeah. I'll make a motion. If no one seconds or doesn't pass it, it is what it is. But I would like to make a motion that the Glens Falls Planning Board hereby submits the filing advisory opinion to the Common Council that the Common Council should look with disfavor on the application of Sarah Bolster, owner of 27 Prospect Street, Tax Map 303.17-1514, for a 14-foot encroachment curb cut to install a second driveway, based upon the discussion that we've had tonight, July 1, 2026. Second that.

Second the roll call. Roll call, Mr. Landry? Yes. Just in favor. Just in favor, yes.

Just in favor.

Mr. Drummond? Yeah. Just in favor. In favor of the motion. Just in favor. Yes. No. Next item on the agenda this evening, Crosman permitted.

Roger.

Levac, owner of 54 Mason Street, tax map number 302.12-16-33, seeks approval for a 16-foot encroachment curb cut to install an additional driveway on Baldwin Avenue. Pursuant to the City of Glens Falls Zoning Code, Chapter 220-13-K and 1, this requires an advisory opinion by the planning boards of the common council.

in that position. So we'd like to add parking space so that we can legally park on the lot.

So if today were the cars and the trailer without the drawing sets, that whole corner would be blacked up? Correct. We'll start with, would anyone from the public like to comment on this?

Mr. Landry? The, I don't know if it makes any difference. The previous application was for . This is for 16. Is there a standard sitting curb cut that is made? This one's two feet. Again, I don't know if it makes any difference.

Well, this is, the way that it's set up there for them is wider because it's from the garage over to that corner. So, I mean, you wouldn't leave like a two foot space there.

It's just part of our curb is.

No, I don't buy it. I understand their issue right now. Actually, they're parking illegally. If you're parking out, you're on. So if they have an inherent issue, they're trying to correct it. Again, I would just go back to trying to follow the recommendation of our Senate city engineer superintendent.

I believe there was also a comment about the utility pole on the corner, whether that was going to impact safety and disability for great people. I don't think the driveway is going to go that far.

I take that back. I think the driveway will go past the post, but not by much.

Pass the utility toll? Can't pass the utility toll.

What do you mean it's from the garage all the way to the other street, right?

No, no, because we have a, you know, a little fence.

Yeah.

So it wouldn't go past the fence.

So you would have like a four or five foot strip of grass there between.

Yeah.

Well, between the centers and our fence.

Yeah.

This utility pool right here in the picture, right?

Yes. So that's close to where the pavement ends.

Yes, the garage is, what, like five feet from the curb? Correct.

So this is a functioning two-car garage?

Yeah.

And each house is required to have two parking spaces. So that's two parking spaces for code. And then, I guess my question is, in your drawing, you say 20 feet. Are you saying 20 feet from the edge of the garage over to the corner there? Yes. So that would be all paved. So that's for two cars to sit there off

The fence used to go up to the street in Baldwin, or closer to Baldwin.

So the 20, I just want to understand, 20 feet would be from the edge of the garage heading in the direction of the corner, and then you're saying it would be 30 feet deep. Correct. And standard apartment space is 20 feet by nine. So my assumption is you're looking for two cars in this.

Well, it's just, we have that fence behind there. So we thought it could be that fence.

Well, the more you pay, the more we start to run into the concerns of permeability. So that's one thing to think about. And the entrance would be off, right? Correct. I guess my question, I don't know the answer to this, is typically there are restrictions about how close a driveway can be to an intersection, but I did not find that. So I just want to make sure that we're taking that into account and my other question would be in a very general way if you have a too far garage with the ability to have two buildings at your house which is really one small cost or by the need for an addition to practices it's a single family correct so those are mine mr morgus i'm still here

And this garage base is a small one. Now, the two cars, how do you get in and out of it? Do you just drive over the curb now? Well, most of it doesn't have much of a curb, so it's... Oh, the curb's one inch, mostly. But part of it is purpose. Oh, okay. So you're using it as a driveway right now, huh? Yeah. Well, we have... Yeah, yeah. Okay. Like I said, I guess if you proceeded and followed all the codes and the regulations, the city engineer and the water department, I'm okay with that. I was trying to do this before I got fined.

Mr. Chair.

Well, I'm confused because I didn't get a chance to go to the site, but I'm looking at what you've submitted in your drawing. There's a driveway in front of the garage. Oh, there's a driveway. It just comes right out on the street.

Yeah, just the garage. So even if you parked your car sideways in front of the garage, it's still inside.

You could open the doors and pull in and out of your garage, right?

Yeah.

Okay. And the other, so if you're adding another 60 square feet of pavement, I don't know what the lot coverage is, or if we're getting anywhere close to having a lot coverage issue.

Yeah, we will have a lot of issues when the driveway.

Oh, well, then that brings up a whole nother issue. So I guess Based on what's been submitted here, without knowing the lot coverage, and if there is issues, and the fact that you already have a two-car garage, again, my position is we should not be tearing up a green space for 60 feet of pavement when you then may go over our code with respect to lot coverage. So we're creating a problem. We're violating our own code. And we should not be doing that. But from the drawing to what's been submitted, without Allison here telling me that, I can't tell. So I can't give favorable advisory opinion.

Just to put the 600 square feet, not 62.

Oh, sorry. Yeah, I'm mad. It's fine. Yeah.

Okay.

That makes it worse. So that's my comment.

If I made it just nine feet, would that change?

Well, I think before we make a recommendation here on this, maybe you do the square footage and see your lot coverage.

I don't know what you mean by that.

So you can only have so much lot coverage on your square footage of your space. Take the total number of square feet in your lot, and you're only allowed to have so much of it covered by building and driveway.

but we have a double lock.

Well, these are the numbers right here. We can make an opinion right now, but as it sounds, it's not going to be in your favor. If you could change your record, what you want here, and go down to nine, and just make sure that you have the right lock of the chief, it might get a favorable.

You're not sure how to do those calculations. I'm sure somebody in the planning office can help you with that.

I'll make a motion to table it to allow the applicant to bring in better drawings, which shows a lot of coverage and better dimensions of exactly what he wants.

So I will make a motion to table then for the applicant to submit additional information as requested.

Second. Aye. All in favor?

Aye.

Next item on the agenda, signboard SB26-007, Eric Uncock, 18 Current Lane, tax not number 303.17-13-8. Cease approval for a mural on a shipping container. All right, sir. Yeah, you got it. Yes, so let's see.

Let's see. The last container on the eastern side of Current Lane crossed from and it's actually going to be on the face and on the antenna as shown in the kind of the mock-up. So Glens Falls Produce is in the background of that picture. A couple of beet roofs, that's the backside of Glens Falls Produce. This is on? Yeah, that one.

Mr. Landry?

I think it's great and done well, but it would improve the area and make it more . I had no thoughts. What do you think?

Mr. Sharma? Just a quick question. I mean, is this just representative, or is this what's going to be the copyright issue?

I mean, there is a copyright issue. Popeye was 1923. if i had the if they had the spinach can that would be a copyright issue because that's later but but this is all okay as far as this public domain so anyone from the public would like to comment on this

I would like to make a motion that the Glens Pulse Planning Board acting as the board sign review hereby grant

sign approval for the project known as Eric Umkoff, 18 Kern Lane, tax map number 303.17-13-8 for the mural on the shipping container as presented at the meeting of July 1, 2026. All in favor?

Aye. All right, thank you. And I think I'm the next one on the list too.

Architecture review AR25-014-amended, Leonard and Cooper and Lawrence, owners of 188 Maple Street, tax map numbers 303.17-13-17, seek amended architecture review approval for the construction of a performance stage, original approval December 2025.

yeah so the original approval because if you remember there was like five pieces of that package there and uh i didn't realize i should have looked through the drawings i didn't realize that it was drawn as an open structure it was always intended to be a closed structure but like we were like in the whole process here with zoning board of appeals and then here and it's just like okay well when we get closer to actually uh wanting to start construction i'll go back through and get approvals for a closed structure so basically um there's uh would be two shipping containers one on either side that are going to be the sides of the structure Other than that, it's still going to look like we're going to be using the same green tin that the farmers market pavilion was for the roof and recycling some of those trusses as well. And the only difference is it's going to have a wall in the back facing The existing block building at 188 Maple, so you won't see that from anywhere. The front of it will be that's facing the pavilion that was put up. It's basically going to be like a 18 foot wide by 10 foot tall steel coiled door.

Do we have no drawings in here?

I submitted drawings.

Yeah, it's just a roll-up door.

It rolls up into a coil. Is it solid? No, it's going to be a solid door. Because, you know, eventually there'll be, you know, house light and house VA and all that stuff in there. And, you know, it wants to be kept out of the weather between uses.

So I have the front elevation. I don't see the rear elevation. Am I missing one? I have the front elevation, but I don't have the rear elevation.

Oh yeah, you have pop side.

Is the back just going to be filled in, or is that going to have a roll-up of oil doors?

No, no, no, no. If you look at the main floor plan, the upper left

Thank you.

What's that going to be made of? Just probably dimensional lumber and sand.

From that to the other?

Yep.

Wait, what are you plowing it with?

It's going to be, so the sides are going to be shipping containers. The rear, which is basically like from me to that You're going to end up putting murals on these? Probably on the sides. There's not really enough room on the back to do anything. Because it's kind of like, it's going to be almost like an alley there.

And then in the gable roof on the front, we've got the door, is that going to be siding?

Yeah, yeah. He's got it drawn as some sort of a... We'll call it a youth movement. Well, it's not going to be, it's not going to be vinyl. It'll be something better than vinyl. It'll be wood or cement.

Did we approve colors last time? I can't remember. Did we approve colors last time?

I don't see any colors. The roof is green. The roof is green. The car is green.

That's all of us.

All these, is the roll-up core, is that going to be green too? Or is that going to be silver? Is that going to be gray?

Uh... um you know probably eventually it'll have a mural on it i mean i can probably order it whatever color i want you know it's not going to be you know orange or purple or anything you know it'll probably be well that's fine and i can see like the way the rest of this project is going to end up with murals on it

I just want to know what floor is going to be in the point and the back wall.

Is it all going to be like that green? If you want to say green, we'll do it green. It's not, you know, it's going to be that way for however long it takes me to put something else on top of it. But yeah, if you want to start with that.

I think, you know, it's a little construction and everything. The colors and everything over there, it's like that for everything.

And mirrors. For me, it's less of a color too. It's less of a color too, it's just the architectural detailing is really changed. Every performance phase, it's not like it'll only dramatically, constantly, simple architectural changes to like make it pop a little more. Again, other than just sort of collaborative sidings, like, you know, it's like the most If there's a performance stage, you kind of want to bring some pops with it.

Yeah. Is this for musicians who come on, like, Thursday nights?

It's for that, and it's for, I've been talking to a couple of independent filmmakers, too, about

I think usually containers on our side are sort of boxed in and then have that double storage and maybe for a creative idea, considering that we've already got those wooden things.

Right.

So, I mean, one container would be retrofitted into storage, one would be retrofitted into a green room.

Can you elaborate on that? I mean, green room to me suggests like a performance restroom. Yeah, it's...

I mean, like, he doesn't put it out. It's an air condition space, you know, that the, you know, performers can use. It's like either a changing room or something to just hang out in between, you know, when they take a break.

So there will be power.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Well, yeah. So, right. The stage obviously is going to have power, too.

Mr. Landy, could you talk about us?

Okay. The only thing I had was a setback strike, because I see you increased it from the original.

So the setback off the rear lot line, which is what we got CVA approval for, was the 13 foot one. So we're going to maintain that. It's going to push that building a little closer because the rear lot line is at an angle. As we, you know, we're allowed because originally the building was here and now we're here. But we're going to maintain all the setbacks. Okay. So even though the building can be made bigger, the setbacks should be maintained? Yeah, right. And then the main one is that the one we got from CBA, the 13-4-1. That's another question I had.

So the main structure on this lot is a single story CMU building.

So is this an accessory structure to that? Would future power for this building come off of that, or is it going to be?

I would imagine, let me take, yeah, so there's a center block building in front of this that you're going to actually see from the screen. So this is an accessory structure? Yeah, we would take power off of that building.

And then it looks like the stage area between the shipping containers is on a slab. Yes, on a slab.

What's that? The containers are not on a slab? It's whatever Ethan tells me to do as far as that goes. I don't know whether I've seen it where, you know, the sink is on a tube in the four corners. You put a plate on the you know, sink a plate with rebar into the sauna tube and then weld it.

Right now, it looks like it's just a slab between them.

I'm just... For your record, it's Ethan Hall, principal of the Rusinski Hall of Architecture. So yeah, what we had talked about was there's going to have to be a structural crushed stone base underneath the slab anyway. So we'll make that same crushed stone base that the containers can sit on. And those are pretty much, once that's leveled out and compacted, it's not going to go anywhere. They're not going to move around.

The wind certainly isn't going to blow away. And is there any issue with sound? Is there any issue? I guess, you know, there's the performance stage.

Other than the city's noise.

You can have the bands much shorter amount of time. I mean, theoretically, most of it's going to be directed back into my property. So it's not like we're pushing it out towards Maple Street. We're pushing it in towards Rock Hill and the Shirt Factory. And the pavilion is fairly close to this. So it's not like we need a mega volume to get where we need to get with it. Thanks. I guess so. Eric, I'm a little bit confused.

One is, you're going to put speakers inside the two metal containers?

They're not going to be inside the containers. They're going to be inside the space between the containers. There's going to be some sort of insulation on that surface that's adjacent to the stage so that we just don't have a echo chamber in there.

Yeah, that's my concern is that I would want to turn up a loud amp inside there.

The other thing is that I think it's a great idea, but I'm kind of unclear on the colors. I think the details are a little bit vague here. I personally am in favor of the project, What is it going to look like? Well, I guess really the details are maybe just color. And, you know, I don't get to choose the, you know, unfortunately, I don't get to choose what color the containers come as. They come as whatever color they happen to pick that day. So, I mean, typically what we've been doing is just... Well, they could be painted. Oh, yeah. No, that's what we've been doing. for when we paint the whatever, you know, we want to paint them forest green, we'll paint the whole thing forest green, want to paint those red.

I'd like to see cut sheets and materials and if there's going to be lighting up in the peaks or anything. I think it's missing. Again, I'm not opposed to the project. I just think if we're amending and we're doing architectural review, we're supposed to know what that is.

Mr. Chairman, I don't believe seriously. What about, this is a metal, these boxes with one, I just see one door here for exit and enter on the same, you know, local thing.

If it's using the stage, I don't think that's fair.

No, no, no, for the container. They're using it for a green room and people are going in there. There's 20.

So there's a, an exit door in the rear and there's an exit door in the rear to the outside and then in the room outside right right if you look at the top left look at the top left okay all right yep see that okay yeah okay and that's something to take up with even i don't you know what i'm saying and say there needs to be another door with another door and i don't care okay yeah it's really important to address

the only comment from the fire department is that it will leave the discussion i'd like to see some colors and what it's really going to look like um you're going to buy the door for it you're going to know what it's going to be as you know are you going to and i can see you're doing putting the murals on there um so it would just be the green roof or whatever the murals on but um We, everybody else in Virginia here, we have to approve something.

That's fine. We'll get Ethan to get on his colored pencils and make a color.

All right. So we want to table this? Yeah.

Okay.

So I would make a motion that we table the architectural review application of Eric on top or Leonard and Cooper Street. who is seeking amendments to the architectural approval that was given in December of 25, so that the applicant can produce additional documents and information as requested by the board.

Second.

All in favor? So when we approved these containers, they were being used as signs, and one of the provisions was like you weren't supposed to be using anything inside, but now we have shipping containers, which are going to be used for storage in the green room. So does that bring up additional, I guess that's the code office.

So we just tabled this.

So now we're going to have, you might want to check with the code office and find out, because again, they were approved as signs. Not to be used for anything else inside.

Yeah, yeah, this is more balls in a room and people occupying it.

All the other ones that we approved like the other one we just approved this whole site there there's they're supposed to be locked and dumping inside and they're doing science.

So now we're in a different now there's now they're an accessory structure and it now is subject to all kinds of other cool things that.

The applicant needs to know when he needs to meet those, right? Okay. Site plan review, SB 24-006, 91-93 Warren Street, LLC, owner of 91-93 Warren Street. Tax amount number 310.5-3-8, sees an amended site plan review approval to include an outside dining patio fronting Warren Street. That original application, August 24th. How are you, sir? Good, how are you?

I'm Matt Hummel. I'm the owner of 9193 Warren Street. I'm looking to make an improvement to the front of the building for outdoor dining space for the restaurants currently under construction to transform into a restaurant. This will be the final phase of the project. I did go through the zoning order approval for the minimum setback requirement for the area. So we're going to go there. I'll just take some time to review it. Let me know what your thoughts are.

Would anyone from the public like to comment on this application? You're under construction now.

Yeah, so we're under construction. The building is going to have to be established because the timeline's kind of stretched out. They've got the drywall. It's gone up inside. Pretty much looking to paint the fixtures up and, you know, to probably see all of them when I get more time and money to allocate to it.

Okay, what do we have here roughly lined? of the building to the property line 9-6.

So let me work with the 3-H setback. So initially it's going to be a zero, which is in line. It's going to be up to the line. Yep. And on the site line, there's planters. Those are repeatable. That would be going to the first apartment.

And yeah, just one planter from the city that's on the right. She's throwing weeds right now.

I'd like to see a degree there or something. That'd be nice.

It's just laying around there. Just want to clarify that it's.

Yeah, there's something else sitting on grinded wall stone or something. Nina?

I'm actually seeing this for the first time. So the only difference, everything that we approved before, you're proceeding with it, you're doing it all, and this is an add-on to it. As long as we're meeting the requirements, which I'm not with,

Yeah, it's going to have railings, black or wrought iron railings on an elevated concrete form throughout. So it's going to kind of like box it in a little bit. There's an existing handicap ramp there and that's going to be reworked. So that's part of the project. So yeah, I'm excited about it. I think it's going to look great. yeah be very attractive building when it's all set up outdoor dining space and tables and all that really excited about it mr landry um i really have no questions i think just gonna say

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman?

Yeah, the only thing I had was the larger planters with the children trees in them. Yes. It's kind of deceiving because it actually, in the picture, it says four by four planters. They measure three by three, not four by four. So you're going to drop it down to, less than two feet of sidewalk space with a four by four planter in those locations. 88 is three feet. So a three by three planter really makes it. The other ones, the 10 foot by 16 foot planters better properly and they're fine. But those other four are three. It says 4x4, but actually on the plan you gave, they're actually 3x3 when that's out.

Understood. From what I understand about the plans, there's a separate permitting process that has to go through the city to have built on city property.

But we're looking at the enforcement of the sidewalk. That would be our concern. So right now, if you're proposing 4x4 plans, client for the sidewalk. Yeah.

So that wasn't actually, that's not something, so I think that would be a separate assumption that this video.

Okay. What is the rent?

Right, but we can't, for the rent, so we can't say yes, we approve it based on the drawings. We know it's not an APA.

It's a violation. We have a good rent on sidewalks. I don't want to ask questions.

You don't have that dimension from that edge of the sidewalk.

Well, I measured it all out based on the scale. It's 5 feet from the actual area where it's constructing to the actual edge of the sidewalk, not the curb side. That one was 5 feet.

on the paperwork.

What's that?

From what I understand, it's a typo. It should be a three by three, not a four by four, because if it measures out three by three, we're okay with that. Just make it a little smaller? Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, we can make it a three by three, and I can change that, indicate three by three. That works with all things considered with the handicap. Yeah, you end up with just over three feet, basically.

Okay.

Good. All right. Did I understand correctly, so the material that is concrete?

So I had the engineer, we had conversations regarding that. He told me that we could go either way, it could be wood or concrete. I'd prefer it to be concrete with either sand concrete or a concrete wall around the perimeter for the railings and then possibly inlay neighbors.

the boxes are installed in the building for that and they're basically

Sure.

So the deck is about 255 square feet, is that right? The deck is going to exceed, I'm looking at your drawing, about 42 feet.

I think he had indicated 47 people on there. I was just doing a quick math question here.

I think that's what it says on the application. I might be reading it wrong. 254.38 square feet total area of closed dining space, meaning the outdoor dining space. No, I just don't want to approve anything that's not going to be compliant with the ADA. So, those modifications, I don't . Okay. .

So, I'm not sure. They wouldn't have built it. It's the planners that are sticking out. Yeah. But, again, they still .

Yeah.

So the line, we did have measurements from the distance, the distance to the curb and the property line is about 10 and a half feet. So the distance from where the fire hydrant is to the property line is about 13 feet. You have a lot of space there.

Yeah, there's not much you should do.

Oh.

Just wear it up. Right, but the edge is exposed to that. So there's not 13 feet there.

It's all there. so i'm basically looking i'll just upgrade it upgrade it kind of organize it a little bit defunding the area it'll be new mr morgan how are you how are you reworking the ramp so yeah there's um a an existing drawing and then a proposed drawing uh basically the ramp is going to come currently the ramp is against the building the use of space for the building, because you're basically occupying almost all the front of the building for this ramp. So we're pulling the ramp away from the building, and we're turning the ramp so that it's actually directed towards the circle, towards what's called the circle there. And so it's going to be actually shorter, the incline of the ramp, because the grade is higher up all the railings in the current area. Just a second, how old is that now? You know, I talked to the previous owner and he says it's one of the oldest buildings in Glens Falls. I'm not sure, you know, how... I'm just curious. Yeah, I mean, I was trying to find that out myself too, but he couldn't put the exact date on it. I asked him what was there, he said it's like a pub or something like that. I don't, I mean, it was kind of the same kind of theme, but he couldn't really, he didn't really clarify exactly what. So the renovations in an old building like that, it would be expensive, right, with the wiring and all that. There was a lot of work that was done prior to it. Yeah, it was, yeah. Back in like 2009, I don't know how many months ago, but then yes, it did need more structural work. Inside, there was a lot that was done, but it was kind of a blank palette. on 100%, but the inside space, yeah, the electrical had been upgraded. They have a nice panel there, but nothing was really brought into it. But yeah, it was all there and it's ready to be.

I'm okay with it as long as you're making a good idea to buy in the adjustments if they're needed at all.

It was renovated years ago and then nothing ever went in there. So it's so good that you're in there.

Yeah. And in spring, if you're going to do the restaurant there and the drawings look great, gone over the compliance issues. And again, when it comes to the encroachments, I'll have to come back for . I like the drawing. I think it looks great. And bringing that, spreading that out of the city, that mask from just one street out with . So I think it's a good thing. Ms. Young, do you? There's no speaker, right?

So I would like to make a motion that the Glendale Planning Board, acting as the Board of Architectural Review, hereby grant amendment to the prior architectural review and site plan review approval to 91-93 Warren Street, LLC, owner of 91-93 Warren Street, tax map 310.5-3-8, to permit the 27 foot six inch by nine foot three inch outside dining patio space on warren street ensuring that there is full compliance with the ada regarding sidewalk clearance and the rain as presented at today's meeting july 1 2020. all right good luck thank you

Thank you. Next one. Site plan view, SB 26-024 of Celia Bora, corner of 1900 Street, tax map number 302.16-15-14, seeks a certificate of preexisting non-performing to operate on the home state short-term rental unit in a residential district. Thank you.

Yeah, this is, so I know the, As you know, with the implementation of the new short-term rental law, all existing short-term rentals were given actually until February to apply for the certificate of non-conformity. The applicant had been in contact with Devin prior to that date and then never filled out or never sent in the rest of the materials. So the board can decide whether or not they want to entertain this. request in general given that you know the date has expired for that request but um the applicant was unable to make it tonight and so i requested that in the table are they operating it now as a short-term rental her discussion with devon i think she is it wasn't was it a long-term mental crisis or was it always a short-term They were operating, they had a certificate, but with our law, they're no longer after 2028 are no longer able to. We approved it will be under the sunset clause. So are they they're currently in violation? Yes.

I mean, they violated the law.

So this is one of the cases that they were given to that February 4th date. She did just have discussions with them and then didn't follow through. So I think it would be, yeah, to support it, I guess.

You were trying to resolve their violations because they don't have a problem.

we wouldn't be committing a violation.

Right now?

Or at any time.

Well, we've approved a couple of them with the sunset clause.

Yeah, but the paperwork was in and everything. Oh, yeah. What I'm saying is the paperwork's not in. I don't have the word. Davis is one month. Somebody that's violated the law.

So I was unclear. So her short-term rental permit request was in, but she did not have the site plan review.

yeah all right well we'll table this only come on to the table left for the appearance of the applicant second all favor

Site Plan Review, SB 26-025, Architecture Review, AR 26-005, Haywood Ventures, LLC, owner of 65 Elm Street, Jackson Ave, number 302.20-21-12C. Site Plan Review and Architecture Review for the renovation of an existing accessory structure to establish an additional dwelling unit on site

an already existing multi-family residential structure hi there i'm nicole herwig and this is one project um there's an existing uh existing building on the property and we are seeking to convert it into a division um until we have two bathroom dwelling um there's already um 13 parking spaces on them on the property the property of the home of the property was originally a doctor's office and this is a large was a garage that was part of that whole property so behind that behind the building there's nine parking spots and in the front of the building there's four parking slots currently the um four uh four units in the main house occupy the four front parking spots. But there's, since it was the doctor's office, I knew I wanted to go around to access the nine spots in the back as well.

Okay. Would anyone from the public like to comment on this item? Mr. Landry.

This is the former office of

I mean, that being a garage, you've got to bring in plumbing and electrical, and you've got to basically turn it into a pump.

And then the question I had was, which is the parking? I know there's parking that kind of goes perpendicular to the house that's there. And then there's a digital parking in front of the garage. Behind the garage. Behind the garage. Yes.

There's space in front of the garage.

Right.

To access the back.

Right. All right.

So it would be no additional like black copy or maybe just give you the lines, the existing part?

There's already existing lines as well.

Right. Right. Okay. So any conditions as far as black copy or previous service is going to be grandfathered in because it's existing?

They're there. Okay.

So other than that, I think it'd be a good use of. It's a good addition. Yeah. Which is why we want to do this. Okay. Mr. Trayvon.

Yeah, I'm familiar with it. Now, if you reach out to the water and sewer department, bring in lines to the street. So I assume you're going to bring water and sewer lines in.

So we were looking at our options to tie into the main house as well. We have had IBS came in and looked at the property where it's high in the street or the option of tying into the main house.

Maybe you talk to the city engineer about this. Yeah.

He was.

He was. OK. I'm just saying with the water. water lines are coming in where the sewer line is going out. The capacity of the house versus that, adding apartments. I mean, the cleanest way would be, of course, to bring water and sewer lines in from the city directly because you do have issues as far as the old infrastructure in that home. I'm sure those lines are probably old gas lines.

I think they are newer. Yeah, they're newer lines.

Okay, that's the only thing I would say. We don't know where the lines are. Yeah, make sure you reach out and handle those issues properly.

No questions on that one.

The garage, it's one two-bedroom, one two-bedroom. One garage, one two-bedroom.

One unit, yes. Okay.

And the house currently has how many?

Four. Four.

Okay. And you have to have enough space. And there's no other changes other than you're converting the garage into a

two-bedroom, two-bath, yeah, two-bedroom, two-bath dwelling.

I have no other.

Smokes? No, we don't have that, as long as you meet the code and the fire requirements hereby.

Nina?

Yeah, I mean, architecturally, you're talking out on the shed bombers, and maybe that height, it looks like it's sort of in keeping with the there and not raising the bridge line, there's a lot of coverage. Since I get from the drawings is intended to look like a smaller version of me. I don't have any other concerns.

What's that? I asked you about the .

Thank you. So I gather people like it, so.

Yeah, just to go along with that motion, just to comply, you got it.

All right, so I would like to make a motion. I'll do two separate motions, because one is for site plan. Thank you. I would like to make a motion that the Glens Falls Planning Board, acting as the board of site plan review, hereby grant site plan approval, SP 26-25, Capefield Ventures, LLC, owner of 65 Elm Street, tax map number 302.20-21-12, for the renovation of the existing garage to establish an additional two bedroom, two bath, yes, thank you, dwelling unit in the already existing multifamily residential. Subject to compliance with all code requirements and as presented of the meeting of today, July 1, 2026. Can I get a second?

Okay. All in favor?

Aye. Thank you, now.

That'd be a nice solution. Perfect. Walking down time. Yes, thank you. Good luck.

Now, I got to . I would like to make a motion that Glens Falls Planning Board, acting as the board of architectural review, hereby grant architectural review for the renovation of the existing accessory structure to establish an additional dwelling unit located at 65 Elm Street, tax map number 302.2-21-12, on Hayfield Ventures LLC owner as presented at the meeting of today, July 1, 2026. Second. Second.

All in favor? Aye. Thank goodness. Second plan review, SB 26-026, Adonis ZLL, owner of 144 Glen Street, tax map number 309.28, excuse me, 309.28-4-8C Safeland, reviewed to establish five dwelling units on the upper floors of the Big Sheets Building.

Good evening. For your records, Ethan Hall, principal of the Rosinski Hall Architecture, here tonight representing Adonis CLC. This is 144th Glen. We were here before you for the previous owner and with the mural that went up on the wall. building and they subsequently sold the building and now the new owner is looking to make additional apartments in the upper floors. The owner who had previously gotten the apartments approved up there, it was their intent to live in it. They wound up getting a better place. downtown and decided to sell this. They didn't like the being right downtown. So these owners are looking to do this downtown. The drawings that you have represent what was originally approved and what is being proposed. So I can walk you through the drawings if you'd like. The drawing EX0 is the existing main floor plan. This is the dominoes that's downstairs. There are no modifications being made at this time at this level. It does have an exterior entry that comes in from the Hudson Street side of the building to the main staircase. The drawing, DX1, it's the half story. So when you come into this building, you come up. This used to be the dance studio to reference where everything was. apartment. That apartment stayed basically as it is. We're just renovating and changing things around inside the apartment. From there, you go, you continue up the stair to what is on eX2. This shows the layout that we had gotten approved previously. And this was going to be the main living area. side that has the mural on it now. And then drawing EX5 shows all of the front, rear, and opposite side elevations of the building. There is some building sections here to show you what's going on as far half-story and what that apartment will wind up being. Again, this will be basically a studio. This was a one-bedroom apartment, one-bath apartment. No real modifications structurally done to this. All of this is really just interior modifications. So the only reason we're here is for site layout. The upper, the second floor plan, it shows the layout for the new the new firing staircase and the two apartments that will be there. The front apartment that faces out on the Centennial Circle will basically be a studio apartment. And then the one in the back also is just a studio apartment. And then the third floor again shows top of That's basically the extent of the modifications. Like I said, everything is interior to the building. There's no exterior modifications that are being made, other than there is an existing fire escape that gets from the second floor to the ground. The original portion of the building had a fire escape. It definitely was taken off and that obviously back on.

Speaking of the drives, the EAS drives and those drives, do they represent what was Or no changes. So they show all the posterior changes shown in the EF times with the previous.

Those were all done with the exception of the addition of the stair of the tire on the back of the home.

Is that the room you said?

The very same spot? It is the second floor down. So the second floor, the half story, and down to grade, but for whatever reason, some of the second floor was taken off, and that was done actually when the dance studio was in there.

What we did in the Congress, is there anybody from the public that would like to comment on this?

Okay. This is just a plan review, not an architectural review. Just an architectural question.

There's no changes to the exterior.

The only thing I saw here is it said on one drawing, it was saying the spindles or something were going to be changed to wire or something.

Did I see that right? That was in the EX drawing. They were originally going to take all those spindles off on the valve. Because that would be really thin. No, and the new owners are not. It's going to sound big. You know what I mean? Correct. Yeah. And that was part of the original. No question.

So there's a structure sort of lower center. Is that an elevator shaft? It's an elevator shaft. Okay.

So it was a freight elevator that was in the building originally.

So does that remain blocked off? So it looks like it opens up

The elevator is actually in the basement, but it's welded off. Okay.

And then, just related to the fire escape, on the half floor, it looks like, well, on all floors, it looks like there's a fridge blocking half the window, which, I guess that's really for the upper floors, but on the half story, it's partly blocking the window that would be the fire escape.

That actually is the next side over. So that's the way that fire escape works in the back, because it goes out. There is a window that's there that doesn't show up on this drawing. So that has to be added back in. And then it goes from there down. It's a formation that we're not blocking.

That's it. Mr. Schroeder?

I'm sure you probably already talked to Aaron about the park escape. Yes. So those are specific requirements that add them back to the building. Yes. But anything new has to be covered, which I know they frown upon ladders, so I'm not sure how you're going to do that. But he worked with you through that. Yes. The only issue, other issue I have is adding the apartment on the third, the second apartment on the third floor. You've eliminated the psychopathic egress, so that has the balcony on the front and that doesn't have egress off of the balcony.

So what we're going to wind up doing is the building's fully sprinkled all the way down and we're going to put a barrier of refuge at the top.

I would have to look into the code for barrier of refuge. I'm not sure that's going to make the cut for barrier of refuge. And the biggest issue we have is you can do it, but it seems like there are ways to do it. Common pathway and guest travel has to be, I think it's 125. Yes. And you're going to exceed 125 from where you are. It's all the way, it's all the way, because you have no other choice. It goes all the way to the common way. So it's going to go all the way out to the side way. So I don't think you're going to make it. The reason it probably could be approved prior is because you had a fire escape originally, but now you don't in the front apartment. eliminated that by making it two apartments. So there's going to be some code issues, I believe, you're going to have.

Yeah, I've already talked to Eric about it, and I know we have some things to work through. Yeah, because area rusting is not required. Intercom systems, they're required.

It's not as easy as just area rusting. No, it has to have the right line. And I'm not even sure about that type of structure and that type of guidance.

With the sustained building codes, there is some leeway to that.

But like I said, that's the only drive. I think that second apartment on the third floor kind of threw a wrench into the plan before. That's the only show I saw.

Yeah, and that's why we've got that one door right at the top of the stairs. I do have to check the numbers going down the stair around the corner back there.

Yeah, I kind of did some calculations. This is from the furthest point in the apartment. So we should probably move the balcony. Okay, that's all I have.

Mr. Landry? Jamie said a lot of what I was going to do, that fire skating on the bank. The one that you showed off on the second floor, when we brought it off the building. Yeah. And that type of ladder was a straight down ladder or something? That's what I got over there.

OK. Like Jamie said, it's they don't like them. Again, the building code does give us some leeway code-wise to work with that. I got to work through over there. We may have to wind up with one of the stairs that as you get on it, it tips.

Instead of having the ladder there?

Yeah.

OK. Mr. Williams, are you good? Other than that, I think it looked good. A lot of information. without parking?

Well, we're in the CCD.

Does it have, that's, we're going to ask this, and if you are, does it have some parking behind it?

So there are a couple of spaces that are in the lot right behind it. You do have to, they co-use those with the folks from Domino's. So when, obviously, when Domino's is operational, they're using those for their delivery cars and stuff like that. But there is, I think there should be spaces back there.

And that's been an issue for 50 years. Yeah. You just don't want to park a lot behind it. Right. So you can tell water errors.

They do have, whether if a tenant gets there first, or a guy has to park on the street.

Or they do have to, you know, they do have to park the garage right off the mark.

I have no other questions, thank you.

No, no more questions. All the stuff that I have written down, thank you. And the whole building is sprinkled. So the egress thing is the thing. Parking, it is what it is for that downtown area. I thought there was a few spots with that building, but there isn't. It's how we build things on 50 years ago. I love living downtown. If we can get some more of these spaces, renovate that are safely done. I really don't have any issues with it. There's some hurdles you need to go over, which as you know, it seems like everyone here is pretty happy with the plan as long as it complies with all the codes. Yeah, we know we've got some code stuff to work through.

I just want to comment. When we make a resolution, because Those aluminum railings were shown in what was previously approved. Can we state that the existing historic rail station is on the side?

What's that? Oh, put it in the thing that that's on.

Yeah. Simply because those aluminum railings were previously approved.

So I want to make sure that.

It doesn't get messed with?

But that's somebody doesn't refer back to them to say this is what was approved and you just amend that by saying you can leave the existing historic rails.

Yes, absolutely. Okay.

This is a multi-use building. It doesn't necessarily fit any of the types of categories. So we're going to have you go short form for the seeker. That's three questions. We have to give you a consensus answer. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with the adopted land use plan or zoning regulations?

No.

Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or impensity of use of land? No. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? No. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of media? City Council Chambers. City Council Chambers. City Council Chambers. City Council Chambers. City Council Chambers. City Council Chambers. Will the proposed action impact existing public and private water supply or wastewater treatment utilities?

No.

Will the proposed action impair the character, quality, and importance, historic, archaeological, architectural, or aesthetic resources?

No.

Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources? No. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding, or drainage? No. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? No. So they don't argue with the motion for negative declaration.

I made a motion for a negative declaration. Okay.

Well, I think we need to accept lead agency status. So how about I amend the motion to be plans for planning board hereby accepts lead agency status. for Adonis ZLLC, owner of 144 Glen Street, tax map number 309.28-4-8. Did I say located at 154? I did, go ahead. The board has determined the action to be an unlisted action, has reviewed the short form environmental assessment form, and upon the documentation of the subject, issues a negative declaration. Need a second.

All in favor? Aye. The water roof trunks separated out and they put that, do you know where that goes on? This is a bitch roof. It is?

This is from Glen Street to the back of the building. And it just comes down? Yes. It's basically flat.

I mean, it does have a small gutter on the backside, but there's no, it doesn't go into the city system right now.

Okay. That's what took out the old,

All right, so I would like to make a motion that the Glens Falls Planning Board, acting as the board of site plan review, hereby grant approval, site plan approval, for the project identified as Adonis C, LLC, owner of 144 Glen Street, tax map number 309-28-4-8, to establish five dwelling units on the upper floors of the mixed-use building subject to the following conditions, that there is full compliance with the fire department to address egress from the third floor and the fire escape. Also, again, working with building and codes to address the proper egress and the fire escape, and also that the existing historic railings are not being changed on the building.

Second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Thank you very much. Recommend, next item on the agenda, written recommendation from the planning board request for subdivision SPDN 26-001 and lot line adjustment LLA 26-001. So all land holdings LLC owner of multiple parcels on Lawrence Street extension tax map number 303.18-2-10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, seeks subdivision and lot-line adjustment approval to establish 12 buildable lots. The proposed lots require area variances from the CBA, minimum lot area requirements. Chapter 220 of the City Code, the Zoning Board of Appeals has requested recommendation from the Planning Board prior to consideration of the variance request.

Good evening. Again, for your reference, Ethan Hall, principal of the Brzezinski Hall Architecture. Here tonight with Tom Senter from Hutchins Engineering representing Cerrone Land Holdings. The property is owned by Cerrone Land Holdings right now. The drawing that I have on the top here is the existing site survey that was done by What is it? Baker Street, which is an extension of Florence Street, does not come directly off from the T intersection. It's an offset similar to the gas machine. There are a total of seven blocks back there right now. to do the lot line adjustment and subdivisions to create a total of 12 lots. You can see on drawing C1, I'm sorry, C0 of our set. This again shows the existing, it shows the sizes of the lots and the size of the front-district lot. The last drawing, the C1 drawing, And twirly with Alice, she asked me to put these in red. So you can see on the red lines represent what's there now. And our lines show the total of 12 lots. I did give you a chart that is the last drawing that you've got that shows size of the total lots that are being done and variances that will be requested.

Yes. No, 65 is the required lot.

And the summary chart that I gave you shows what each lot will be. The thing that I wanted to point out about the surrounding lot within that neighborhood, All of the lots we're creating are of equal or greater size than the ones that are right along Catherine Street and some of the ones that are along Platt Street as well. Tom is working with the city engineer on the new entry drive. It will be a city street. It will be built to city standards. We have to bring in water, sewer, electric, gas, the whole nine yards. So all of that, storm water, everything's going to be sent into that site. It is our intent to bring in a hammerhead at the end to turn around. We're going to put 12 single family houses back there. The houses will be basically two stories. All the bedrooms will be on the upper floors. So this will be geared more towards families, which is what the square footage of the house would be. This is just a subdivision. We will come back with that. We're still kind of working out the details of that. And when we get our lot coverages, the way we've worked this out, our lot coverages will meet what the requirement is, even though the lots are going to be substandard size lots. So our lot coverages are going to be in 65 to 70% range and will meet all those requirements. So we're not, the only relief that we're seeking from variance, from the variance board is for lot size and frontage.

So between these two lots here, with the normal street at 60 feet, you've got what, 47?

Yeah.

That's just, that's the thing between those lots that are already there, that's what's left.

Correct. So can you just put it right, you just said 12, seeing the family out of the scene. On the EAM part one description, it says six, two-plus compound.

That was the original one that got submitted, and I caught that with Allison. The original submission that we had was for six duplexes with zero lot lines, but your zoning, and this was in front of this board for the wording and the zoning says it has to be de-patched residences. Whereas the two places would have been a zero lot line, would have lost a lot more green space, but we can't have detached homes. We can't have detached a zero lot line house. So maybe we split them apart. So it's going to be the same number of bedrooms, the same number of everything else.

Mr. Landry.

You were saying the logic of it's only seven feet wide. There's a lot of people, I believe, that are here for this. So if we could use our microphones and make it so that we can see that as well as the board.

Just turn it right around.

So the common lots on this side are 41 feet, the lots on this side are 40.7 feet. So they're basically 41 feet apart.

Okay, so with setbacks, you're going to have about a 20-foot wide house?

No, no, no. It's the setbacks on both sides.

Eight feet.

Setbacks are required. Eight feet. Eight feet. So a 40-foot lot might be 16 or 32, and the houses are just inside that. So they're about 30-foot wide houses. Okay. Two-story. garage in the front.

OK. And you're saying all the utilities, all that has to be brought in? Correct. And that's a paper street as of now?

It's a paper street as of now. It will be developed as a city street. It'll be a dedicated city street where the engineering is.

So this is listed in the garage you see. That's a paper street that goes in there even though it doesn't line up with that long street extension? Yes.

And it's shown on the survey. The survey shows that as Lawrence Street extension.

And well, they never did anything. It was never built. There's several areas around. There's no outlander. They just had it.

It's just laid out on the grid that way. I'm sorry. Okay.

And I guess other than the fact, I mean, I know the city engineers got access in and out, that type of thing. Is there any type of like vegetation or buffer between the houses that are going to be adjacent to this? Or is it all wide open?

No, it's all kind of swamp alder and brush in there right now. And we will clear enough of it that we can do the grading and drainage for it. But we will leave, we will show on the back sides. Also, the rear setback, where the rear setback is, is where we stop there.

So there is a buffer to the existing aircraft. Yeah. OK. OK. Other than that, I have no questions.

Hammerheads are my least favorite. They are. They're not. They're not functional for our apparatus. They're terrible for plowing. The issue, we do have hammerheads, a couple of them in the city that have been allowed recently. The difference between those hammerheads and this one is one side of the hammerhead allows for plowing. You have driveway entrances on both sides of the hammerhead, which eliminates the ability to remove stuff. You also have, it looks like less than five feet from the edge of your road to the As far as plowing snow, about 378 foot roadway to the end of the Hammerhead, I see issues. So I don't know if Dr. Rutsch reached out to the DBW regarding that. And that's just the DBW side of that.

Aren't you just going to push it onto the city property once it's dedicated to the city?

Yes, once we get further along in the review, we're thinking about doing something similar to what is at the end of Robertson, where they have a gate that could be locked normally, which city key is unlocked, and they can push, you know, straight out through. But we're still working on some other details with that. But right now, that's part of the plan.

You know, those are the biggest items that, you know, you're dealing with.

issues, attorney crime issues. And it's pretty neat, it's 370 feet, so it's a pretty good track. It's not, you know, 150 feet is the goal. So anything over 150, you're well over double that. So that's my biggest concern as far as the construction part. As far as the lots, You know, I understand you're trying to maximize profit. And you're saying it's a character with the rest of the buildings, but everything was a character. You used to have 40-foot lots, then they went to 50-foot lots, then they went to 65-foot lots. So they did that for a reason, and everything was a character. At that point in time, people bought a double lot, or, you know, a double lot to build one house. So I understand what you're trying to do. I don't know what's the right thing to do, but I understand what you're trying to do.

So here in Garrett, it says bedrock is assumed to be relatively close to the surface. Will any blasting be a required construction? No, these buildings are going to have basements in them.

They're going to be cross walls with slab. What about further utility and water and sewer lines? Yeah, we don't know. The engineering hasn't progressed that far.

uh have you thought through how you're addressing obviously small water management that's the best part of this depending on the number of lots we'll set up how we address storm water uh on the last we do know we're going to have to bring in fill the lot itself sits several feet lower than the road so we're going to have to bring everything up so that's going to give us added area and then based on the number of lots the size of the

And I guess just in addition to the fire trucks and snow blow issue, garbage trucks going down that road, having to turn around as well. It's a tight little space. Will there be pedestrian access at the end of this road to Eastfield, to the city property? More than likely, yes.

There's a trail that goes through there that's been used since I was in high school. There's a trail that's there that's been used since I was in high school to get from the classroom to the field. It's pretty well overgrown, but there's no fence, there's nothing along that line. Which of course, as part of this project, working with the city, city engineer, those are some of the areas we're going to want to clean up, we're going to be adjacent to it. And as we work through the process with them, there's some options that we have to work out.

And then this development would require the removal of a fair number of trees. Have you thought through this being mitigated by plantings either on-site or off-site?

Yeah, we'll have a full planting plan. We've got, there's a lot of steps involved before we get to that point. So we know that there's a lot of engineering that has to be done. We know that there's landscape that has to be accomplished in that end. So we haven't developed all that yet because we've got these other steps

Is this sidewalk on both sides? More than likely, yes.

My understanding is you're here because the zoning board wanted the planning board to take a look at this and say, gee, this is a good idea, or no, it's not a good idea. They apparently didn't feel comfortable.

According to New York State Code, if a subdivision requires So when I look at this and I say, oh, why would we be granting a wide VBA grant variance for a small lot?

But then I look at every single lot that surrounds us and they're all 40 feet, 42 feet, 40 feet, 40 feet. So when you're looking at an area variance and is it in the character of the neighborhood or is it distinguishable, I don't have a problem with the ZVA granting a variance which creates lots exactly the same as their neighbors. Nor do the neighbors have a problem. Well, maybe, whatever. I shouldn't have said that. But I think it is in conformity with all the other lots in the surrounding area. And so I do not have an issue recommending to the zoning board that it shouldn't be a problem with the area variance for the lot size or the frontage, because I think every single other one that surrounds this entire neighborhood is the same way. So, My only one opinion here is that I would recommend to the zoning board that why not change the area of . Certainly, it would meet the criteria. They could go through the task.

Mr. Morris.

So this is a change from the two unit houses at the same . I think that there's some good and bad. And also, I know that that path on the city property is right behind that fence, so that if you were pushing snow or something, you're gonna block that.

And that doesn't get used in the winter time. That goes to the lowly anglers. I don't think you should be allowed to push your snow. I'm just starting to interject. For someone that's done work better, it doesn't get used in the winter, but you should move your problem, someone else's.

Yeah, but once the street is dedicated to the city, it's the city that will get its know onto its own structure. Once the street is created and dedicated, we now own the street and we manage it the way we want to. Then the desert side wants to get to the park.

To the park, OK. Absolutely. Yes, yes, 100%. Maybe they won't leave the city. They might open up a corridor then.

And all of these issues.

And you're going to come back with all the other concerns. And if you don't get past the CDA, you may be coming back with a different.

So just like I mentioned, I think there's good and bad.

I understand wanting to maximize the number of lots in there. Absolutely, the reason for it. So the Hammerhead at the end, is that meaning people are going to be turning around in the driveway of those 200,000?

Well, the driveway is kind of part of the Hammerhead.

Yes, to an extent.

there is no traffic however that it's not but if somebody i mean it happens on lake avenue they would go down to the end of the street it was especially during the memorial parade we'd sit there and count how many cars would turn down lakes laid down go down and turn around and get back because he couldn't get out And that's exactly. Sometimes you see that, though, where it's extra land at the end of the street that is not part of anyone's yard. And as Tom was saying, at the end of Robertson, there is a gate at the end the city has access to. So they could, you know, that could continue. And it may be something that we, as we're working through this, that we work through with the DVW, they want that connection through there. we would provide something like that where you would go out and it would be an out only going out through there. But again, that's something that we still have to learn through with engineering and .

We don't have room for that at this point with these number of blocks because you've maxed it out, but I don't- A cul-de-sac won't work.

A cul-de-sac, I think it's cul-de-sac.

No, no, no, yes.

lot 12 and eight would turn six would have to be.

The four end lots would be significantly smaller.

So I guess my only questions, my concerns have to do with infrastructure and the density that would be brought on by this. I myself have bargained for projects that are on lots that are small or smaller than, let's see, required because a lot of the zoning overlays were done after the original neighborhoods were in place so you find yourself with the pre-existing non-conforming lot size but then these are all new lots so there is the opportunity to say why why is the zoning code recommending larger lots for this area And that's, those are my thoughts.

I just wanted to make a comment about the process, too, so that we're thinking about a little bit. Also, I'm going to be working with the planning office, but it seems like what needs to happen is this recommendation will go back to the consulting board. They may or may not make a decision at the next meeting that for them, That kind of depends on whether or not this board wants to take lead agency status and will do a coordinated review. It appears to be an unlisted action, so we don't have to do coordinated review, but since it's going back and forth between the two boards, we may want to consider doing coordinated review, taking lead agency tonight or I'm passing the motion indicating we would serve a fleet agency, then the zoning board would have to say they agree with that. Then it would have to come back to us, planning board for the actual secret determination. And then it would go back to the zoning board for the actual determination on the variance, which means it would then need to come back to us yet another time. I'm just saying it's still going to be a long process. Like they mentioned, they still have a lot of materials to provide to us. for a full review of the subdivision application. And again, we're only looking tonight at the recommendation on the lot sizes and the variances that the DBA will consider.

Yeah, just to clarify. Is the board being asked to make a recommendation, positive or negative, to the CDA, or are we simply recommending that this loops through us because it's not being shot? We're just being asked to make recommendations. And then Cassie's, and obviously you're not gonna speak for the CDA, they'll make their own decision.

They make their own determination, but yes, it's your, you are being asked to make a recommendation on what the CDA will be doing for the fairing. Not the silt division itself.

It's just related to the lot size.

So I'm going to open, what's that?

The engineer did provide comments. Is concerned about storm onsite stormwater management as you all brought up. This project will also require a SWPPP, but again, there isn't much room for that onsite stormwater management given the configuration. In the future, they'll have detailed plans for the public utility extension, and there is concern amongst the engineering and DPW department about snow storage and turnaround space. And when you're considering your recommendations or zoning board, there are four factors that the zoning board considers when looking at area variances, and that's about undesirable change to the neighborhood. Can the benefits stop a feasible alternative way um whether the variance is substantial and whether the variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood so keep that in mind when you're thinking about what you want to say to this song i want to take the time now to open this up to public comment it's three minutes um you can come up if you'd like to speak say your name and where you live um anyone that would like to comment on this

Please call now.

Hi, my name is Dr. . I live on 12 Calvin Street at the property that Victor Sirone owns behind me. It is a wetland. I wouldn't call it a swamp area. There are many different species of wildlife that live in there. it is a wetland we do get flooded behind there and also the parties on flat street even on other sides of the street we had rain last evening we get ponding on catherine street at the probably mid-level to the end to platte street every time it rains a heavy rain um we do have our basements that fill up with water also. So I'm concerned, one, for the environment. Wetlands are 10 times able to get carbon dioxide out of the air than dry lands. We have industries, as you know, that surround us. There are The traffic, I don't know if you spent time there in that area, the traffic is horrendous. It's constant. They're speeding between Catherine and Platt and they're speeding between Haskell, the corner of Catherine up Haskell and the corner of Platt or the corner of Catherine up Platt. So we're having traffic I have my camera and it's all day long. We have 18 wheelers going through. We have wide loads going through. Kelman and Goldsmith are right in front of me. We have all the dust and debris that are coming and falling off the trucks there. So you want to bring in 12 new homes to this. That is a buffer for us. between us and the baseball fields and the playground and Eastfield, which are all beautiful and they well deserve to be there, but it's also our park. I think a lot of people are saddened and a lot of people didn't get this letter. that live in the neighborhood. It's just us who will mutt the property. I think everybody in the neighborhood should have received that letter.

I'll hand it over to you. You can go to the zoning board when they have their hearing. Yeah.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Linda Plant, I live at 10 Catherine Street, actually right next to Audrey. I'd like to start by showing everyone, some of you might have, in the audience, you might have this copy. I'm not sure how many of you realize this, but 19 years ago, in the Postar, on October 31st of 2007, Reagan, ex-Mayor Reagan, was going to develop that property back there. That was 19 years ago. we found out about it the day that he was back there i was in my backyard admiring the beautiful fall day and i heard ruffling through the trees and i saw two men walking through the thickets of this tourist and i went up and i asked hi can i help you and i recognized mr reagan right away but the other person long story short they said that we're looking to develop the property And I said, well, I'll tell you what, you better watch out for the giant snakes in there. So this is the article. You can pull it up, Postar, October 31st of 2007. Us neighbors fought this complex and this development, and we won. That's there because of most of us today and some that have passed away in the past 19 years. Okay? Issues were the same 19 years ago. All the environmental issues, the traffic, the whole thing. But now, Where there's more concern on the air pollution rising and the climate heat rising as in today. This tree habitat. is helping to filter the toxins emitted from Ames Goldsmith next door across the street, roughly 300 feet from my house. And the recently, 12 years ago, purchased Cohen scrap yard by the big conglomerate and H. Kellman out of Cohoes. They've been there since 2013, give or take a little bit. All right. We have their trucks. And we have pictures. Some of you know we've been to Common Council meetings. We've been fighting for this neighborhood for 14 years. Okay? Those trees filter everything. And as Audrey said, they are a buffer. I've been in my house 23 years. I bought that house. It was the original owner's house, Joseph Verdella. I live in that. It's over 100 years old. He was an Italian quarry man who came from Italy back in the early 1920s. He built up this entire first board. You can look it up, go to the Chapman Museum. But where I'm going with this is he created that buffer. And when I bought my house 23 years ago, I walked All right, I'm going to finish this, please. I walked to my back fence with the person with the real estate and I said, oh, what are these trees? And he said, that's the buffer for Eastfield to protect the houses from the lights and the noise. I have more to say. Maybe if the others don't mention it, I'll be able to get up after. Thank you.

Good evening.

I live at 63 Platt Street. My name is Giselle Howell. I have almost two acre lot. It is adjacent to the trees everyone's talking about and it also is adjacent to the Lawrence extension. This would affect my family and my property and maybe my property value, I don't know, intensely. It is wetlands back there, we have a lot of fireflies, we have toads with fawns, we have bobcats, we have the New York box turtle, and it's an amazing lesson from the noise of the park. We all think the park is wonderful, kids need to play ball, and very valuable. And really, I can't even imagine, there's 100 trees back there, and they're gonna be mowed down and paved, I can't even imagine. I bought that lot because I wanted a big lot, big house, and privacy. I have two large dogs. I have cats. It's a beautiful place. I look out on the trees. I can barely see Eastfield. And if that were to change, like I said, I have three lots. I'd be looking at three lots of somebody's backyards. It's huge.

Yeah, quality of life, environmental concerns, noise.

Yeah, property value. And construction. How long does it take to put in full utilities down the Longstreet extension? I lived right there on the extension. I can't even imagine. It's a nightmare. I'm totally on board with the development, but gosh, This is kind of a delicate little area back there. I guess that's all. We're not real happy. I would hate to see it go through.

Hello, my name is Marie Roberts. I'm in the 79 Platt Street, right where the Little League fields are.

They're a property line in my home that I meet.

And I also are on the floor for the Little League and have been there seven years, I think. My son has been a player in that field. I would hate to see that area ruined. I mean, it's a place where kids can go play and we have traffic and I'm not exactly sure where that road that they are looking to put in, but if it's that dirt road that goes into the Little League, we have kids that play in that area. We have kids that families, it's a very family oriented place, we lease the property from you guys, from the city. And, you know, they go fishing in the pond. They go, they walk the path. I mean, that is a beautiful area. It's been mentioned before, the wildlife. I just had two fawns laying in my yard this morning. There's wildlife that come through there. What's going to happen to that? It does flood. My basement pump is constantly pumping. If it's all black tops, then where does that water go? I don't know if this affects my poverty line. I'm still trying to understand the whole plan, but I would hate for this wonderful area where you feel like you're kind of in the country, even though you're not in the country,

you know, to be ruined because of, you know, development.

So anyway, and also the traffic that goes down flat is insane. I'm scared for my kids are not allowed to play in the front yard just because of the cars that go by, trucks. I've had my house rattled because they fly down there so fast. You hear people's trailers rattling and it's, I just, it scares me. I have kids and there's a lot of kids down in Brittany or Catherine.

There's a school down there.

So anyway, it just would be heartbreaking to see that. Thank you.

Anyone else?

I'm Tim Keith, and I live right back in Eastfield. And I do not want to build up back there. And I just want to be left alone. And we'll fight for this. We'll be back.

That's fine, I guess. Do you want the map of Eastfield?

Sure.

Do you want me to go to you? If I may, real quick? Yes. This is the map of East of our whole area. You can get them right down on the table in City Hall. Basically, if you look at it. Well, the reason I'm giving it to you, there's a reason.

I have to keep things in order to smoke. I'll take a look at your map. That's fine. Bring this to the zoning board.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Also, a number of people have mentioned weapons, I just wanted to ask if you don't want to put these guys go back up.

I didn't look at it. I know that that's an informational evidence.

Okay, yes, we're going to go into the show. An internet Davis.

A lot of the environmental

issues that they're going to be with that they're pushing those animals that live there out we have deer coming across the street eating you know the flowers that we plant and whatnot we have woodchips coming destroying our gardens so where are they all going to go we're all going to come back down into our areas where we live and we pay a lot of money for our shorts our plants we like our homes to look nice so where are they going to go

My backyard.

Anyone else? Okay, guys. Now to answer that question.

The original ones that are shown on the Warren County tax maps are information only aerials. After providing them with additional information, they determined negative on the wetlands. We do know that we have stormwater that comes off the access drive that goes into the park, and also from the baseball fields themselves. There's no stormwater. It all kind of comes and collects down in that area. It's going to be up to us to take care of that. Those are some of the things that I'd like to work with the city to address as we move through the process with the city road and with the stormwater management. So since we're a budding city property and what we're creating is going to be city property, we want to be able to, we have a little bit of leeway there to work with them to try to manage that stormwater and hopefully try to manage some of the additional stormwater that's around us. I have some ideas, but I would like to have that time to sit down with the city engineer to discuss them, try to create them. On top of that, we're also doing slab on grade homes. So, you know, our disturbance that we're going to be up water on some of the backs of the lots and try to maintain the buffers as much as possible that ethan's already shown um talking with the serones and you know i'm from the east end grew up on prospect street this was my paper group as a kid and i've been to some of the east end rising meetings and listening to try to come up with unique ways to try to get new single family homes into the city this has been a subdivision for some time if you look back guy fredella actually owned billboard we'll work with the city to take care of the utilities there's a sanitary sewer manhole that's right out in front of us obviously they were able to get down in there if we're building these slots up that's going to allow us to connect into that and then the water line is just going to be a function of depth and it should be weathered back to bedrock in there so we should be able to take care of that and provide the utilities

yeah, I just want to provide us like you, if you haven't already the package of materials it's meant to be for your dress.

yeah. it's that's what i'm saying we're hearing so too.

And with along with that being right now that traders ditch that that drainage ditch runs down the back of the properties last week and it winds up in this. wet area. As we develop that, we can take care of a lot of that and perhaps alleviate problems that are in the neighborhood now with wet basements. That's part of how the stormwater stuff works, and as we start to develop that and funnel the water and make it go where we want it to go, which is the quarry, that's where it's all trying to get to. It's got a big hole in the ground right there, and that's where a lot of it's trying to go.

Just one more thing to add to. I did have discussions with the surveyors that were out there. I hear some of the safety, some of the comments that the public made. They ran into homeless encampments back there. They ran into little pockets that they could obviously tell that people were living back there. Somebody did skimp away when they did come through. One of the things that this project, as we work through this, could do with sidewalks would give children access to go straight from Platt Street into Eastfield and access to that. interconnecting the parks with the subdivision would be a good thing, but that's currently not there. So that would be an avenue to work with the neighborhood on this project to do these things.

Do you want to have the planning board consider taking lead agency status during the quarantine interview? environmental where do you want to leave that so their approval would be conditioned on planning for the agency are you recommending that as council i am recommending that i think it's a Pretty unique project. I think that there are some environmental concerns that should be considered holistically. And it would mean that at the next zoning board meeting, they would not be able to seek action. They would hear the application and consider your recommendation, and then they would have to wait for the planning board to do seeker.

But we wouldn't get to seeker. When would we do seeker then? When do we get to it? Well, I don't understand.

When we have a complete application, you've conducted a public hearing.

But they might not even get to site plan review until they get their ZBA. They've got to have their variances to come back to the site plan. If they don't get the variances, they're not doing this project. They're going to rework it and do something else. They'll come up with a whole different, yeah. Right. So I don't understand how we would ever get a the packet without the ZBA having granted their variance.

Yes, they would have drawn it.

I mean, legally, that's .

We'll just see.

You have to declare that now at this meeting. Well, we're not even taking a vote. Right, we're recommending it to the ZBA.

And my understanding is, and correct me if I'm wrong about you, support doesn't necessarily have to send a recommendation with a thumbs up or thumbs down it could be also a we have questions further discussion will happen and that may result in changes what we see here we're not each of us on us right now to say fall in or fall out. That's very true.

I think, Allison, if you want to go through the CPA criteria again, that's our line there.

But that's not for us to determine. The CPA knows what their job is, and they know the criteria that they have to go through. That is the purpose of this. So how why Okay, so those only work with heels and requested a recommendation from the planning board prior to consideration of the variance request so. The recommendation could be love it or right or or it could be reconsidered the number of last person like it doesn't matter to them to deny the parent.

Go ahead.

Yes. They can do that.

So we're making a determination on whether we agree with the lot size. Yeah. And the neighborhood that's there are pretty much the same for lots of them.

I mean, I guess the one criteria they may get hung up on is whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible to pursue other than an error. No, they'll meet that one, too. They'll meet that, too. My understanding was we wanted to take a look at it and say, hey, do we think 12 o'clock is okay? Do we think it's okay to give them, you know, 2000 plus square feet relief and I don't know, 25 feet in the frontage, which to me, I'm looking at the map and every property around it.

Looks the same.

Looks the same. So I myself, And I'm not speaking to the board. My opinion is I like the project, and it's an infill, and that lot's been attempted to be sold, I don't know how many times, Guy Verdella, right, who's been buyer, sellers, or leaders. And someone's finally going to come in and create a street and create 12 single-family homes, which everyone is talking about in our master plan that we need more single-family homes.

And so I think this is a no-brainer.

The comprehensive plan, it's like, we need more housing, more affordable housing, single-family homes. I think of the potential to be more affordable. These are not going to be huge homes because the lot won't fit it. So there's going to be affordable housing in today's market. So if you're asking my opinion, I say, don't ignore, do your job. I don't have a problem with 12 o'clock.

Okay. So this is the first one of these that I've really done, sitting in this chair. It seems like we've all had enough information that we've heard, and we have the maps in front of us. How do we make this recommendation?

Like I said, the only thing I'm concerned with, and again, it's not necessarily a lot, And I believe those, in my opinion, are going to make a difference when I determine the lot size. I may say with the plowing and everything else, they may say drop to 10, which gives the hammerhead an area to have free space. But for me to make that determination now, I can't do it because it hasn't been to the property. So I understand what the purpose of this was to get it here early so we can look at it. But there are things innate to the project which I have a difficult time making a decision on it. The lot size isn't the issue. I understand the same as a lot of the lot sizes. But some of those other issues, and I understand the city will deal with it and certainly give them a piece of property. But our purpose is to make sure the city doesn't have to deal with something. That's the reason we're here. Until we adopt a piece of property, let's make sure everything's proper. And that's what I'm looking for. I was looking for more information from both superintendents and the parking department.

So we can make a motion to say that we are a favor or we agree to go ahead with this, but they need, the zoning board needs to take these into... Well, they are not going to take that into consideration because that's a site plan review that's going to come back to us after they decide can they have an area variance for the lot size and the front end But we will deal with those issues when they come back, if they do.

So even if they give them the variance. Now, this is why we have that point. We get, say, just to say we make a positive recommendation, and it goes to the zoning board. It could come back to us, and we could say, no, we, as planning board, won't allow those last two clouds or whatever on the end of that, because they need snowplow space or turnaround space.

If we can't make up the stormwater, if we can't get to work it out with the fire department, then we'll have to, obviously we'll have to modify it. Now there's additional options that we can talk to them about if we do get this. I'd rather not put them out here right now until I have a chance to talk to the city engineer that may alleviate some of those questions around the utilities. It's on us to work that through. We need to see where the zoning board stands on this with all those items.

And if you get your area variance, you can always modify it later.

You can always reduce the number of losses and make it cheaper.

If it comes back to us, and all of a sudden we decide we don't want 12, we want 10, then you've got your area variance. You don't have to go back, because you've been given permission for a smaller lot anyway.

That's right. board you can say we agree with the lot size change without coming up with a number of lots.

We're not opposed to the lot size being in the 5,000 range as opposed to the 7,500 and we're not concerned about the frontage being in the 40 versus 65 because everyone around them is the same thing but we're not saying you're going to get site plan approval because they got a lot more work to do.

I would say we recommend this goes to the zoning board.

Well, the zoning board has to hear it. If they give the area variance, then the applicant still works, the engineer, the fire department, and this will be back here.

There's a lot of groups. But we can't get there.

Until we say we give a recommendation. I recommend if we make motion, whatever, that this goes to the zoning board.

that we are not opposed to the smaller font size and we're not opposed to the smaller frontage and they can do their criteria to determine whether or not they want to grant the area variance Well, based upon what I've seen, it's in line with the other lot surrounding it. Right, and that's the problem. But we all covered this. You could not celebrate just the idea of growth. I would make a motion then that the Planning Board makes a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals that they consider the area variance for the lot size and the lot width that we, looking at it from a Planning Board point of view, do not have an issue with the concept. And then it's up to the applicant to make their core criteria before the zoning board.

I second that. All in favor?

Aye.

Great. Thank you very much.

You got a lot of votes. We know we do, and we appreciate that. As Tom said, he was born and raised in this neighborhood. I've lived in the neighborhood for 38 years. We're all aware. I remember when we board of directors for nine years, 10 years. So I know what's going on over in Eastfield Park. So we're all working to make things better.

And relative to Seeker, can zoning work do Seeker based on their area variances only and then subject to planning board during full Seeker review?

Well, we'll probably just do uncoordinated meetings. And have the user-seeker on a little quotient, and then it's going to come back.

We're going to do what we got to do. We'll make it worth it. So I make a motion to adjourn.

Second. Second. All in favor?