Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Ready, here.

Good evening everybody and welcome to the city Kingston planning board meeting. Uh my name is Suzanne Khill. I am the planning director of CU Kingston. Before we begin the meeting, I just want to go over a few quick announcements for everyone. Um I do ask that if you have a cell phone on you, would you please put it on silent so that it does not interrupt the meeting. Um secondly, if you have a conversation um that is not with the planning board itself, then we just ask that you please take it outside of the room. Council chambers are available and there's a second conference room on the opposite side of the chambers. Uh restrooms are through the chambers. Uh men's would be to the left and women's to the right. If we do have an emergency, we ask that you please use it there and not the elevator. If you need assistance, please ask and we will help you. Um, I want everyone to please be aware that the meeting is being live streamed and it is also being recorded. So, I want you to be cognizant of that. Um, and please respect others if they are speaking. With that, I'm going to open the meeting at 6:05 p.m. and I'm going to turn it over to Chairman Platt to introduce himself and board members and others.

Thank you, Sue. Um yeah, going along with introductions. Uh my name is Wayne Platt. We also have members Charles Palato, Matt Gillis, Vince Archer, Sage Newkerk, Andrew Harris, and Kyrie Grundig. You've already met Suzanne Ko, the planning director. We also have Kyla D-Day, the assistant planner, and Alderwoman Catz is the common council liaison to planning work. Uh before we get going um on the agenda, I know a number of folks are here tonight for item number five, which is 73 to 75 Burner Street. Uh we do have it under new business. If nothing is going to be voted on tonight, resolved. So um the board will be voting tonight whether to pursue this as a public hearing which would take place at at subsequent meetings. Um I think that that will happen. So, um, I said I know a lot of folks are here tonight about that. So, if you could just hold off until the next meeting when the public hearing does become um a thing, uh, we'll certainly allow everybody and anybody to uh, uh, have their comments so and address the board. So with that, uh, we're going to move on to item number one is the adoption of the March 16th, 2026 planning board meeting minutes. Everybody has had an opportunity to take a look at them. Any addition or deletions? Seeing none, I'll make a motion that we approve them. Do I have a second? Matt Gillis with a second. All in favor? I opposed. Gary. All right. Public hearings. Item number

two is 36 Foxhole Avenue and number 388 Avenue. It's the lot line revision of the lands of SNS uh RE LLC. Section block and lot is 56.26-5-44. Secret determination ward 9 transex zone T5 act SNS re LLC is the applicant owner. Uh is there anybody besides the applicant owner wishing to speak on item number two? Okay. Is the applicant there? Yeah. Come on up. Right at the head of the table there.

Are those chairs okay over there you the ones? Uh yeah the black ones are yes. Yeah. So, if you want to pull, you want both ears to come off. Yeah. Why don't you draw us over there? Yeah. Well, you both are welcome yourself. Welcome. Can you state your name for the record, please? Can you I'm Samantha. Okay. Welcome. All right. We have a depiction behind you there. And uh if you just go ahead and tell us what your plans are.

Oh, okay. So, um we own the bike shop, right? You can stand up if you want to. If it's easier to stand up rather than twist and just point the other thing you're buying. Okay. I have yard work knee, so I might stay seated.

Okay. So, uh we we'll be on the mic shop right over here on the corner of Fox Hall and Husbrook. Some of you know that. And then the little pink house that's adjacent to it. Uh we also own that. And uh it's got a it's a small house with a pretty big lot. And the lot extends straight off the back of the house. And uh having been the person in charge of maintaining it, it's extremely hard to maintain cuz it's big and um you can't drive back there. It's like one of those houses that they built out almost exactly to the property line. So, um it's kind of wasted space and we could definitely make use of it for the shop and eventually there is a apartment in that building which is presently unoccupied but um we're working on that in the next year. So, it would be additional parking um for tenants of the building uh us potentially customers maybe even somebody else in the neighborhood. Um, so we felt it just made the most sense to just add it to the commercial property and then eventually, you know, we'll sell the pink house to a single, you know, family homeowner. Um, and we just wanted to do that, you know, get this out of the way so before we move on with any sale of that property.

So, right right now there's no parking for the house. Is is there any plan to allow the house occupants to use the parking as well? But the the house does have parking. There's a driveway in the front. In the front. Yeah. You can fit about two cars. You can fit two. Okay. Right. Um but as far as letting someone use it, I mean, yeah, as long as we're the ones who own a commercial property, of course, you know, um you know, what would happen one day when we retire? Who knows? But yeah, but immediately yeah, that would be a problem.

Are you saying that because we're looking at maybe have there's a parking going to happen there that you would have something in the deeds to But if there's there's currently parking for two vehicles, that's fine. All right. There's a shed on there. That's that isn't what you're going to have that removed or into one side or the other. Is that we're we're just going to take it off. Okay. So, the shed would have to be actually moved um prior to the chairman signing the subdivision map. Oh. Um and allowing it to be piled. So, that will have to be demolished first. Okay.

That can be done, you know, on the intro. Okay. Um, a couple other things I just want to make a note of. This um will have to be converted to a formal survey, full survey map um by the licensed land surveyor and title subdivision will give you all the information, but then that will be the final map that gets um submitted for signatures. You will need to sign the map prior to the children signing it and we'll give you the boxes that you need to put that your surveyor will have to put on the final plat. Okay. Okay.

Um the um site plan for developing the parking area that will probably be a minor site plan. Um the difference being that a minor site plan is an administrative review that does not come to the full planning board. It is handled by agencies within the city of Kingston, planning office, building department, engineering, that kind of thing. So, we'll need to do that down the road after the subdivision. We'll get together with you before you actually construct it if you need to go through that process.

Okay. Just it's probably going to be years before. But yeah, that makes sense. But but what you're saying is that we would do all the revisions and that would all be formalized first. And then you're saying before we go down there and start shoveling and we come back in and take that step that service jumping out for me.

Any questions from the board? What looks like a logical adjustment? Yeah. Uh under seeker it is a type two action so no further review of the board is required for that. Um at this time I'll make a motion that we approve item number two and Sue has the conditions and board policies listed.

Right. So board policy six um the formal survey will be submitted with the elements of the vinyl subdivision black which will be provided by staff to the applicant. The shed will be demolished um which is encroaching across the property line prior to the chairman's signature. Um a site plan will be filed in the future prior to any construction of street parking area and we will need one myar five paper copies and result parcel descriptions as well. Give them all to you in a letter. Oh, okay. And we're looking for two surveys. Correct. So a new one for the house and new one for Yeah. He can put it all on one map. that penguin on what like just like he has here. Cool. Okay.

And Kevin's going to do that that that work too. All right. So with that, make a motion. I said we make make a motion we approve item number two. Is there a second? Second by Chuck Balco. All in favor? I opposed. That's it.

Oh. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. any. Okay. Item number three is 693-71 Broadway special permit renewal to operate a radio station sectioning 56.92-3-19.100 secret determination board for transact zone T5MS radio corporations the applicant owner does anybody besides the applicant owner wish to speak on items that's Hey, Jimmy is here. Welcome.

Thank you. How you been? Good. Good to see you. It's been a year. Um, all right. When was the last time this was uh uh 21? Actually, we did the special permit 21. Oh. And it was it five years. Mhm. Oh, okay.

Yeah. So, Um now they are seeking um their lease is actually or your license is actually a 10-year license. Um but in a communication which came in um over the weekend which you have in your staff notes um they're requesting that the permit be extended to match the term of the license agreement which would be 2030. At that time, if nothing changes, um, no circumstantial changes at all, then it would be strictly an administrative review. Uh, you wouldn't come back to the board. Uh, we would have a public hearing, but um, it would be reviewed administratively, and at that time, we would do probably the 10-year extension to match the the full term of your your license.

Great. Um, I know you suggested June. Mhm. Um, and what we're going to re what we're recommending is that it be August. And that's simply that's when we're doing all of the in-house the administrative renewals because the board does not meet in August. So that allows us to have a little bit of flex time there. Okay. And um it'll also allow you to renew your license with a valid special permit in place and then you'll have the license renewed hopefully by the time we get to the renewal of the special permit. Great. Thank you. That makes good sense. Yeah.

Overall, have there been any changes since the since we were last together? No. No. We have to go stuff.

All good then. Okay. Any questions from the board? All good with the term to go to August of 2030. Correct. And seek uh under seeker. Again, this is a type two action. So, no further review of the board is required. Uh, at this time, we'll make a motion that we approve item number four for the term to expire on August of 2030. Uh, all original conditions will be carried for anything additional in there. No, that's it. Okay. We pass a motion. You got a second on that. Second by Matt Gillis. All in favor?

I opposed. Great. Thank you. Have a good evening.

All right. Item number four is 25 Brag Alley, a site plan for a mixed residential development with 40 residential units and two live work units and a major lever for alternative building. Action block is 48.314-1-12 second termination transaxn GDC Kingston LLC is the applicant owner. Is there anybody besides the applicant or owner wishing to speak on item number four? Welcome gentlemen. State your names for the record, please again. Hi, I'm Tony. I'm the owner. Alexanderini.

All right. So, we skipped a few months or a month between when we last saw you, right? Um, you've got some changes to discuss tonight, right? Yes. Okay. We got a nice presentation for you, too. Yes. You still seem enthusiastic about it, so that's good. Well, the sun's about 10 minutes today. So, I guess is Is this the right um that you want up there? Uh if you have the uh the revision for architectural we can also show it on this one. That's fine. Let me see here.

Well, we can show it on this one now. Yeah, that's that's okay. Um so you can go forward. Okay, here we go. Uh so uh the major change since the last time we presented this plan is it's actually in this area here. So uh where there were four town homes uh we heard a complaint from from board some of the public about lack of parking and circulation and especially for deliveries uh for mail and and servicing etc etc. Uh and then we also finalized the location of the transformers with with central Hudson. So it was a mix of uh additional requirements that require removing four town homes along uh this is the north um yes north end of the other property against the pump station uh and replace that uh with uh well the one of the transformer the two transformer one in the main courtyard here and the other one in the in the corner over there and four parking lots uh there's two uh ADA accessible parking lots in there and two other parking and that are going to be dedicated again the public and also uh with with a strategy that we have yet to determine uh dedicate part of that was for deliveries so that there's a dedicated space for UPS trucks and what not to to to enter this lane and uh and park there without occupying the fire lane along Frog Alley. Uh that's that's the major change as far as the uh as far as the layout and design of the of the uh the development. Uh there were some other changes mostly uh concerning the utilities. a conversation with the uh with the city about the storm water as next the next one uh we managed to do a survey of an existing manhole uh which is in here.

This is uh yeah this is a sewer plant right storm water you kind of see the storm water situation here. Uh so uh we found out there's actually a 36-in pipe running underground basically diagonally cutting the the site uh and accessible again from the manhole on the on the sewer pump uh which is more than 24 in that we were estimating. Uh so actually has more capacity. Uh so we're we feel confident that this is this going to be able to actually uh catch all the water. Uh we also did a calculation concerning the the permable surface versus imperable surface peration with the with the CD engineer uh and compared to what the site currently is which is mostly uh black top asphalt we're actually reducing the the perable surface by about 20% going from 19% to 44% of the of the development. Uh so again uh confident that uh we're confident that we can capture all the water with the system that that is is in place uh and with this reduction of of the permeable surface. Uh at the same time uh again we we develop the full uh utilities plan with utilities. So you can see in this on this uh diagram in this plan here the sewer plan uh the electrical plan again with the consideration the new consideration with the uh location of the of the transformers that Centra Hudson requested uh and again the storm water and uh and the drinking water also all with the proper setback proper requirement. We work with the engineer to provide the correct specification for all the pumps and the kind of equipment that is needed. Uh we recently confirmed the the location of the main access point for for public water and here the with the mantle that is actually going to be uh that is driveable. So it's safe also for those which is fire access. Um,

and again laid out everything on the on the side there. So it works the kids and with the changes that you've illustrated here, you've had consultations with the fire department, right? They're and that and they're fire chief Chris Ray. You're you're satisfied with Yes. everything here. Major lucky sentence.

Yeah. They they've actually kind of uh we've been working with them and other city agencies um in addition to the fire department who they just they finalized the comment today. Um and that was just a question about the durability of the pavers that are in the open air patio just to make sure that they would be able to support um one of the small the ambulance buses. So, they've confirmed that and that was really the last kind of piece that the fire department was looking for. Um, I will mention that there are mountable curbs here. Um, they are not actual um curb cuts for access. They're mountable curbs. Um, so that will hopefully deter uh other traffic from going into the areas where we're really not looking for um vehicle traffic to go in on a normal basis. um with the water department, they've like uh just likewise have um resubmitted drawings based on water department comments um water department has signed off um on their end um with just the expectation that they continue to have that communication um as they get into the construction phase of development so that they're connecting and and doing everything according to plan. um with the city engineer um he reviewed the final plans that were submitted um gave us a list of comments on Friday which have been posted. All of these are posted as well. Um, and I did have a conversation with him after that um, because he wasn't available today, but he did he did agree that they could be conditions of approval um, and that the applicant um, would be able to work with him subsequent to a conditional approval to satisfy all of the comments that he um, wants to see additional information

on for the sewer and the water, storm water. Um, and I think that covers all the urban forester. Um, he they've also had with their landscape um, design professional, they've had multiple comments and and discussions with the urban forester. Um, all the plant species um, and the layout have been u reviewed and are in accordance with our code. So that has all been satisfied as well. So they've really done a lot of work since you saw them last and come up with I think a really great plan.

So the affordable housing component was did there have to be a recalculation done based on on this amendment?

No. What what you have what you have in your notes um is an updated calculation and you gone over the calculation with the applicants. um they have uh now with 42 units, it's a requirement of them to have 10% affordable and 5% workforce. So that works out to four affordable cuz you use the rounding up and down method. Um and two workforce. Um they also are so that's six. Um they're also required um because they're receiving county funding um from the housing program um they're required another six units, five of them affordable and one workforce.

Um the cities are required to be de-restricted by covenant in perpetuity of the project being residentially occupied. The counties are not. Um and there's a distinction. And I mentioned that because when we are going to be calculating the assessment of the payment in Louis park land fee um affordable units are technically exempt if they follow the city's code. So because the counties are not dedicated in perpetuity we can't count those to um they will still count towards that park payment. Um, so with the park payment, the first seven units are exempt and then the six units that are going to be deeed restricted will be exempt. And there's I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, but the calculations are in there. When we get to that, you'll be assessing that faith. We could move on to that famous little back too.

So yeah, so with what it what it works out to be is that um 32 - 7 is 35. And then you would take off. No, this I that can't be right. Maybe this I I have 23, but I can't find in my notes where that came from. Let me see.

So 42 minus 7 would be 35. And then we take off six, which is the 29. We the the 23 would be if the six That's right. units of the county were deeded in perpetuity, which they are only required to be kept affordable for a certain amount of time. If you were to put them into a d-restricted covenant for the life of the project, we could exempt those as well. That's something that you would have to commit to. So the six that you're talking about that would be the six four units at 80%. And the two units at 120.

Correct. Okay. I think that's why we only had four. I don't think we found

but it is six. We're subtracting six from that. Yeah. you won't take the board force was worried that way but I would double check that um but wanted to think on the code while you're going to You want to talk about the wave or everything? Yeah.

Yeah. All right. So, the question No, go ahead.

Okay. So, the major waiver request is for the new building type. Um, and it's being considered identified as a row rowhouse support. Um I mean from the first meeting we had when you were describing how this kind of the building styles that you were having that you were going to have the prize this project. Um I think it was you found it very the board was very receptive to you were uh saying that it had to do with our Dutch heritage. Right. You were having some some elements of architecture from Holland, right? that uh so I mean that's that that's I like that and you've also incorporated other components into this from other transets right that's right yeah the intention with this uh request is that we take what the city has already set forth and just adjust a little bit to meet the conditions of the site because of the size because of the location there are certain things that we wanted to um to modify but there's nothing material really different here where we're asking for significantly more density for building types that aren't called up for in the code.

Yeah. And I also like the like it how the courtyards are um and I want to say they're incentivizing or encouraging people to to come out of their out of their units congregate and it's almost like a small community there. That that's the biggest influence of the Dutch heritage. The architecture were taken from Kingston were taken from from Dutch context as well. But the cottage courts, they're they're called Hafias and it's just amazing when they're smaller, very cute, charming cottages and you stack them together and it creates these really wonderful communities that people just want to say hi to their neighbors. They want to welcome them in. They want to talk over gardening or or what have you.

Yeah. So for me, um, all the things we just talked about, and there's other components of it that are that are attractive to me, too. But, um, the elements we've just talked about really, um, make it easy for me to group to to feel comfortable to grant a major waiver. So, I mean, I can open it up to the rest of the board to see how they feel. I mean, there's a walkable community there. Um, it's it's an attractive space, I think. Thank you, though. Um, I don't know how the rest of the board feels with uh that we're going to have to vote on this this part of our um the waiver form and it's also going to be whatever we decide is going to be incorporated into into the resolution too. So, um

I think it's well thought out and a lot of things are taken in consideration. Um, and I think that that is very solution forward thinking when we have a situation where so many people need housing. So, we need to be innovative and we need to think of different ways to house people um that fits with the city's history. So, it's just nice to see that that much effort was put into something um for the community and the needs of the community. And we worked really worked through uh this for a long time. Had a lot of time and you guys really took to heart and listened to what the neighbors were saying and added the additional parking which is not required which I think is really good. Um I don't have a problem with that at all.

I think it's a great idea. I mean I think there's really no fundamental change other than taking the yards from behind the houses and putting it in front of houses. everything else they've kind of stuck with falls within our code already. They didn't, you know, want to blow out any heights or widths or anything like that. So, um, for me, it's a it's a yes. It just kind of brings the community forward rather than having all their space behind them.

I I concur with what has been said. I like the idea that everything out there is walkable. They've got the uh the people move in there, you know, everything will be fine, be able to stay there. It's it's kind of inviting people out of their houses like I said to, you know, like a small sense of community there, right? Is that what you're trying to speak to?

Yeah. And there's so many great things going on uptown that we want more people to be able to benefit from them and to walk to the grocery store or to restaurants or to cafes or whatever it is. Um, and we we think that this program will will make them feel comfortable not to do that as opposed to being 20 stories up in in an apartment building or having to drive 10 minutes away. They feel like this is a part of their backyard. Thanks.

Thank you, K. I mean, it's a lot more in terms of what the uptown shops and down in the closet for groceries. I mean, it's really close and convenient. They can design pops right out. Andrew,

um I don't really have anything to add that has already been said. Yeah, this does everything that the new zoning code allows for it. That's similar to um I was not part of the discussions for the meeting with parking, but that's my only concern because broad valley is tight. There's no on street parking on Schwank the old spectrum lots and things like that that can't be. So, parking is my only concern. Do you want to talk about your parking um work that you did? We did two separate uh studies. I had Leella do one and you had done an earlier one. Do you want to talk a little bit about that?

Yeah, I I won't say the exact number just because I don't have in front of you. I don't mention anything that I can't but uh we were surprised but pleasantly surprised the parking demands weren't as strong as as we thought they might have been initially which gave us comfort as the owners to move forward with a limited parking program as opposed to going one to one. Um it's one of those things where there aren't spaces on progen but if you go two blocks away you can find some spaces uh and the demands of people who are uh living on the property change throughout the day. So they may not be there uh there might be lots that they can park in overnight or on the street um in some places certain municipal lots um they might not need to have their cars in the street at 12:00 there. So the marketing centers came back and without saying the exact numbers I just again don't want to commit to it. Um we felt comfortable enough we had a plan because at the end of the day we want to make sure that we can call this building full and if the market came back to us and said this doesn't make any sense we we would revise and and take stock of that. I will say that one of the things we we initially had a little bit of a concern because um obviously with the fire department directly across the street, it is very restricted there um for a lot of the Brock Alley Street segment. Um and in addition to that, the the other parking also has restricted hours on Brock Alley. So those two things together made it a little bit like questionable on you know how would you um accommodate a handicapped individual um or how you know what about a delivery what about a service call what about you know just moving in moving out kind of um activities. So that's why they went back and looked at the plan and did provide

for a couple of handicap parking spaces and then a couple extra just for whatever might be needed during the course of the general day. So I think that was a a positive move on their part. Um I know that parking uh there was a parking concern raised by one of the um businesses in close proximity. Um and the county also raised some questions. the county planning board. So, I think that they've done their due diligence in terms of their studies that they they did and they had Labella uh do for them as well as a followup.

Yeah. And the one thing I would add is that it's not exactly equivalent, but we do have a lot of bicycle parking called out in the plan. So, we have dedicated bike stalls. We have a couple of covered stalls as well. More and more people are taking ebikes, not uh cars. Obviously, it's different in the winter. Um, but we think given the proximity to everything else in Uptown, the couple of spaces that we have, the space for deliveries, um, and the fact that more and more people do want to have a walkable lifestyle with maybe a bike or or access to public transportation, uh, we feel pretty comfortable. see some of the other components of our notes here. Are they just these probably have been here meeting to meet? Do they have they need to address anything? I mean, sidewalks. I mean,

uh, well, they're all going to be in your final resolution. Um, obviously, but these are all offsite. There are some offsite improvements that are being made. Um there is quite a large tree that is um along the sidewalk that will need to be removed. So that's going to be required to go through the tree commission. Um but they're also be planting um a lot of new trees um on and off the site. Um they'll be redoing all the sidewalks along the frog alley. So they will be uh corrected um you know to ADA and POAG standards. Um which is a nice move. Uh the refu has been uh moved back a little um so it's not close to the street but um and it'll be fully enclosed in a um in a manner that is similar to the new construction. So it'll blend, you know, seamlessly hopefully

as as good as refues can blend, right? M and um one of the things we had talked about was you know for the occupancy um you know they you can't demand that they be uh city residents but that you know they try and work with uh the local community to get exist you know give a preference for some existing city residents to to reside here. Um, one thing that, um, we haven't quite gotten yet is the, um, school sign off. So, that will be a condition. We'll work with the school district. Um, for a project this size, I wouldn't anticipate that it's going to have an impact. Um, particularly the design of it, it's not really a a project that's going to be uh, something that would attract family. Um is that some communication that comes from your office or this?

It typically comes from goes from the applicant and we we assist the applicant but where there's a need. So we'll work on that. Um but that's I'm pretty comfortable with conditions. Um the poor performance bond there will be we have to yeah it's not right now

um there will be a required performance bond um for all site improvements on this project as with uh several of the projects that you do. Um we do not have the um detailed cost estimate completed yet. Um theoretically that can't be really completed until all the signoffs particularly city engineer has finished his storm water and sanitary sewer review. So um in lie of that what we would ask the planning board for is that to allow staff to work with the applicants. Uh we've given them four mats to use to put that together. Um once they do we'll review it with the city engineer. uh we'll take that amount that he approves and add on a 10% contingency which is our standard. Then we'll work with them to get the bond and the bond will need to be in place before any building permits are issued.

So we did look in the code and it is affordable housing only. um the payment in little odds would include a um reduction if it's in if you don't um it's a payment in lie of affordable and workforce housing. So that is not something that you're looking to do because you're going to be provided. So um it's only the affordable. So that first number would be the so it would be four instead of six.

Yes. So the number in the staff notes is correct and the number in the resolution that received has to be amended. So the payment will be 3000. There been 31 years assessed for 2000. Okay. Perfect. Would the calculation be part of the proceeding? Would the exact calculation be part of the proceeding? Yes,

that's true. Are you going to check what's where you put I unless I I'd open the floor up to the board members to ask if you have any questions um for comments. Um although we've looked at the plans on multiple occasions um we've also had the opportunity to look at it um within the man website. Um do you have any questions for the applicants? Any comment? Any further concerns? Can I do the county plans?

You can review them. They are in the two talk about them in depth.

So I'm moving to the for the required modification that the planning board should require more analysis regarding the parking demand associated with the site. Um, also how traffic and and what have you will um be handled so that it does not interfere with the Kingston Fire Department's ability to conduct emergency responses as they enter and exit their property on the east side of Prague Alley. I know that you folks have you acknowledged and the fire chief has acknowledged that um those things have been taken care of as far as cons, you know, the concerns of the city and the fire department. So, um the fact you've added more, you know, parking to here, um I I think that this required modification hasn't been addressed. Personally, I work with you. Was this written prior to them changing and adding the parking spaces?

Yeah, it was written prior to the second traffic study. So, that's

that's right. We get the second study after this. Yeah. as long as it's not a safety issue to us involved within the coding. We don't have, you know, I agree with what Matt had said earlier, but I know you weren't here for that one conversation, but that's like the position that I think that we're going to find over and over projects like this is that it's not, you know, we are following through the code and we're fortunate enough to have applicants to pay extra money to have studies done to add things when they're not even required to. So, yeah. you coming?

Okay, thank you very much. All right, we're going to go fill out papers.

You bring me water? I'm sure water. I I did. brought some

and the people who don't want to talk like so um performance bond where that's all can handle plate that's all everything's good with engineer that would be another resolution as well so I just want make that off a few minutes ago the other the the last thing I think is towards the end of your your notes there is the just to go through some points uh you will be uh we will be asking you to um consider making any seed growth determination this evening based on um the submitted form um as well as all of the additional information that has been provided through various reviews and comments and feedback. Um there are multiple points that we put into this. Um example, one of the things um that they did do was that marketing demand study. Um they did it in July of 25 and then followed up with the addendum in February of 26 and then they haven't made accommodation as we've noted on site. Um they worked with the urban forester on the rural landscaping plan. um made a hard effort to provide as much native species um and appropriately located plantings to serve the site and assist with storm water. Um they've engaged a historic cultural services to undertake the appropriate survey work for archaeological and historic resources. Um there are certain um comments and recommendations within those that will be required to be followed um when construction takes place. They've worked with the fire department to provide safe and accessible emergency access. Um they're working to provide um handicap accommodations for pedestrian and

pedestrian movements and ADA compliance. Um overall they've reduced the pleous or imperous uh surfaces to allow for more storm water to be retained and kept on site, thus removing that offsite. um they know that they will need to um obtain a flood plane permit because they are within the flood zone A. Um Shipo has reviewed this and issued a no impact letter and all the public comments as well have been considered. So those things all in mind um we did if you look at the um parts two and three which you should have in your um packets there and there is a resolution as well in your packet for the seekers. So, you want to go through part two of part three that

do you want to do the waiver checklist first or do you want to do first

enough to get my uh it's all I like see after that page and we'll see after We have to go reach one by

mean we're starting right. Yes.

All right. All right. to part two of the short environmental assessment form which is the impact assessment. Um item one is will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulation and I'm saying that no or small impact may occur. Agreed. Agreement. Two. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? Um, and I'm saying moderate to large impact may occur. Great.

Three. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? I'm saying no or small impact may occur.

Four. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of a critical environmental area or CDA? I'm showing no or small impact may occur. Five, will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking, or walkway? I'm saying moderate to large impact may occur. Agreed.

Six. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy of opportunities? I'm saying no or small impact may occur. Agree. Seven. Will the proposed action impa impact existing a public/private water supplies? I'm saying no or small impact may occur. Agreeing. Uh B, public/private wastewater treatment utilities. I'm saying no or small impact may occur. Great. Keep reading.

Eight. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the important historic, archaeological, architectural, or aesthetic resources? I'm saying moderate to large impact may occur. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Nine. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources? Examples being wetlands, water bodies, groundwater, air quality, flora, or fauna. I'm saying no or small impact may occur. Agreed. 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding, or drainage problems? I'm saying moderate to large impact may occur.

Second. Agreed. 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? I'm saying no resp.

Okay.

Yeah. All right. Short environmental assessment form part three, determination of significance. Number two, the project will result in a moderate change in the use and intensity of the land. The property was previously used as a laundromat that was demolished and has been vacant land for a number of years. The proposal to add 40 residential units and two lid work units falls within the allowed densities in the zoning code for this transact district. The board and city agencies reviewed storm water utilities, fire protection, and site improvements. impacts were mitigated through a series of comments and revisions to the plan, including the addition of more impervious surfaces, complying with utility recommendations from the water department and the city engineer, the inclusion of native landscaping and compliance with the zoning code, the reduction in the number of buildings to accommodate some parking and an area for deliveries on site. widening access lanes to address fire department and emergency response accessibility and relocation of existing on-site storm water infrastructure in easements. Number five, impact on existing traffic and existing infrastructure. The project is designed on a model that has successfully operated outside of the US, but there are similar typologies with within larger metropolitan areas. The location of the project is in proximity to trailways bus depot within walkable distance of businesses that provide goods and services is being designed to promote walking and bicycle use and provides for accommodations there up on site. In addition, there are

they are aware of the proximity and restrictions of on street parking due to the firehouse and limited hours of parking on the adjacent roadway. There are four spaces on site to accommodate uh business handicap and deliveries, service, business, etc. A study of the area and available parking in proximity was completed and the owners have made the decision that the population served will have their needs met. Number eight, impact of historic, archaeological, architectural, and aesthetic resources. Directly across from the project are the low bar of Bardis ruins. The site has been managed and preserved by friends of historic Kingston. The new construction will not impact the site. The design being proposed will not be anything that will diminish the importance of the historic property. The existing site is being addressed archaeologically under the oversight of a professional cultural firm and all digging and excavating is being monitored and recorded. State historic preservation office has provided a no impact letter. Number 10, impact of flooding. The site is located within zone A and all necessary precautions will be taken. A flood plane permit will be required through the building safety division for new construction. So I'm saying we check the box number two. We have determined based on the information analysis above and any supporting documentation that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Read the resolution then the resolution resolution.

Where is schedule A?

Schedule A will be attached to this document. We should have it there resolution. So speaker the schedule A is attached um to public reservations that you'll have to make and that is basically a listing of all of the documents um plans um documents emails that have been considered a part of this process with a comprehensive list with the most current updated state Guys are going to get some.

All right. Um and before me resolution resolution of the city of Kingston Ladybird adopting a determination of negative declaration of environmental significance 25 frog alley section lot 56.124-1-12 under a coordinated secret process 6NYCRR part 617 whereas GBC Kingston LLC the applicant submitted plans along with the completed part one of the short environmental assessment form SEAF to the city of Kingston planning board. It bends the board to construct a mixeduse residential development and supporting infrastructure in improvements. And whereas the project is located under 25 Frog Alley, SPL of 56.124-1-12, Kingston, New York. And whereas under the initial review, the board determined the action to be unlisted under seeker. However, both the applicant and the board agreed that a coordinated review was in the interest of all parties due to the scope of the proposal and number of agency reviews required. And whereas after receiving no objections, the planning board adopted a rescue date December 8th, 2025, declaring themselves lead agency in the SE review and considered all documentation submitted to determine significance of the action on the environment in compliance with the New York State Environmental Conservation Law, Seeker and regulations progated there under the regulations by the New York State by the New York Department of Environmental Conservation 6 NYC RR part 617 and whereas in support of this project the applicants have submitted plans applications and other supporting documents all as posted to the municipal website and as defined under schedule A attached and made part of this resolution.

Whereas the board opened a public hearing on December 8th, 2025 and which has remained open until April 20th 26. All comment received under the hearing in oral and written testimony has been fully considered. And whereas under routine circulation, the board has received comment has reviewed and considered statements from the Ster County Planning Board, the city engineer, Kingston water department, and Kingston fire department. And whereas the property is located within the FEMA adopted flood hazard area zone A and zone X which will be required to obtain a flood plane permit in advance of any work in compliance with section 405.27 of the city of Kingston zoning code. And whereas there is an existing storm sewer with a and easement located through the property which will be relocated and mapped in accordance with recommendations from the city Kingston engineer corporation council and the planning director. And whereas the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation, SHIPO, issued a no impact letter dated September 22nd, 2025. And whereas landscaping will be focused on native species and will comply with section 405.14K of the zoning code. And whereas the project will follow the recommendations of the phase 1A literature search and sensitivity assessment and will complete the phase 1B survey as outlined in the letter from the Hudson Cultural Services dated November 18, 2025. And whereas the findings and recommendations of all documents listed under schedule A as applicable have been fully considered along with the public comments and technical advice from other municipal agencies.

And whereas the board has completed and attached part two and three of the SEAF. Now may therefore be resolved that the city of Kingston planning board as follows. Section one that pursuant to 6NYCRR part 617, the city of Kingston planning board hereby renders a determination determination of negative environmental significance recognizing all conditions as described within the document presented and adopts the negative termination as final. Section two that all identified involved and interested agencies will be notified of the case and planning or determination of this decision. and section three that this resolution shall take effect immediately. Do I need to schedule anything else?

Yes. Um at this time, I'll make a motion that we adopt this resolution. Do I have a second? Second by Sage. All in favor? Wayne is a yes. Charles Palato, yes. Matthew Gillis, yes. Vince Archer, yes. Sage Newkerk,

yes. This is adopted. Please be happy. Okay. Pling word waiver checklist. Uh section 405 12 is the transect to which property is located. The applicant has included a waiver request letter that clearly identifies and describes the waiver being proposed accompanied by plans or other visual representations as applicable. There's a yes for that. In their letter, the applicant describes in detail why the waiver is needed and how the waiver request is consistent with the intent, design, and compatibility of the transex zone in which the project is both. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Will granting the waiver contribute to the realization of the overall intent of the transex zone and result in an approved project which will be an attractive and notable contribution to the transex zone? Staying guess. Yes. support walkable neighborhoods and or mixed use centers. The project emulates the neighborhood context for how far the buildings relate to the sidewalk, how the facade is designed, and how the building interacts with the street. I'm saying yes.

Yes. The project supports a green and resilient future by for example reducing vehicular miles traveled, providing green infrastructure and/or street trees and/or including highquality usable open space. A yes, the project supports incremental development patterns and size and density and supports infill development or the reuse of existing buildings. Saying yes. Yes. The project supports the provision of the variety of housing types to support a range of income levels, age groups, and family units. Yes. Yes.

The project specifies street design that is walkable and bikable and will reinforce safe and comfortable environments for all. Yes.

Yes. Okay. Okay. Who's next on those resolutions? Resolution of the city of Kingston planning board approving site plan and required major waiver of building typology for 25 broad galley PNS SPL48.314-1-12 Kingston New York 12401 whereas GBC Kingston LLC PNS applicant submitted applications plans and other supporting documentation ation to the city of twisted funding boards board for construction of 42 residential units consisting of one studio 17 onebedrooms 18 twobedroom four three bedrooms and two live work units the proposal also includes a minor waiver I'm sorry major waiver for a new building type under section 405.12v3 per the action and whereas the action is located at 25 frog alley perins SPL48.314-1-12 in the T5N neighborhood mixed use transsect zone in FEMA adopted flood hazard area zone A and zone X adjacent to the low Bardis historic ruins and pro in proximity to the national register historic district and whereas the board received the original application supporting documentation August 2025

with a major waiver request submitted in October 25 along with revised and supplemental information submitted over the course of the review. And whereas the board concluded a public hearing on December 8, 2025, which remains open until closed on April 20, 2026. And whereas the board has reviewed and considered comments from city engineer, building safety division, city fire chief, Kingston water department, and the general public. And whereas all documentation outlined in schedule A review document listing April 2026 and comments are made part of this review in their full form. And whereas the board determined the action to be unlisted under Seeker and upon mutual consent of the application development project under which coordinated review process with the planning board adopting a resolution on December 8, 2025 declaring the agency status and whereas pursuant to six NYCRR part 617 the board adopted a negative declaration of final determination of nonsignificance by resolution dated April 206. Anywhere where the action is referred to Olster County Planning Board appending recommendations under referral number 2026-002 dated January 7, 2026 and now therefore be it resolved by the city of Kingston planning board as follows. Section one. After thorough review and discussion of all documentation and public comment reference schedule A, the board hereby notes to approve the site fund to construct 42 residential units consisting of one studio, 17 one-bedroom, 18 two-bedroom, four threebedroom units, and two live work units along with supporting infrastructure improvements at 25 Prague Alley with conditions as described in the following citations.

Section two board hereby hereby votes to approve a major waiver for a new building type known as roadhouse court as proposed by the applicants with the following findings. The building type is specific to this location and this parcel is located within a walkable mixeduse neighborhood with close proximity to public transportation and retail uses and meets the intent of the underlying T5N transitect to provide a variety of housing choices in small to large footprint, medium to high density building types which reinforce the walkable nature of this neighborhood. support neighborhood services, retail and services uses adjacent to the zone and support public transportation alternatives. The protocol for the rowhouse court is attached as schedule B to this resolution. Section three, approval shall include conditions as follows. performance bond submitted a of a detailed cost estimate of all site improvements for review and approval of the city engineer for purposes of defining the required performance bond amount for the action. Said bond will contain a standard 10% contingency be in the form satisfactory to the city planning administrator and the corporation council and shall be received prior to issuance of any building permits or site work being initiated. Asbuilt drawings will be certified by a licensed engineer or suitable profession professional and provided to the planning office for all newly constructed and installed plan elements prior to any performance bond release or within 30 days of issuance of a certificate of compliance. A final certificate of occupancy will not be issued until asbuilt plans are submitted and accepted. Kingston water department sign off recognized and conditions as outlined in the email dated April 17, 2026 shall be adhered to. City engineer

final sign off and satisfaction of all comments and issues as outlined under email dated April 17, 2026 shall be met prior to any permit issuance. Flood plane permit from the director of building safety division as the flood plane administrator. Kingston Fire Department sign off recognized with no internal EV bike charging unless specific building conditions are met and approved by KFD. Require confirmation that pavers used throughout particular the open air patio from the southern mountable curve can support the weight of a typical ambulance bus in five to six tons. provide details of the gabber installation and its specification of a

that has actually been accomplished. community status because status correct. Okay. Board policies. The following board policies are hereby incorporated. Policy one, storm water compliance. Policy 2 and 2a, tree renewal and replacement. Policy 3, 3A, and 3B as built plans and performance policy. Policy four, 4A, lighting. Policy six, affirmation of compliance with approved plans. Policy 7, approval time frames. Policy 8, 8A, clerk of the works and project directory. Policy 9, survey markups. Policy 10, signage guidelines. Policy 11, of dumpsters. Policy 12, contact names updated. Policy 13, be safely on plans utility contact. Policy 1414A, zoning data and legend. Policy 16, school district impact. Policy 16A, landlord registration completed. Registration completed. Policy 16B, affordable housing compliance. Policy 17, payment in lie of parkland. Policy 18, noise ordinance compliance. Policy 20, carbon monoxide detectors. Policy 22, sidewalk standards. Policy 23, Knoxbox installation. Policy 24, acquire building permit in required time frame. In lie of policy 5, the board requires a formal maintenance plan to be submitted to the planning and building departments to cover the regular and ongoing maintenance procedures to be followed for the PA sections and commit to the long-term functionality of permeability and storm water management. In accordance with all uh board policy 16,

the applicants must secure a uh no impact letter from the district for the project. Refuse and recycling collection shall be by private baller services. Final sign off of USPS for location and design of mail receptacles. Applicants shall work directly with engineering and Olster County 911 to assign building numbers and identify all units for emergency responders to meet required standards. Sidewalks will need to be constructed in accordance with chapter 358 of the city code. The curb cuts will need to be raised where they are no longer being used and provide with mountable curbs as shown on drawings. And the sidewalks will need to meet the ADA and ProAG standards for running slope, cross slope, and width. Landscaping will be inordinance with the landscape standards section of the code 405.14.K and will follow the recommendations of the city urban forester. Approval of the city tree commission for all tree removal/planting work to take place within the public right ofway frog alley. All work within the public right ofway shall have permits issued by the department of public works and carry appropriate insurance requirements. The project will follow the recommendations of phase 1A literature search and sensitivity assessment and will complete the phase 1B survey as outlined in the letter from central Hudson cultural service since dated November 15. Confirm with all plans, documents, and specifications as defined by attachment pay documents dated April 20, 2026, unless otherwise noted herein. Copies of newly established vital easement agreements for storm water and lean shall be submitted to the planning department prior to issuance of any building permits. Section four,

inclusion of affordable housing shall be as follows. The city of Kingston FDC requirements section 405.19 project contains 42 units 10% affordable equals four units at 80% AMI 5% workforce equals 2 units at 120% AMI six units must be drestricted for the duration of the project actively used for residential housing and monitored in compliance with section 405.19 as written or amended going forward Olster County Housing Action Fund, six affordable units, five at 60% AMI, one at 80% AMI. It is understood that these are only deed restricted for a period of time as provided under the funding source and not in perpetuity. Section five, payment in lie of parkland. The board finds that the anticipated increase in population as defined by creating 42 residential units shall cause a need for continued upkeep and improvements to municipal park facilities which provide recreational opportunities for residents. The recreational trust fund is utilized to help maintain existing and provide new amenities to contribute back to the city's parks and programs which allows for the recreation department to continue to grow its recreational opportunities to meet the demands and community needs. is the numbers have changed here. So I'm just going to read the next two paragraphs.

Okay, because these are changing. The board acknowledges and finds that four awardable units gated in perpetuity are exempted from the requisite parkland fee along with the first seven exempt units. The remaining 31 units shall be subject to a $3,000 per unit fee according to be placed into the recreation trust fund. Therefore, the board hereby finds that the transp shall be assessed for this project in the amount of 93,000 and must be remitted to the city prior to the issuance of any permits for the auction. Okay. Section five.

Holster County Planning Board UCP referral January 7, 2026. The board have reviewed the required recommendation and advisory comment of the UCPB which are I can read a little similar.

Um, the city planning board should require more analysis regarding the parking demand associated with the site as well as the proposals traffic and traffic safety related impacts. A traffic analysis for the development as well as an accident analysis for both Schwank and North Front Street intersections is recommended. The board should also consider a requirement that clearly defines how and where transistory access to the site will occur and ensure that it does not interfere with the Kingston Fire Department's ability to conduct emergency responses as they enter and exit their property on the east side of Frog Alley advisory. As noted, the city's zoning statute code they're missing pamp statute does not require on-site parking. The applicant has developed a parking availability analysis, but has failed to include the facility's parking demand in its calculations and has not shown the impact of that demand on the available parking supply. Nothing in the submitt indicates that the private sites in the parking analysis are available for the residences of the project to use. Finally, the parking availability analysis is at odds with previous studies and the desires of the city of Kingston as indicated in the RFP issued by the city that indicated a quote severe lack of parking infrastructure close and the need to develop a multi-story park. The city has indicated that parking demands exceed supply in this area and in the case of the Kingstonian has required the developer to meet not only its own demand but also the additional public demand. During this review, we would urge the planning board to determine whether there is a parking shortage or surplus as indicated by this latest study. We note that this has cumulative impacts with several

other developments proposed in the area, all of which generate parking demand. In the end, as with highway improvements, the last proposal should not be required to bear the brunt of any future parking improvements. The planning board has reviewed the traffic and parking analysis submitted by the applicants and has consulted with the Kingston fire chief regarding the project. It has been noted that there are other local businesses who also utilize the onetic parking of proximity to the site long current parking restrictions. The applicants have submitted a modified plan to remove a portion of the building and provide on-site parking and have recognized that there are limited street parking resources that considered. The applicants have expressed confidence that the project will support needed housing for those who do not require parking and rely on public transit and other multimodal needs of transit. The planning board thus votes to override the required modification of the UCP and accept the advisory comment as submitted. Section six, approval of the board does not eliminate the need of obtaining the appropriate permits and approvals from other boards, commissions, departments, and relevant agencies. Section seven, that this resolution shall take effect immediately. make a motion to adopt this random motion. Second on that second by

Chuck Chuck. Uh all in favor Wayne Platt is a yes. Carl Kaco yes. Matthew Gills. Yes. Vince Arthur. Yes. Dave Dart. Yes. It's adopted. We can just listen.

Take up the road. Thank you so much. We appreciate all the confidence you put in us in attending award. And I I you know I the board appreciates the uh the fact that board that we have to make this the best project. So we appreciate that. Thank you. will be yes.

All right, we are What is it? Yeah, it's about

Okay. End of new business. Uh item number five is 73-75 Street site plan to demolish an existing building and construct a 12 and residential multiplex with major waiver from ground finished floor required 8 must be 18 in ground dash floor to 18 in. Okay. 8 in, right? It's a elevation. Okay.

Uh section block and line is 56.92-8-42. Secret of termination. Transex zone T4N- W4. Joseph Herszy is the applicant. 73 Furnace Street LLC is the owner. Welcome. Are you Joseph? I am Joseph. Yes.

Welcome. Hey. So um I was I was at the board I think it was in June last year July and I initially proposed to take the building that that was at the site A4 and converted to four units. Um, we got the approval. We started the demolition and we realized that it might require a lot more restoration work than I thought it would and it's it's it's much easier to demo the whole thing and start a fresh. So, um I mean working with the city zoning code, I determined that the best use or a great use of the property would be to build um 12 single family units. It's um that's how it looks. It looks like a little house, not like a very large building. Um and I don't require any major variances except for um a request uh to lower the building from 18 in to 8 in which um the project would move forward regardless of whether that's food or not but we thought it's better for for first floor which would require um handicap access. It's it makes it much easier for hand access and um and yeah it's it's um I invite you to continue looking at the the pages over here.

Uh J, if you want me to pull up anything specific, but otherwise

I think there's nothing specific that we have to look up for with everything. But obviously um you know before anyone else brings it up, I might as well bring it up. Um the neighbors weren't too excited about it. they they um I mean we got a lot of complaints from our friendly neighbors that are not friendly to this private that we might end up being parking at the area. So I'll get started and explain what my rationale for um um building units over here at first place. I wouldn't try to propose a project in the area that I think is not fit for the neighborhood. Um I personally I visit I visited the site plenty of times during the day and at night and I I always found talking over there. I always found numerous talking spots over there. Um especially considering I mean aside for that block itself um being a pretty sparsely um fronted block. There there only five buildings on that block facing Burn Street. Um, and I think yeah, right over here we have a little diagram of parking spots available before we I mean I don't have any diagram showing the buildings at Front Furn Street, but I guess you have to take my word for it that there only five over here. Um, there are 23 available parking spaces and that takes into consideration that um, according to Kicksten um, zoning law, it's um, each parking space is supposed to be 20.

I just want to be clear because some people may have looked at the Vicola website. This document came in along with um another an explanation this afternoon. So, it was just recently uploaded. So, that you might not have seen this if you're looking at it and wondering why it wasn't something you had seen. It just went up literally late this afternoon. So, I just wanted to make that clear.

Yeah. Yeah. So, so this is I mean based on my personal analysis and I invite anyone to go and and confirm this with me, but this is there there are 23 SPs that start at the science factory which is at the end of Furnace and go all the way down to um um Liberty Street and there are five houses that or five buildings I should say that front furnace street. Um three of them have driveways. Um um I should say yeah three of them have driveways, two of them don't. One of them is a restaurant that's not in use right now. I don't know what's going to happen with it eventually and the other one did my building. Um now in addition to that um if you go to the next slide um we could see this white text is on top of the building of the library which is um the 73 furnace is up there in the top left corner. There are additionally 15 parking spots um on this block over here. holding two buildings that front that black. Um both of one of those buildings have multiple parking spots associated with it on garages and driveways. The other one doesn't. So So overall and and aside for that, there are more spots around the library which the library itself has self-contained parking. So we don't have to worry about the um street park being used for the library. So So overall, there's plenty of parking on Furnish Street and in the vicinity around Furn Street. Now obviously there are neighbors that do lose ver parking from from other blocks and you look at night over there. I personally went there last night and counted 13 available parking spots. But um but I think that this building even without putting any private parking in the back in the back which we have discussed um that may or may not be feasible um we we we should still have plenty of parking over here. But um I I I would encourage

the board to see if they you know agree with that or not. and any other questions will be asked.

Are you going to be living there? No. Okay. Um you going to have a site manager?

Yes. I mean I'm I'm going to self-manag. I'm going to have people on site that take care of um the work has to be done on a day basis. Are you going to be formulating a management plan that's going to incorporate who you're going to have responsible for when you know in your in your absence? Is it um if if that's what requires I could I could form the plan. That's not a problem. It's 12 units. It's not it's sort of at that I guess at this border of needing um a more formal management plan versus something to self-manage. But it doesn't plan self-managing and heading plan even I estimate that I'll need about um five to six hours weekly man.

W four is a very sensitive area. Okay. Um, I think that would it would behoove you to have a management plan that that identifies somebody who's responsible for in in your absence to take care of handle situations that may arise that that can be that can be done. I think that if if you're going to be doing your management plan, then um you should just include regular site maintenance like you know snow shoveling, snow removal, um who's responsible for taking garbage out, garbage day, who's responsible for bringing it back, that kind of stuff just in daily activities as well. Just incorporate that into that plan as well. the layout of each of the units. Do you have a floor plan?

I do a floor plan with the layouts. Um, the layouts I'm still going to need some some massage. We're not I mean completely done, but this I I I I included a layout that works. Now, one of the things that I brought up is um for example, the the first floor units in the front have bedrooms facing the street, which is obviously not ideal. Um if we lower the building from 18 in to 8 in, then we could have um a much lower incline that's needed for the first floor wheelchair accessible apartments, which allows the layout to change a little bit in a way that allows bedrooms being facing the side instead facing the tree. I was under the intent. It is your It is your intent to make the first floor all handicap accessible units. Correct. Adaptable units.

100% handicap accessible, adaptable. That was your And your intent is to have hopefully you grant me the 8 in of a shallow enough rim that it's really noticeable.

Okay. What does the code say about the uh availability of the handicap parking for living situation that has the apartments to accommodate um with four units um the zoning code does not require it. Um I don't know that there's a requirement in the building code. We can double check that. Um, typically we would look for one to be located either on site or if there is an existing one within close proximity. Um, the set the formbbased code used to have a section that said if you have over four units of housing, you had to provide for a handicap parking space or there had to be one in close proximity. That language was changed, never moved from the zoning code. Um, so that is no longer a requirement.

All right. One thing we did talk about um with U Mr. Herszig is the the survey for the property was done after the plans were created and submitted. So, the survey has shown that um where the property lines actually are were not where uh Mr. Hersley originally thought they were there. There's a little bit. So, he's going to be he's going to be required to resubmit his drawings to show um that and also to provide he's looking for a door what we call a Doryard frontage type. And the new code, as you're all well well aware, it now has architectural standards. The old code did not. So, um, he has to comply with one of the building frontage types that are allowed for building to take place. Um, and so that's going to be another adjustment that he'll have to make on his end and show in a final plan. Um obviously you have all seen um all of the public comment that came through um regarding parking and density and just form basic form of the structure um being in in the public's view not consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Couple things I might ask you to think about. Um, obviously the main question is whether or not you will hold a public hearing on this project. It's not required by code, so you can set one. If the board feels that um you want to hold a public hearing, we can schedule that this evening for next month. But I would say that a couple things should happen before a public hearing takes place. Obviously, the management plan that Wayne had mentioned earlier would be something I would want

to have Mr. submit for reviewing and at least for um review and consideration. Um I know that he has done some parking review of the neighborhood, but that's showing what is what parking is there, but I think that a little bit more detail needs to be looked at in terms of utilization and availability. You know, what's available is really the question. Not, you know, not that a street can accommodate 10 cars, but how many of those spaces are are effectively available for another use? Okay. Um, so I think that work needs to be developed more. Um,

would that be done by an actual study rather than just kind of going?

Yeah. So that I mean I would I would recommend that you require that um formal formal study. Um you might want to think about alternatives. I don't know how the board feels about the density, the scale and and this project, but you know, do you think requesting a minimum of, you know, a couple alternatives to be to look be looked at? Um, and not not full-blown plans, but maybe some concept alternatives might be something to consider. Um and then the last thing um you know like you have done in many other circumstances um is to look at visual simulations um and ask for the simulation. Uh you just did it recently with Elizabeth, you did it with Frog Alley where they put together a simulation of what the new building looks like in the context of the street and you might want to request that as well. So those are a couple things I would you know off the top of my head recommend before a public hearing is is scheduled. So I don't know members may have their own thoughts. You know, historically for larger projects, um, the board has asked the applicants to submit, you know, if you have a plan B just in case, you know, the board doesn't feel warm and fuzzy about a project, if it goes to a public hearing, which I'm going to ask the the board to go ahead with a public hearing tonight because, like you said in the beginning, you've you've got some concerned neighbors and I, you know, for this project, I think that they deserve to be heard. Um, we're not trying to discourage you from this. This is not something that we don't ask, you know, of other applicants. Um, so, uh, I think that's a good idea to have a plan B or a plan C just in case, you know, you're you're not getting a

warmer set reception from us about the original concept, you know, and, you know, public comment will also um allow you to to see what's, you know, maybe see alternatives to um to what your your your first proposal is based on, you know, public comment. and comments from the board as well. So, I mean, this is our this is our really our introduction to this to this project and I'm sure that we'll the board will have questions uh on subsequent meetings, too. So, again, I don't want you to to walk away from here tonight thinking that we're trying to discourage you. In fact, you know, I I'm I'm happy to see something like this happen there. Let's just again try to make this the best project that we can that that satisfies, you know, everybody. So, um, and meets your needs as well.

So, I want you to know that. So, but I do believe that a plan B would be in order, you know, for this. So, I said I don't know how the rest of the I'm I'm going to ask this question not to go for the major wave like they decided to go for the 18 in and not go to us for the eight. Does this move forward with or without us at that point? No, we still have to excuse me. That's just one component of the of the site. It just doesn't have any major wave that Yeah. Right.

I think having a variety of options to see visually will help. I think will also um help with maybe some of the questions that the public is asking, especially the residential neighbors that have lived in this neighborhood and are experiencing, you know, their own daily parking routine. I know that all over Kingston, it is, you know, definitely something um that is a constant thing that we see, but I think that it will help. Um, having options would be great and definitely having a plan B and then definitely I agree with Lea having a public hearing I think is is important.

Speaking to Leah is at the VA. Yeah. Um, when you can you um clarify what you mean by a plan B or plan C, do you mean like a six unit instead of 12 units? It could be. It it could be a reduction in the amount of of you know the size of the units which lowers it from 12 to something else. Um you know possibly

and it could encompasses the area of things. So yeah, and and and it could be, you know, based on our comments, public comment, you know, giving him, you know, another look at, oh, maybe I should consider that or, you know, so yeah, the project did change quickly. I think

I do want to mention, which um really should be mentioned at the public hearing, that furniture as it is right now is sort of primed to have to go through a transformation. At this point, if one of the few blast in a larger area that's still stuck in it's still had its original industrial um flavors 100 years ago that is probably will become a lot more residential over the next um couple of years. And you know we we we still have the opportunity to shape the direction of the residential look that it will be gone. Um, I did also add that I know that some of the comment um identified the alleyway in the rear um of the property and um the applicant has had some extensive title work done and research. Um, and that alleyway is not being used or considered in this application as access to the rear. So, I just want that to be clear.

So, when we're considering a major waiver to lower uh the ground floor, can you talk about the intent of why why does the code want a team? just so we can know what the intent of the boat was there to when we're considering doing it was really to create more of a a residential like if you're commercial you can be at grade and for residential uses it's 18 in so that you have like a a step or a porch like kind of entryway versus an at grade entryway um that's really the difference

and we've done that on street right was one and uh Foxhole land by Prince Street was another one. Didn't we change the alternate? Well, that was first floor height. That was the That was the height of the first floor. That was from the the floor to ceiling height. We lowered that. Which has since been lowered. The previous project that we had in front of us for this property, how many units was it? I know they were going to utilize it was four.

So the initial proposal was for four and now this is now 12 months ago. It was an adapted reuse of the space building. Right. Y existing this building would potentially double the the the area that we built up and it would turn into three floors instead of two floors. So it would would substantially grow the the interior space.

Do you want to really delve into all this right now or do you want to I mean we we can give him the staff notes that we Okay. um developed. We'll do that. Um, and then just yeah, moving forward. As far as having a public hearing in this, I've already expressed my willingness to do so. As well, how does the rest of the board, everybody else is involved with that? So,

do we need an official vote on that? Well, yeah. Will, but I mean, do you like I had made the statements of what I feel should be submitted prior to a public hearing being scheduled. Um, I need to know if you agree with those, if you have other things. If you don't agree with them, um, because that's important information to have. Yeah. So, I mean, but, um, I know folks have comments that have been submitted already. Um, if we open the public hearing, those comments are still on the record. Those comments are still there.

You were what you would have what you're looking to require as part of that will still be in play then, right? I mean, that's not when you're going to ask of the applicant. You the mean that mean what you're recommending. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. So, if we move forward to have the the public hearing opening at next month's meeting, what I'm saying is I think that information should be available before we schedule the public hearing. So, he has to if he can get it together, okay, and put it, you know, get to us. So, we can we can we can word this based on your recommendation when we should open the public.

Yeah. Essentially, I think you'd like to see a full presentation first. Maybe it'll answer some of the questions that people had and then only hearing and then we put like finalized floor floor plans cuz I think right now the floor plans you have there you said they just kind of work. They're going to change. I was under impression that the planning board need final floor plans but it's definitely it's approximately that. Yes, I

think with a waiver considering it probably would be nice because with having the spaces on the lower floor needing the waiver or the accommodating the any kind of special needs that the tenant would have. I think that that's what makes it different. And we can dictate how long the public hearing stays open, too. So, it's not like one meeting and it's done. Apparently can it can remain open. So yeah, you're just saying the the waiver would alter it would allow you to put the the bedrooms off the street which is something we definitely would want.

The way make it set up a little bit make the layout much better. Yeah, if you guys could just give me the waiver right now once, you know, some sort of confirmation. I got the way it allow me to have have a better vision and in how I could I could continue playing. I think we would have to see both sets of layouts to determine whether or not we were even comfortable moving forward on the layout or you know moving forward on the waiver. So so the waiver really gives me it gives a much better like it a little bit advantage. Nothing to do with the layout. That's the main reason why I'm requesting the waiver in that um it just makes the ramps less steep. The handicap ramps are going to be pretty steep and makes a lot less steep

because the project was already initially proposed in one aspect. I think that is kind of I'm only speaking for myself but feels like something that's completely new and it is. So unfortunately I think that I don't feel comfortable like moving along with how I would feel about that just because I have to look at it as like entirely new and especially because the first round it didn't have as much public input and this one has a tremendous amount. So I think that that gives you me the indication that we need to like face it out a little bit. Thanks.

Then and our comments tonight don't mean that does not indicate that we are against a waiver. It's just that we need more information and you know I understand I understand. That makes sense. Um I'm ready for for public hearing. Yeah. Um well I want more information about you said but I would like to see multiple different ideas I I would propose. I mean I could anything obviously that's not what I'm going for. So what type of proposals like do you want to see? Well is is there um you know the the the scope the size of the of you know the amount of units. I mean if you could reduce that how does that look?

Unit size. size, you know, go from 12 to 10, right? You know, if that's and again, this is this is you have to you're working with what you know, a budget and and economics that work for you. Is this something that is in in your wheelhouse that is doable? So, you know, um are we is is it something that we can uh can we get any off street any off street parking there with a with a with a different with a different scale of the of the building, right? These are these are things that you should think about with with big,

right? So, park is something that you guys would really want to want to um um get more of. Um there is so alley in that I'm still trying to work on but but it's the unknown alley. They're not gonna add to that. I mean we're not we're not saying get all 12 cars off the street. Yeah. Obviously but you know like with Frog Alley they did their their original proposal was no off streetet parking and over the course of a you know a number of of meetings interaction with the board um they they were able to get four cars off the street. So cuz we that's four cards for 42 units. Yeah. No, but I mean still they were able to guess, you know, I know it's it's a larger scale.

It's a zone, too. Different trans. Yeah. Mhm.

I mean, even one or two handicap spots, something that would have four handicap apartments, you know, having, you know, at least one or two dedicated handicap spots. So, so there is a handicap spot just at at the turn of the corners on Liberty Street that is um I mean a few times that I passed that not been used which which is like one indication of of a of a handicap spot in the area. I mean I haven't done a traffic study I can't guarantee was never used and um you know before handicap spots don't mean for like handicap people. They you know I mean for handicap um um apartments don't mean for people that drive handicap cars. could be many types of people that would need, you know, um um apartments in those stairs such as um maybe people that stare like elderly people, you know, mother with a stroller.

There's a lot of problems I think with housing that we want to solve, right? I think that going from an original four unit plan to a 12 unit plan, I think that if you look at maybe some consistent if there are any consistencies with some of the feedback, I would pay attention to that initially, but also definitely if you had to change your project, I'm sure that that was expensive and try and figure out a way to consider the feedback but also get the potential earned from it that you need to that's that's the plan to try to come up with you know the best works but I know it's very expensive to go to to string together a product that's profitable is not is not always or even brick savings it's not always that easy so so you know I have to see some other options but yeah the smaller you get the more difficult it is uh preparing as well. sheet is you're receptive to you know the back and forth and the feedback and we look forward to that in subsequent meetings when when we have you know

I have university so I got to be a little and I think that you would get a feel from our board here like by now that we know I I you know we're not there so you know Okay. So, at 10. Um, anything else? Any question about the alley? Well, is that a book? Is your property line right?

Yeah. So, the alleyway actually interesting history on your bed. So, all the properties I this whole square block usually owned by one or two people and slowly got subdivided. That alleyway was never subdivided. There still as far as these are concerned still seems to be owned by the original people but it may have been issued indications that may have been issued to the city in meeting minutes um in the 1850s and we just we just we just find those minutes and that's why yes that is well I feel like parking study would definitely be able to inform our decision

especially since so many of the public comment is about parking and there's parking study that does show there's a ton of parking inventory around there that and in between meetings you you're going to be in discussion I would imagine with staff so they're very helpful down there and you know to kind of put put your hands around what we've been talking about tonight so I work with all of you and I not you know we'll be handed back any of my neighbors. So, you know, it's this this is the public kind of, you know, I want to work with everybody. Okay. Okay. Good to table.

Yeah. Motion to table and to open a public to have a public hearing. Correct. Yeah. So, at this time is discussed. Yeah. Yep. Any other questions? Okay. At this time, I'll make a motion that we table item number five and also authorize the opening of a public hearing. the best second legal when the information is available or just as you have recommended. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Be clear.

Yeah. And that makes sense. So Matt Gillis with a second on that. All in favor? I opposed. Carried. Thank you, Mr. Herszing. We look forward to seeing you again. Yes. All right. Take care.

Okay. Item number six, we're on an extension request. Uh 206 and 208 Flatish Avenue. Extension request for Earth's lot line deletion of the lands of Kingston Housing Authority section block and lot is 48.74-3-24 and 48.74-3-9 secret of termination transex zone SD-fing authority is the owner. Welcome. Hi everyone. Uh my name is Jonathan Joy. I'm an attorney with the law firm Man Rider McKay. We represent the Kingston housing authority. um because the board may call granted approval back in July of last year for a lot deletion followed by an extension in January and uh we're just about done with all the conditions. Uh we have the map filed. The county is looking for one more form that we are finishing up hopefully in the next week or so. So we're just asking for one more 90day extension to get that.

Where's we're actually can get these to Lori. Sure. These are the three forms that she signed on earn. Great. Thank you. Um, seems pretty straightforward. I mean, we did it once before. Anybody opposed or any questions? Okay. Um, good. Anything else? Okay. So, I will make a motion that we extend the lot line deletion. I done reex for 90 days. Second by Matt Gillis. 90 minutes, please.

But I don't see anything that says C and I know it said C over here. Just don't do it. Just recognize this. I was cuz I was I wasn't actively thinking that. Like it's not in here. So maybe. All right. So this is a type two action under secret. So no further review. The board is required for this. Having said that, um the motion has been made. Seconded by Matt Gillis. Any question or look at all? All right. All in favor? I opposed. Barry. How long were you waiting tonight? Um, two hours. All right. So, you guys start at 7. So, um, you're ahead of SK or at 6. So, you're ahead of schedule. Okay. All right. Some days are longer than 11.

Yeah. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you everyone. All right. Mr. Pass around passing around. We almost got Brian to lead here.

We should have been meeting just about the end of the meeting last month. Um, and they're probably all aware if you've been following the news media, um, that the governor um, in her 2027 budget proposal is proposing uh, certain changes to some of the seeker um, protocol and um, so we had a meeting Sage um, joined us and we discussed it. Um I know I've been sending out um documentation opportunities to listen to webinars at Zoom attending Zoom meetings um that discuss it. Um and so this is a drafted letter that we came up with. It would go to Senator Hi, Assemblywoman Trasha uh the mayor and the old woman at large Andrea Sha the common council um from the planning board. if you agree with it. So, I want you to take a couple minutes and just read it through um really just um you know make some bring some points of discussion um that you know the proposed changes um you know so that any change to the cedar law is in the best interest of Kingston. We wanted to make sure certain issues were recognized um by those who are and to them to make decisions. So as we're reading that to get readiness, what this proposal says is well what the governor is proposing is that your other board would be handling. No, the the govern well what the governor one of the one of the things

that the the proposal does is it basically changes um projects that would be considered type two. Right now uh three units of development are type two. um it would increase the three units to 100 units as being a type two action and as you are very well aware being dealing with seeker type two actions do not necess do not require a seeker review or environment environmental review process. So um our code our formbbased code says that titan 2 actions are minor site plans. So anything up to 100 units could theoretically be a minor site plan in the eyes of our formbbased code which means that it would not come to the planning board. It could potentially just be reviewed at administrative level with um you know with the requisite agencies which are the engineering department, building department, legal corporation council, housing director and planning. and um I have the ability to bump it up to a major project, a major site plan um with flaws with good cause. So, you know, a project like you saw tonight, 12 units obviously has a significant, you know, impact to the immediate neighborhood. Um you know, you don't know from project to project what those impacts might be. Um something else that I think is important to understand is that when seeker is pursued um under an unlisted action or type one action the EAF mapper um program is used when the state program and that brings up um certain pertinent information whether it's endangered

species whether it's brownfields contamination wetlands um brings up a a gap ment of things that should be looked at in addition to you know some of your standard considerations and concerns like you know pick um you know things of that nature. So just you know impact on community services so this would impact on the schools police fire um so this would impact the coordinated review. Yeah. Good. Yeah. Yeah. What about a bit of like

I mean you know as a planning board I mean certainly as a planning board you know you you can always um you know call for and ask for certain studies to be done you know depending on where it is sensitive area right I mean does that does going from 3 to 100 take that out of

well one of the things and I I I know we we shared last month the conservation advisory council's um recommendations with all of you um and we agreed we agreed at least as a as a as a a group um that what they the statement that they made regarding the definition of previously disturbed is too broad um and it needs further clarification. Um, in a couple of the Webland Zoom meeting I went to, they had an attorney who was talking about these proposed changes. And they were asking about what is the definition of previously disturbed. And one thing that she said was that you could have a site that might be 5 acres in size. Um, and it might have a small shed or farmhouse or whatever on it, building on it, and that entire site is considered previously disturbed.

Meaning, look at New York State.

That's a little that's a little, you know, I mean, so statements of that. So that's where, you know, they were saying that that definition really needs to be uh refined. Um, you know, if if it's a site like you have uptown where you have Brock Alley that's, you know, 75% covered with asphalt pavement has easements running through it and has been previously occupied by various, you know, entities. That is, you know, more of a previously disturbed site. In the other situation, you know, I think Golden Hill um with that project site, you know, was 20 acre site. 20 acres was not disturbed. It was probably maybe 4 acres disturbed on that site where the jail was and other outuildings that they had up there. Does that make the whole 20 acres pre, you know, I don't know. Um it's, you know, it's a subjective, but I think it's important to recognize some of these things and that's why we wanted to point them out to you. Um,

so this letter is asking for like very two specific things that they really focus in on definition of previously served and then also asking that the power be left with us to

Okay. I mean, I think the local communities, you know, it's not a one-sizefitit all type of um kind of situation. I think the local community should have the ability to define their own thresholds. Um, and you know, where Kingston may fall is going to be left up would be left up to the common council if that were to happen. But you know there would be the ability I think more for more public input and more discussion about it rather than allowing you know this just broad blanketed type of

threshold. So that you know those are things that we we were talking about. I don't know if the other board members have anything else that you want to add to it. Um if you have comments on the draft that we presented please let us know. um you know um you know that we'd like to get this.

No, I I uh for me I I appreciate the time that staff board members participated in this um but put in to formulate this. Um and we I know we've said we felt some frustration that our voices aren't heard in general and I you know But don't say I know and I agree there's something to we need to have something has to come out of this this this body to to uh to weigh in on this. I think that this this gets it right on the head. child. Um,

I didn't get it because the intention I I mean at least what was like portrayed in the news versus was that there was some sort of gridlock and hold up with the way that it was was existing and so that this was going to eliminate some of those roadblocks. But at the same time, if we ever end up in a situation where something needs to be really dope into, there's a lot of reasons usually why. So only know to the uniqueness of our own city what that would be.

It's worth a degree that there's room for improvement in the secret regulations. I think, you know, just just like we said with the old Tony quote, there's room for there's always room for improvement, you know, and and so I don't disagree with taking a look at it. I just, you know, I think that more, you know, more discussion needs to be had before the changes are made because I think there is some refinement needed and some more decisions to be looked at. And I know we're in confinement now of

of all the way from from the governor's office down because housing housing more housing no matter what what the cost of of the impact on a community. Um you know we've we felt the frustration as we said adopting the new the form based code. Um, so, um, yeah, I'm in agreement with with Mr. Yeah. And there's probably other municipalities feeling the same way. So, more voices. Yeah.

But again, thank you to participated in drafting this thing. It's So, do we need a motion to approve this letter? Yeah, I make a motion that we uh approve sending this letter off to the uh four individuals on the top of top second. Second by Matt Gillis. All in favor? I opposed carry. Okay.

Thank you kindly. That's all I have. Anybody else have anything else? Like I don't you have anything chief? Uh chotion to adjourn, second by sage. All in favor? Cinemas.