Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

There you go. Okay. Angelina, would you please do a roll call for us?

Present.

Here. Here.

Here.

Okay. Also, could I have a motion for the minutes to be accepted?

I would move that we accept the minutes of the July 1st meeting.

Second.

I cannot vote. I'd like to recuse myself because I was not present for that meeting.

I would vote yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Rick, counsel, would you like to introduce?

Oh, yeah, I'd like to introduce Andy Brick. He's going to be the new staff attorney advising the board at his regular monthly meetings. And if you have any legal questions in between also.

Thanks. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. Thanks to Rick for all these months or years that you've served. I really appreciate it, especially I do.

We all did.

We all did.

Okay. Okay, and he has a lot of experience, both with land use and in particular with the two boards in Troy.

So, all right. Welcome. Perfect. Okay, so tonight we have four board members we have one out. So what that translates to our meeting tonight would be if there is a two and two vote. That's a no.

Yeah, motion fails.

Motion fails. So just want to keep you guys attuned to that. And also tonight we are going to announce there's going to be no action taken on the PLZBA 2026-0055-865 2nd Avenue. So we'd like to open that up and whoever's here, make your way up to the podium. And we'd like to open it up to the board's questioning of some things that we'd like to question you guys on and also the public.

Also, you might want to state the reason why no action will be taken tonight is because the seeker has not been completed by the lead agency.

The planning board, right?

Which is the planning board.

Okay.

So come forward. I ask if there's any public input.

Absolutely. I did. It's a little too late. Andy, is it okay if we do public first, public comments first on this, or?

It's totally up to your discretion, but sometimes it's better to let the applicant go first so the public can hear it.

Gotcha.

The public may ask questions. Okay.

Got you. Okay.

Also, we're gonna limit this time, right? Okay. As we listen to the presentation, we have questions. being somewhat conscious, being concise.

If I could state also, since we're going to be presenting and we're not taking a vote tonight, it's okay if we could be concise and expeditious on the time that we're going to spend, which I just want to, even for the public, appreciate that.

you Let's just talk.

Yes, that should have been done at 5.30.

5.30, we're ready to fire. I know, I agree.

At the last time, I was...

I'd be fine with that. I'd be fine with that. Just a verbal? Sure. I don't know what they're demonstrating. I'm taking all your change. Technical difficulties.

If we can't get it up, can we just verbalize?

All right.

no there's a button on the top okay now we're good okay my promise to you next time is that we will fully check that in advance third time's a charm i sincerely apologize for the delay noted that we're going to move quickly tonight given that no action can be taken and that we want time for you guys to be able to comment in the public um so that being said thank you for having me back we've done a lot of great work since we were here last uh and i'm excited to share that with you tonight i'm going to move quickly through the beginning i just want to make sure people who are new here have some context um so tonight we're gonna um we're it's too loud Okay, bear with me. Okay, so tonight. We're going to pick up where we left off. I'm going to talk a little more specifically about these homes. I know there were a lot of questions about that last time, and I have more detailed info for tonight. We're going to review some of the design updates, which I'm sure you guys are eager to see. And then we're going to talk about the traffic more specifically. Frank Villachotto, our traffic engineer, is here tonight. And I want to be able to answer any questions you may have as that came up last time, in addition to some site engineer questions and then we'll quickly review the updated variance requests. So I am Andrew Shriver of Attic Labs. I am working in concert with Rockabill Development. and AHC Development and Construction. I am the lead on this project and working through entitlements and the local process and overseeing the larger coordination of this project. Rockabill is our finance partner, AHC is our construction partner. These are three projects that various parties have worked on together in the past, Zero Place in New Paltz, The Lost Foundry in Newburgh, and One Lafayette in Newburgh. I thought important to note after engaging with a number of local community members to make the point that I am not a merchant developer. We are not a team that entitles a project and walks away. We do not say we're going to do one thing and then do another. And if something does change, because projects do evolve, you're going to hear it from us first, okay? So I think it's important to state that. There are a lot of different types of developers. I am not that kind of developer, and neither are my partners. As you know, the site today is the former site of the Lansingburg Price Shopper. It has sat empty for a number of years and certainly has quite a bit of potential, which I'd like to go into a little more detail tonight. PB, David Ensign he or him, So quickly at a glance, we had previously proposed proposed 205 units, since we since submitting last we have a new application submission to the PV planning board. PB, David Ensign he or him, The materials, you may have, or maybe a little out of date. And parking spaces are reduced from 205 to 201 to allow for designated delivery area. So I'll just point out both the reduction in units and parking. However, we still have nine more spaces than units. All right, let's talk a little bit about the homes, so I think it's just very important to distinguish what this project is okay, this is workforce housing. Income is the only test. That includes credit scores income verification references background checks if appropriate. applied consistently throughout. We have committed to this as a workforce housing project. It will be managed by us. And I truly believe that this will be a project that people choose. It will not be defined by the fact that there are income limitations for these residents. It will be defined by the fact That it is an excellent project cited on the water in a part of Troy that has not seen development in recent years and deserves good development. The city has an opportunity to work with us to pursue grant funding. I hope they will, I believe they will, and I believe this project can anchor quite a bit of improvement in that area. That's not to say that Lansingburg isn't a beautiful area, but certainly there are infrastructure improvements that that community needs. And this project is a wonderful way to achieve that while simultaneously anchoring that site, which has sat empty for a number of years. To be definitive, This is a workforce housing development. It is not supportive housing. There is no supportive housing component. There is no unhoused set aside. And there are no on-site social services anticipated for this project. We have committed to that. We have expressed that to HCR. Everybody is in agreement. Quickly about the unit and AMI mixes, rents, and income levels. I know that Stephen had quite a few questions last time, so I want to be able to answer those in more detail. I'll quickly run through this. I assume you may want to ask some questions at the end. Okay. On the left, you'll see monthly rents by AMI. So depending on which AMI band you... ACM Conference 29th, ACM Conference 29th, occupy based on your income, this would be the rent for these units, so you see one bedrooms two bedrooms and three bedrooms and then the rent by those levels Andrew can you enlarge that at all yeah absolutely please sorry. ACM Conference 29th, ACM Conference 29th, I didn't want to I don't want to have like five slides so I put it all in one good. ACM Conference 29th, ACM Conference 29th, I want to note that that rent includes a utility allowance and i'll come back to that okay.

Read those rent numbers out loud under the one bedroom column, please.

Absolutely. Understood. So a one bedroom at 40% AMI would be $923. Okay. A One bedroom at 50% AMI would be 1,154. At 60%, it would be 1,385. And at 70% would be 1,616, okay? Based on area median income as defined by HUD in this year, okay? I think as I've stated before, HUD updates AMI average median income each year. What market housing actually costs in Troy, okay? Troy asking rents average $1,650 for a one, $1,900 for a two, and $2,250 for a three. That does not include utilities. That does not include internet. The true cost of housing often includes services and or additional expenses that we don't always anticipate when we think about the cost. So the true total cost of housing, and this is an average, right, is $1,875 for a one, $2,165 for a two, and $2,560 for a three. And so the reason I show that is that at 60% AMI, a unit here would allow someone to save approximately $490 a month. 58 80 a year okay and that scales up by bedroom and what that allows for is for people to save money and hopefully re-enter the private housing market unless or deploy it in ways that they may need, right? Stable housing at rents that are affordable allow people then to dispense with their money in other ways so that they are not rent burdened and can meet the needs of their family, of their individual choices, education, savings, starting a business. And so I just wanted to illustrate here a benefit that this would provide, okay? Now, if we scroll over here, okay? I want to highlight, this is an example unit mix of AMIs in bedrooms. Now, the bedroom counts, we are more or less fixed unless we learn something relative to some exogenous factor having to do potentially with the site, et cetera. I cannot say. Gareth J. We are more or less fixed on these unit counts, and this is an example of how those units could be distributed by am I banned okay. Gareth J. Ultimately, the weighted average of a project like this needs to be 60% am I okay how you do that there are many ways, we have to pursue a market study right which informs this decision. HCR, the state agency, needs to review that and potentially weigh in. And then ultimately, a tax credit investor, which is part of the larger financing framework for a project like this, needs to be confident that this is going to be successful in cash flow properly so that their investment is guarded. And so there are many people that engage in the process of determining a unit mix. It is a negotiation. It is an evolving thing. And ultimately, I hope that it meets the needs of this larger area. Okay. And provides a mix that is genuinely positive for everyone in that building, right? You want to see some income distribution so that those people there benefit from exposure to other types of people. What would incomes look like? Well, you can see right there below who it houses, the incomes that would qualify based on household size.

Can you blow that up?

Absolutely.

One more. Okay, thanks.

You know, and I would... Yeah, so... A single person making under 43,100 a year would qualify at 50% AMI. Now, I'm happy to break out in further detail next time those individuals in this area that are rent burdened relative to their incomes. But these bans right here do a lot to securing stable housing and providing these people an opportunity to And when I say these people, I mean people that are working wage jobs, who are working very hard to secure a stable existence, right? This provides them the opportunity at stability and the ability to work their way up, okay? It's a wonderful opportunity. It is not in any way an over-concentration. And I want to get quickly now to the design so that I can... further show how because of the way this project is designed and how we've evolved it i believe that this will be a very competitive building many people want to live here so just quickly teachers school staff trades mechanics homemade cnas retail food service child care staff all the kinds of support staff that a community needs a project like this is meant to house

Okay.

Amenities and services included. Trash collection. Efficient heating and cooling so energy bills don't get out of whack. Further buttressed by a tight building envelope. Okay. LED lighting throughout. Wi-Fi included so people have access to information and the ability to navigate a complex world online. Parking is included. There's a community room, fitness room, and the whole project is designed for healthy living. You have six acres. It is not a one acre site with 150 units. It is six acres with waterfront access. There's more than enough space for people to enjoy quality of life. It is not cramming a bunch of people and it is an amazing opportunity to have parking and open space and enough various amenities, et cetera, to support an active, balanced lifestyle. So then I would just say this, public benefits of the project to the community, all right? A street you want to walk down, a place you feel safe because it's well lit. Shops around the corner. I know some people question the viability of shops. we would not include retail if we did not believe it viable and if we had not underwritten in such a way that it will be successful. And that means slightly below market rents, right? So those retail spaces are attractive. kinds of retailers willing to take a shot and supply services to the residents of that those buildings in the surrounding area eyes on the street i was at the lansingburg community association meeting last week and i saw one of the police officers nodding right the more people live and identify with an area the less likely something you know, crime or any sort of adverse action is going to happen because people are aware and watching out because they've taken ownership and it is, you know, occupied, right? There are people there. Right now it is an empty site. a cleaner Hudson, we're going to get to that a little later, a wider tax base, and an anchor for what could follow next. So moving into the design portion, we have three renderings. And I'm happy to zoom in a little bit. We've made extensive updates to the design itself. So you can see there's a three-color palette. Actually, it's a little more than that. But in essence, there are sort of three main colors. this green, this olive, and then this sort of bluish hue here. And so what you can see is that those colors are consistent throughout the three buildings, but applied differently. I think oftentimes it can be challenging to unite the aesthetics of a building or buildings without making it feel repetitive. And I really liked this approach that our architect came up with to unify the buildings while simultaneously giving them a distinct identity through an approach to color. So moving down here, I really like this rendering. This gives you a sense of what it may feel like walking down the street, approaching the buildings to the south, looking at the buildings to the west. And so you can see here, we have updated that first floor to more clearly define the retail spaces with brick, right? And extended awning, and then transom windows above. Those will be beautiful retail spaces that receive a tremendous amount of light. Okay, these are not afterthoughts. These are programmatically considered. You can see then we'll have trees there in front of the parking lot. I'm annoyed with myself because I did not include the most updated renderings but, in fact, we have devised a way to include trees in front of those buildings kelsey we'll get to that a little bit later, that was the one thing I forgot. And then, finally, we have a rendering from the river right. And so, preserving what portions of the existing existing fauna can be preserved one to solidify that bank right, we want to ensure that that bank is sturdy trees various fauna, excuse me for not knowing more specific ones in this area at the moment. retain and enforce the riverbank. Simultaneously, they ensure that there is a balance between the enjoyment of those views by the residents and the preservation of that view corridor for the larger community, right? You have a historic district across the river. You have a historic bridge right there, okay? You can see an updated site plan here. I'm going to skip this because Kelsey will talk a little bit about this, but I thought just helpful to show, you know, an updated sort of elevation of the retail and in fact here you can see where those trees are going to go and i'm not going to steal kelsey's thunder here so a little more detail on the facade colors chosen types of materiality and what's been done there i'm not going to dwell too much on that unless you guys have specific questions i'm going to move through some of these renderings i would just note sorry elevations Elevations are architectural in purpose insofar as they are meant to guide a builder. These colors are off, right? This is not to the same extent as those renderings in their ability to accurately depict what those colors will look like, okay? So I don't want there to be any confliction here. Those renderings are accurate representations of those colors and what those buildings will look like. Site plan and engineering. I'm going to hand it over to Kelsey now.

So I would say the site design is generally the same as what we presented to you last month with a few key exceptions. So first, the front setback for all three of the buildings has increased from 10 feet to now 15 feet. And this was solely driven by the water department's requirement to provide additional separation to the existing 16-inch water main that is basically paralleled underneath the front property line. So they are requiring they want 15 feet minimum to our buildings to protect that mean. So that triggers the need for a building front setback variance, which was included in our revised application. As we had noted last month, the location of the clay combined sewer main prohibits the ability to provide typical street trees along the curb line. However, The additional building setback of the 15 feet allowed us to actually add 10 small trees along the frontage of each building that are set back five feet into the property. So that actually aligns with the 11 trees that we already had proposed in the parking lot landscape screening areas. So, in total, we will now have 21 trees along the frontage, where the code requires 25 street trees. So they're not directly at the curb, but we are going to provide the trees, they're just going to be set back a little bit further. And then After further conversation with the Troy Fire Department, they will actually require the 26 foot width for those two access points into the site. So they are saying that these are going to be the primary aerial apparatus access roads. So New York State Fire Code requires 26 foot width. So the updated plans reflect that. So that also does trigger a variance to exceed the 20 foot maximum width for access driveways allowed by the code. Uh, lastly, we added a four dedicated striped loading zones for deliveries and tenant move in at the frontage of each of the parking lots. Um, so this reduced, uh, the provided off street parking to 201. Um, but with the reduction of units, we still have more parking than units. Oh, um, I can't remember if we presented this last time, honestly. But in the southern parking lot, one of the key comments that we heard in the initial meetings with the planning board was that they wanted something more inviting for access back to the river. So in the southern parking lot, we opened up the center space to provide a designated public access pathway through the site. So it basically goes directly from the CDTA bus stop back through the parking to the river. And then there's like seating nooks and a lot of landscaping along the way to get back to the riverwalk.

If I could just highlight, I'm sorry. There's a large tree median in the middle there, right? It is meant to be a landscaped, dedicated path. There are two cross points that are minimal, one at the beginning and one at the end. There will be proper striping, stop signs, et cetera, in order to ensure pedestrians are safe there. But it is meant to create a dedicated space for the neighborhood residents people in the neighborhood to access that waterfront so that it feels welcoming and inviting.

With that, I'm actually going to turn it over to Frank to do the parking and traffic portion.

Thank you. Good evening, everyone. My name is Frank Filacciotto. I'm with LaBella Associates. I was not here in prior meetings, so it's nice to meet you all. I'll go through the traffic and parking approach. We've prepared a couple of analyses that have been submitted. One was a TDM analysis, a transportation demand management analysis, which essentially forms the core of our approach to traffic and parking, and I'll walk you through that. But just sort of stepping back to the existing condition. This area is already an area that is multimodal. And whenever you can couple a multimodal environment with mixed use you enhance that further. So trips that are traditionally made by car only become varied, walk, bike, transit, and car. And so when we initiated our work on this project, we looked at census data from the track that this project is in, which is 401. And we pulled some data and the slide here summarizes some of the key points. There's about 7% already walk to work in this area, 30% travel car free. So that could be any mix of bike, walk, transit. 10%, interestingly, do not own a vehicle at all. And then there is seven day bus service literally at the front door of this project. And so when you think about putting a small population at this location that was traditionally entirely car-centric, you can leverage these other aspects of transportation in the area. How are we advancing slides? Sorry. Oh, down. Oh, that way. Got it. So then, you know, as Andrew pointed out, this site historically has been developed with retail, commercial retail only. Large price chopper, a Burger King, very intense uses from a traffic standpoint. Supermarket. in general, just a supermarket on its own of about 50,000 square feet, which is what this is, would see over 5,000 trip ends per day, 5,000 in and outs over the course of a day. It's about four to five times more than a residential building of this size. A lot of us think about traffic in terms of what the peak hours are. When you're trying to commute home from work and you're stuck in traffic, you're, you know, that's the worst time. We looked very closely at that. That's the weekday PM peak hour bar graphs that you see on the right. A former use of this site, Burger King and Price Chopper would see 517 peak hour trips, one hour in the evening. Contrast that with the proposed use where over 300 trips less intense from a traffic, from a vehicle standpoint with a mixed use property that's proposed. So, again, it is somewhat night and day from a vehicle traffic standpoint. And the reason for that is that supermarkets, Burger King, those are, again, very intense uses. When you look at a residential use, specifically one that is coupled with mixed use, you get less intense vehicle traffic, more multimodal use, etc., We performed a traditional traffic analysis to evaluate the intersections of 124th Street and 125th Street along 2nd Avenue with the development built. So what we did was we forecasted the traffic for the residential building, as well as the mixed use. And again, there's multiple tenants in that commercial space. Those tenants have not been chosen yet. What we did is we looked at an array of possible uses, uses that would be complementary to a residential building, daycare, small coffee shop, things like that that would complement the residents above. We forecasted that traffic, we superimposed that traffic on the existing condition, and we calculated levels of service. I'll cut to the chase here, A's and B's are very, very good levels of service at these intersections. back when this Price Chopper and Burger King were operating, I would venture to say that those levels of service were a bit worse, but A's and B's are, they connote a very good operating level of traffic. The project will also improve transportation facilities in the area. One of the key components of the site plan is that it will remove entirely the central driveway at this site today, which is unsignalized. The north and south driveways are each controlled by a traffic signal. Those will be enhanced. But the central driveway today, if you're there, is completely uncontrolled. It's wide. That will be removed. So from a pedestrian standpoint, if you're on a sidewalk and you're walking, You don't wanna have to cross driveways all the time. You'll have to cross two driveways, but those are signalized. There'll be pedestrian improvements to let you know when it's safe to cross, but that central driveway will be completely closed. Um, signals will be upgraded, uh, at the North driveway, uh, to allow for traffic to exit. That's traditionally been an entrance only, um, at the North end of the site. Um, the pavement markings along second Avenue are not in good shape. Currently. Um, the proposed project will enhance those pavement markings. specular striping, proper arrows, crosswalks, stop lines. And then one of the other things that we discovered is that when you push a push button for a pedestrian, when you want to cross the street, you push a button, the crossing time to get across the street is not adequate. So what we anticipate doing is retiming the signals to allow for pedestrians to adequately get across the street during that walk phase. With respect to parking, shared parking goes very much hand in hand with mixed use. So the best way I could explain it is when you have a variety of uses that are all using a parking field, those uses tend to act complimentary to one another. When people are out working, the retail is open, people are at the retail, people have left in their cars to go to work, you're not looking at the maximum of all uses together at one time. That is an event that doesn't normally happen, doesn't ever happen if you design your site with a mix of uses that are complimentary to one another. So if you were to look at zoning code requirements and say residential requires X, retail requires Y, we're gonna add them together and that's how much parking you need. That's only part of the story. Well, how much parking do you need when it's peaking? And residential, for example, at night when people are home, their cars are in their parking spaces. But the retail uses are completely closed at that time, not generating any parking. So what we're looking at when we design sites so we don't build a surplus, an unnecessary surplus of parking, is we try to dial in on hours where both uses together result in the peak parking demand. And for a site like this, that is about at 6 a.m. in the morning when most people are still at home, so their cars are parked. Maybe some of the retail uses like a coffee shop are starting to open. If there's a small gym, maybe some early birds are working out, cars on the street for that. What we have here based on our analysis is we will have a final parking demand of 184 vehicles that will need to find parking at the worst case period. We have 221 spaces, so 201 on the site, and then an additional 20 that we're proposing along the frontage of Second Avenue. So on street parking and that parking is really geared to the retail. We can work with the city to come up with, you know, creative ways to make that parking turn over so that it actually helps the retail, rather than have it be a long term parking space that anyone can use, and then it doesn't help the retail. That gets back to the transportation demand forecast. When you look at just parking demand and don't consider the availability of transit, the walkable nature of the surrounding area, bicycle access, there's gonna be over 80 bike parking spaces in this facility. you're really not looking at the total, you know, the full picture. So the city of Troy requires a TDM, a transportation demand management analysis. It's somewhat modeled after a well-known TDM plan that the city of Buffalo uses. And what it does is it looks at car ownership. It looks at the likelihood of someone using a non-vehicular mode of traffic. and then it takes credits for that. So what would normally be 282 parked vehicles, that would be an unadjusted number if you were to just look strictly at zoning. What does this require? What does that require? Add them together. That is reduced down to 184 when you consider the shared nature of uses, a reduction for vehicle ownership. Again, bring you back to that number, 10% of people in this area do not own vehicles. Um, and then the TDM credits, which are the fact that there's a bus rapid transit line directly in front of this property. Andrew mentioned that there's going to be a sidewalk that literally leads from that bus stop into the site, bicycle, um, facilities, and of course the walkable nature of the surrounding use. We believe based on our analysis that the site is well parked, there'll be a surplus, um, and that together with the reduction in network traffic, this project will actually improve conditions when compared to the former use as a price chopper and a Burger King. Kind of summarize that before I got to the slide, but if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

I can turn it back to Kelsey or Andrew.

Sure.

But Frank, there are two and three bedroom units in this building. Won't each of those unit types need two cars?

It's a great question. So the workforce housing and the AMI numbers that Andrew mentioned, just shared prior to me presenting will essentially self-select in terms of the type of resident that lives in this building. At 50% AMI, people in that category of income will not necessarily have the luxury of owning two cars. It's just math working itself out. I did some research on this going into this project. The average lease in the United States right now is $650 a month. That doesn't include insurance. That doesn't include gas. escalate that up, you're looking at vehicle costs that almost approach the cost of a one bedroom in some of those categories. So I think if there are residents that do have two cars, it will be a very, very small portion of people. And we have the surplus of 37 spaces if that happens. I don't think on a property like this, it is going to be a fact that if you have two bedrooms or three bedrooms, you're going to absolutely have two vehicles de facto. Hope that answers that question.

Okay. Since we've been going for about a half hour or so, could I open it up to the board to ask questions? Or public? Can we do that? Is there any more? Are they done? We're almost done. Almost? Okay. Almost done. Okay. That's great.

Great.

I just wanted to really touch quickly on the major benefit of this project, which is we are going to be removing, eliminating 100% of stormwater that currently discharges to the combined sewer. We're eliminating it and sending it to the rear, to the separate storm sewer that discharges to the river. So what that means, like in this region, you know, an average storm that you're gonna see on like a regular basis is in the range of like a half an inch to three quarters of an inch. In that storm, you're going to see a reduction of almost 80,000 gallons of stormwater being removed from the combined sewer, which is significantly more than the added sanitary generation from the project. So the combined sewer is going to see a significant benefit, which we already know that there's some issues with that system in that area that cause flooding during larger and more intense storm events. So we are doing everything that we can to help eliminate that problem. So really quickly, just a summary of the variances. So the current application that was submitted includes 11 variances. So we've got six variance requests that have not changed from what we submitted last month and presented to you. We have two variances that have been modified, which were for the maximum building height and the maximum height of the story. And then we have three variances that have been added. So that's for building front setback, access driveway width, and roof form. So for building height, we had discussed this last month. And unfortunately, we were going back and forth with Eric Ferraro at City Planning in how to interpret the code and how to measure the building height. And where we landed, unfortunately, is that the measurement is gonna be more than what we had originally thought it would be. So the proposed height of the building at the Second Avenue frontage will be 60 foot three inches, where a 50 foot maximum is required. So we have the variance submitted for that 10 foot three inch difference. But I will note that on the riverside, as we said, the grade of the site kind of does slope up to the high point at the rear of those buildings. So on the riverside, the height of the building, it drops to about 55 to 56 and a half feet. So it's slightly shorter on that side. Okay. So the street trees that we talked about, we batted a lot of new trees. We conservatively still requested the variance as if we're providing no street trees, but I guess I think it's open to your interpretation on if the trees that we're providing would qualify as street trees or not. If they do, then that would reduce the requests to a shortfall of only four trees for the 25 that are required in the frontage. So the building frontage, as I said, that is being driven by the water department's requirement for that additional setback from their main. And then the maximum width of the access driveways is driven by the fire department. So those were uncontrolled variances that we now are requesting. And then the last one that I'll just touch on quickly is for roof form. So with that, the design proposes continuous pitched roofs where the architectural guidelines calls for variation in the roof form. So we feel that the pitched roofs are consistent with the traditional architectural character of Lansingburg and more compatible with the neighborhood than a flat roof that you would often see on a lot of these types of buildings. So, and then we've, worked really hard, our architect has worked really hard to try to reduce the perceived scale of those buildings by providing facade articulation, varied building widths, changes in the material and color, and pronounced cornices so that the buildings do not look as pronounced.

Yeah.

I would just say one final thing. Again, our timeline, and we're here for, and now excited to engage with you guys on any questions or comments you may have. I just want to state the height of the building has not changed.

That's because of the berm, right? It's just mentioned a berm.

It was... The floodplain or... More so, it was... Everybody can slightly interpret code differently. The point at which we were measuring... was had to be further understood. Different city codes, codes may be written similarly, the way people interpret them either at the city level or at the applicant level can vary based on experience. And so we had to make sure we were interpreting that correctly in the way that the planning department interprets it. So again, Building height has not changed. Where we were measuring from has changed. Okay. I just wanted to be very clear about that. So with that, thank you for your patience. Again, I apologize for the beginning. I swear to you that will not happen next time. And we are excited to engage on any questions you may have.

I want to go to the public first.

discretion.

Why don't we open up the public first? Is there any questions out there in the public?

Yeah, come on up.

Hi, I'm Jeannie Stigler. I live at 797 First Avenue. And so I have a couple of questions. One, with your roof design like that, like what we had last week on Tuesday of a torrential rainfall, how are you going to capture those water, you know, the water coming from the roof? all the way down because it was so intense. Like when you have a flat roof, you have the drain right in the building and it comes down. How are you going to control that? I see that you have some, you know, you know, grass and trees and everything, but not kind of intense. The other is that you usually, if you're setting your building back because of the sewage, because of the pipes, Right? Then you're closer to the river, which, you know, when we had Hurricane Eileen and everything else, all of the Second Avenue was flooded. All of those basements were flooded. So...

So you really need to direct your comments to the board, not to the audience.

OK, sorry. So how is that going to affect it? Because yes, Eileen was one time maybe in 20 years, but we have seen different changes in climate. torrential downpours, how is that going to affect it? Does the buildings need to be up a little bit more so that it maintains, you know, that the flooding or massive rain is not going to flood your sort of like commercial buildings, the commercial side, right? The other is that they're throwing balconies or anything to sort of like on the view of the river There's nothing to sort of like have people be able to come out at least into their dwellings to be able to see the river and experience that and maybe have dinner or maybe have some other sort of like leisure time for themselves. Like there's no sort of like access unless you go down to the river, right?

So those are the comments that I have.

I am supportive of workforce housing and you have a lot of baristas that are paying a lot of money for housing and other things of childcare workers, all those kinds of people that need affordable housing. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else out there?

Come on up. So I too live like a half block from here. State your name, please. My name is Richard Sleeper. I live at 797 First Ave. And we lived in the downtown area. We have a home a couple blocks from here, 1890s row house that we fixed up historically.

Could you use the microphone, sir?

How about that? Very good. So I apologize. Okay. So anyway, I would say to, since I'm addressing you, the planning team, board no no zoning board i apologize i don't know where i am but i know what i want to say so i'm addressing the zoning board and uh I would give these guys, I don't know, a B minus because they did. I went to architecture school at RPI. I worked at TAP. So I worked on affordable housing issues and building permits and all that sort of thing. And I feel that they did what they taught us to do at architecture school. They gave us a pretty picture, which they call a rendering. And they gave us a Pollyanna-ish story about parking and flooding. And none of it makes any sense to me. Because you and I have been here long enough to know that Irene was 12 feet above the current Hudson River level. The markers are on the Waterford Visitor Center, for example. All that wall was underwater eight feet. Our whole neighborhood was underwater. First Dab was underwater. trailers were floating down the Hudson River, their former city hall, which I love, by the way, because instead of a windowless little room, we had a spacious room to meet, so forth. Just after they knocked it down, you might remember the heavy equipment had to scramble up on top of the piles of rubble during Irene. because the flooding was above, almost to the top of the rubble piles from knocking down City Hall. So this business of a quarter to half an inch, I don't know where they live, but they don't live here. And we had seven inches last week. We had a torrential rain just last week of seven inches, right here.

Yeah, you did.

So, I mean... you know, figure out where you are and come back with something that's a little more realistic. In my understanding in flood zones, like we tried to buy two houses in this neighborhood and we were denied because of the flood insurance requirements. That's all flood zone. And what happens when you're in the flood zone is you pay exorbitant rate if you want to get a mortgage. And what people are, sensible architects are doing is they're putting in what they call breakaway walls in places where there's rising waters. So the first floor, when Irene comes again, which it will, can break away easily without damaging, destroying, like dinosaur barbecue, we all remember, completely destroyed in Irene. You know, I mean, I'm just floored. And parking, that's ridiculous. I mean, we know that where we live, the one unit apartments mostly have two cars. Trees, you know, I give you an A for the pretty picture because you always put trees in the pretty picture. But my friends who work at an arborist collective in Troy, Moore Trees, who plant trees along their property in Lansingburg, got five tickets from the city while they were vacationing in Hawaii last month. And so this city's gotta decide, do we like trees only from pretty pictures from out of town architects and investors? Or are we gonna support the actual residents in Troy that are actually planting trees and taking care of trees? So all these things are incredibly upsetting to me. And he said it best in the beginning. Investors must be pleased. They have to get investors to do this project. I don't want to please the investors. I want this city to start pleasing the taxpayers and the residents. And I'm over pleasing the investors. And finally, the comment about the police. The police have, again, a Pollyanna-ish view that, you know, a pretty residential development is going to eliminate crime. OK, so I happen to live Old Sick Dav. It's two blocks from here, two blocks from City Hall, two blocks from the river. And I can remember like the lawyer for John Headley when they were getting permitted to do this thing. back in the 90s, saying, you watch, we're going to put lights on the corner and all the bad people are going to scatter like rats. That's a quote from like Reddy Griffin, John Headley's lawyer. And as you well know, there is no abatement of crime on Old Sixth Ave. And so I rest my case. They have some work to do and I hope you make them do it. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Thank you.

My name is John McQuinney. I'm advocating on behalf of my partner, Maria Long, that lives at 871 3rd Avenue. I estimate the property line to be 500 feet from this project that's going up. And a very unique situation. Maria purchased the property in 2011. and was told that it was in a flood zone. So therefore she had to get flood insurance, paid the flood insurance with the mortgage. And three months later was told that she was not in the flood zone. And it was true because Irene came through and flooded our neighbors to the sides, to the rear, because it is in a flood zone. And another incident was they had a water main break up there. And the same thing happened. My neighbors got flooded. The McDonald's funeral home got flooded. We didn't. So when the house was built, Maria's house was built in 1960, they changed the elevation, took her out of the flood zone. My reason for coming here is that I wanted a record that if we get thrushed back into the flood zone, who is gonna pay the $4,000 a year flood insurance? It's a very unique situation because it is a newer home. I mean, it's 1960, it is 70 years old, but The other ones were built in the 1800s, and they're in the flood zone. $4,000 is a lot of money. And I don't think that if whatever is happening over there, and it looks like a nice project and everything, but if they change the landscape and thrush 871 back into a flood zone, I want that a matter of record.

Thank you. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Maria Long. They say, my parents say, okay, I lived there since 2011. A couple times since we have flooding in the second avenue. And of course, the neighbors next to us, they have flooding in the basement. Very bad, very bad. What happened, the persons that The family who live behind us who is in second half with McDonald's funerals, they have to cross through our yard to go to 3rd Avenue all the time when they have flooding. And it's not just, you know, the basement, everything, whatever happening in their house, they have to cross to our property, to my property to go out of their houses or the house because all 2nd Avenue is flooded. All right. And before we had the pre-shopper there, we have floating a lot. They have what? Two, two bathrooms for the whole business. Plus what is Burger King was there. They have bathrooms there. All right. We have floating. I don't know. How was the system there? All right. You know, the pipes or whatever, but now with 192 people, All right. How many bathrooms there will be in there? I just counting that apartments plus whatever business they go in there, they need to have bathrooms as well. And that area is a flood area, all right? And it's not, I'm talking just for me, I'm talking for my whole people who live in Lansenburg. Lansenburg is beautiful, very beautiful. Why don't keep an eye in all the buildings that are empty? They can be coming in business. Second half have a lot of empty buildings. In one time... In the life, there was living, people was living in second floor and they have business in the first floor. They have beautiful buildings there. And we have Landsberg. I don't know. I just think we need to keep, we have to find something better. make for the residents of Lansenburg. We don't have just the park in 111 and 110. That's the only park we have there. Right now they open the Knickerbocker, kids go in there, but that's it. We don't have nothing to that. Teenagers, teenagers don't have nothing to do. What they have, they don't have business so they can go to work. Only one is Hannaford. Hannaford don't hire nobody if he's not 18. I think that we need to think more about the community who live in Lansenburg. because apartments, who will be working in the apartments? The people who they have already school. But the teenagers, I think they have to find something better for people who live in Lansenburg. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Rani Shamam. I have a home at 807 First Avenue, just a block south of the proposed project. In regards to Dick Sleeper's comments about the flooding in Irene, the flooding came to the top of my fence that's on top of the river. And I lost two water heaters and two furnaces during Irene. So I had significant damage and know what those quote unquote hundred year floods can do. I would like to refer you to the letters that Liza Rodriguez and Barb Nelson sent to you from TAP. I think Barb covered it all in her pros and cons, and I don't need to repeat this to you, but I really think that her comments about the plain, plain, plain design are something that we need to do better about. in order to attract more people and not just people from workforce that need workforce housing, they need housing those people. But also I firmly believe that all kinds of people of different income levels need to be living together so that they can learn from one another. And perhaps that will keep us from being as separate and polarized as we are now. So I won't take more of your time. I know that you're concerned about this. And I know that the community is concerned about this. I want there to be a development there. Lansing Bird needs it. The city of Troy needs it. And we need to do the best that we can. Thank you.

Thank you.

anyone out in the audience anymore or online?

Can we open it up to the board here? No one online.

Can I ask first? My questions are general.

Yeah, I'd like to ask you guys a couple of questions.

So there seems to be a consistent cry for something more aesthetic. My question is, is the architect that's working on this project, have they even been to Troy?

Yes, they have.

It doesn't seem like it. I love the idea that there's no balcony. I don't love the idea there's no balconies, but I like the idea that it needs balconies. It needs to take in the river. It needs to address the beauty of what we have here. And that's not it. You know, we have just these beautiful, beautiful buildings here in Troy of all sorts of varieties, all sorts of different roof lines. And I don't want to say what I think it looks like, but it's not attractive. And to Barb Nelson's, you know, some of the other comments, it is very clean. And, you know, the idea of trying to get all sorts of different people there that it should be attractive so that everybody wants to live there you know versus just offering up something that is plain that then you know somebody who is in the higher income bracket is going to go i don't want to live there So to that, my suggestion would be just to try to make it look like it blends better and uses our historical beauty that we have here in Troy. Use the river because there isn't anything particularly drawing the people that live there to the river.

Yeah.

And, you know, one of the things that Barb Nelson had mentioned in her letter, I don't know if you see these letters or not, but... We haven't. You have not. Okay. So... The idea of having, and some people mentioned it here tonight, parks, places for kids, for toddlers, for something to bring the community in, not just the people that live here, but something so that if you live around the corner, you live down the street or a block away, or you have your kids, your grandkids, that there's something to go to. So it's not just this isolated thing for workforce people to live, but it's for the community to also, you know, maybe there's a kid that lives with his parents, you know, and now he just, and he's working wherever he's working.

I completely agree with you. We have engaged the city about the potential to connect our pathway to the North with the bridge. And in addition to that, to connect it with the boat launch, I'm ever hopeful that this can be part of a larger continuous plan. Right. But I, I, I cannot do that on my own. And so I would love to engage a larger vision of that accord, but I need to, I need

partnership to do that and i'm hopeful we will figure that out i mean just this i mean even if you can like kick up the aesthetic i think that would be understood understood i do have one question aside from aesthetics and all that stuff yeah that i don't know anything about that if if i'm paying 900 and my neighbor here is paying 1400 societally i don't know how that flies i'm ticked I mean, that's a question I'm not even asking you to answer because I think it's something worth thinking about. Because it does sort of open up the idea of if he's paying 14 and I'm paying nine, you know, and we become friends, and I'm like, what? I'd be kind of, well, he'd be kind of mad at me. I don't know how it works. I don't have any history with this type of living.

Understood, and I appreciate those comments. We will absolutely take them into consideration. In terms of, I just want to note, in terms of that street wall, maintaining those views on 124th and 125th is a limiting constraint, right? And so we, to some extent, have to work around that in terms of where the buildings are sited, but noted on your comments regarding the aesthetics of the project and how they may be improved to further articulate those buildings and also to ensure that they are contextually appropriate within the Lansingburg community, its identity, and that it compliments and also simultaneously is distinguished.

Thank you. All right, Steve, you're up.

Thank you. I would echo her comments. And I'm not being a wise guy when I say this. The renderings of those buildings remind me of college dormitories versus housing to promote the ambiance, the architecture, and the history of Troy. But I do have a couple of questions. Last time you were here in July, There was a variance. Relief of six feet is requested to allow a two-way driveway width of 26 feet, where a maximum width of 20 feet is permitted, quote, end quote. And I raised the issue or the question, has anybody talked to Troy Fire Department and or Police Department and or rescue vehicles? Do we have adequate width by going from 26 to 20? And I was told, yes, we have. It's not a problem. And now tonight, I'm hearing you've talked to the fire department and 20 foot that was no problem, is a problem, and it's going to go back to 26 feet. Is there something I'm missing or did I misunderstand?

In the last meeting, what I told you is that the turning movements for the Troy aerial fire apparatus worked at 20 feet. But we, based on the conversation that we had, we double checked with the fire department after that meeting. And they said, no, we have to require 26 because these are the primary fire roads into the facility. Okay. So the attorney movements are even better now.

Yeah. I'm just trying to remember. There's an awful lot to absorb in two shows that are an hour and a half each. One of the things you said last time we met, you had about 11 or 12 variances, as I recall, and that you said when you came back, but you said after meeting with planning, which I guess never took place, that you'd come back with a reduced number of variances. I don't see a reduced number of variances.

The original meeting, we focused on the eight variances that we knew were required at that time. We then coordinated, had multiple meetings with the planning staff and confirmed that the three additional variances were required. If you remember on the agenda for the last meeting, there was a list of like 20. Yes. So we eliminated a significant number, but the final number is 11. Okay.

Can we talk about the anchor stores that are proposed to go in? Maybe I shouldn't use the term anchor store. Retail stores?

Absolutely.

The retail storefronts. When you drive over 6th Avenue at City Station that connects Ferry and Congress on the east side on your right, most of those storefronts are empty. And they've been empty for a number of years. When you proceed north on 6th Avenue and you get to the back of what used to be the old Troy Record building that was rehabbed into apartments, there's a lot of, quote, storefronts. on the backside of that building facing 6th Avenue that are empty, they're vacant. When you drive through Lansingburg, depending upon where you drive, but I see it on 6th, I see it on 5th, there's a lot of vacant storefronts. My question would be twofold. What makes this project think that they're going to be successful with storefronts when all the examples I gave you apparently haven't been able to achieve success? And the second part is if somebody goes to pull into one of those storefronts, where do they park? And I was told they're not going to park the parking is designated for the tenants or the renters, they would park on Second Avenue. And we got into a bit of a conundrum about two lanes coming off the Waterford Bridge and other parking. So I'd like to revisit that because you're down to 192 units and 201 parking spaces. Is that correct?

That is correct. Do you want to start with this section first on the parking? I think we should. And I'm going to let Frank.

Okay, happy to address that. So it's not the intent to have specifically assigned parking spaces such that if someone were to come in who wants to only patronize one of the retail tenant spaces, that it would be disallowed for them to park onsite. The purpose of the on-street parking spaces is to encourage street activity in a city-like setting and avail curbside space to patrons of retail spaces that are directly in front of the sidewalk.

But other people are also currently using that part of Second Avenue for parking.

The part in front of Price Chopper? Directly in front of Price Chopper?

From the northern end of Price Shopper to the southern end of the property by the bus stop.

Okay. We've done some parking observations there. It's rarely used based on our observations. What we would propose doing is working with the city to implement appropriate parking regulations along that stretch. So the curbside space accomplishes what you want out of it. If you put, let's say, just for example, two hour parking between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., you can encourage turnover for the retail spaces, while after 8 p.m., it could go into a no-regulation zone, and it would open up to people who need overnight parking.

I understand that, but to answer my question, there would be no designated parking for those storefronts?

As of now, no. The parking on site...

I understand.

...would be available to anyone coming onto the property... And the nature of residential and retail is that when retail is peaking, residential is not peaking. You're out. You're out. You're at your job. Your car is not on the property. So that's why it's not essential to have those assigned parking spaces for retail uses. If you had retail and let's say a doctor's office.

I understand.

That's when you would get into that.

You talked about crosswalks and pushing a buzzer and having more than sufficient time to cross the street. Yeah. What would that do to the traffic flow on Second Avenue going north or south coming from the bridge?

It might, depending on the crossing time now and what we would have to change it to, what we need to design for now is three and a half feet per second walking speed. That's what the standard is.

The standard is what, sir?

Three and a half feet per second.

Okay.

it might extend it by a second or two, which would mean that if it's pushed, a person in traffic might wait an extra second or two or three before that light cycles back.

So it wouldn't be a matter of minutes?

No, no, it would not.

Okay. A couple more questions and then I'll be quiet. And thank you for answering them. The clay sewer main we talked about last week. And I made a comment that Troy is forever paving, laying down McAdamer blacktop, water lines break, they come in, they have to dig it all up. I assume this old clay line is a few years older than I am. And I'm assuming... based on that alone, at some point in time, it's going to need repair. Wouldn't it be more proactive to get that clay line repaired or replaced before you enter into a project and pump a ton of money in? And then six months or a year later, that line ruptures? Wouldn't we have an opportunity to be proactive and take care of that clay line Now, if you got to go ahead for the project, just sort of common sense to me.

Yeah, I mean, that's one of the conundrums with any city with older infrastructure like Troy clearly is. And that that that main being clay, it is a large main as well. The city I've spoken countless times with Chris Marini about that. that area in the infrastructure. And they recognize that it is very much an issue. And if this project is moving forward, they agree that it makes sense that we want to try to replace those lines if possible. But funding is always the concern, right? So they are actively looking into grant opportunities for infrastructure improvements.

I think it would be great to get that bridge crossed before you proceed.

And I would just say this, right? In the context of projects like this, right? The state is very eager to support housing, right? We have a housing crisis. It is a stated policy goal. The state deploys money to duly tackle issues. When they take notice that housing has been approved, grant funding soon follows. Insofar as the municipality is working with the developer hand in hand to pursue that funding and feels that that area is a priority. We welcome that engagement and hope that the city will work with us and prioritize this. We want them to.

And so I think it makes more sense to do it up front, get it done and then proceed.

I agree with you, but it doesn't quite work like that. OK, the approvals in hand and a project that is shovel ready notices the state that this is real and that if they assign dollars to do something, it will not be for naught. It's a critical thing.

I've got one more question and then I promise I'll be quiet. One of your pictures triggered a thought.

Which one? Rendering or?

It was a sketch and it showed the front of the building facing Second Avenue. How close to Second Avenue is the front of those buildings?

So one caveat, and I do apologize. I did not get the updated renderings onto this deck, which would show 15 feet back. Okay.

The answer is 15 feet.

Correct. And so I apologize. These are 10 feet back at present. It was the one item that I missed in updating this deck. And I do apologize, but presently the buildings are cited 15 feet back from the property line. Excuse me.

And then it's, It's an additional like eight to 10 feet to the curve line, the proposed curve line.

No, it was one picture. It looked like it was right up on the sidewalk. Sorry, I might have missed that. But that was my perception. It could be wrong.

So this is- It wasn't that. Nope. Okay. This is the present site plan?

No, it wasn't that.

Understood. This is the present site plan. And this is the siting of the building in relation to the sidewalk.

Okay. I'm done. Thank you.

I just wanted to ask, There were a number of residents here who asked questions about the floodplain, and I wanted to give Kelsey an opportunity to address those questions so long as you guys are okay with that, because I know those are probably front and center and they'd like to hear an answer. Is that all right?

Yeah?

Okay. Okay.

So this site is obviously very complicated in that there are two different types of flooding that are occurring. There is flooding from the river under a hundred year scenario, right? And then there's flooding that is occurring from the combined sewer system being overtaxed and having too much stormwater flow. So what we are doing, so the overall site redevelopment is proposing it's almost a 30% reduction in impervious cover over the existing conditions. So the site right now is about 83% impervious. We're reducing that significantly. And then the other piece is that right now, the entirety of the buildings, as well as the entire frontage of property that's almost 100% paved parking lot, all of that right now drains towards 2nd Avenue to the catch basins that tie directly into that combined sewer. So one of the major issues with that network, the combined...

Please continue, I'm sorry.

One of the major issues with that network is actually the upland sanitary combined sewer flow coming from 124th Street. So that pipe is coming down at a very steep slope to then 2nd Avenue, which is very flat. So under a large storm event where you've got combined stormwater and sanitary going into that system, it actually almost becomes pressurized as it hits that flat section. So that's the major issue that's causing it. And the other thing is that it's directly up gradient of the combined sewer splitter that splits the flow between the Rensselaer County sanitary line that goes to the wastewater treatment plant And then there's the combined sewer overflow that goes to the river. So that's what is occurring at that overflow is basically there. There's no there's no scenario where there is ever a dry weather overflow event. So under when it's not raining, the combined sewer is carrying 100% of that sanitary flow, it's all getting to the Rensselaer County system, going to the wastewater treatment plant. It's when you have the stormwater event that it becomes overtaxed. So What we are doing as part of this project, as I very quickly explained earlier, is we are taking 100% of the site stormwater and we are disconnecting it from the combined sewer. So we're actually going to have onsite separate storm sewer that's going to go against grade, like it's going to buck grade to go back towards the river and then head south to that separate storm sewer that discharges directly to the river. Like there's honestly no better scenario when it comes to like a combined sewer system than having a connection point directly at that outfall.

So you're not overloading the pumping station? No. Thank you. Got it.

can i just add one thing so one of the things that was brought up by one of the public community people was that as you change the topography of that six acre area i'm sure your engineers have but i just want to address that thought that we don't want to make a bed for any you know sometimes you change something for the good over here and then it falls to heck over there that has that been addressed

So two pieces of that. So the current FEMA flood mapping for Rensselaer County that is adopted is from, 1978 or 1979 is the current mapping. Rensselaer County is just going through an update to all of that mapping and there is preliminary new mapping that is available. So interestingly, that mapping, like the old mapping shows that at this site, the flood elevation is roughly 34. The new mapping actually identifies that the flood elevation, the base flood elevation is closer to 30.8. So if you think about that in the context of this specific property, the frontage at Second Avenue is around 28, 29. But the peak of the site where the existing building is and where our proposed buildings that at the riverside will sit is up at 34. So that's above the floodplain. So, the majority of the, the residential zone that has to be built up above two feet above the base or the design flood elevation that is actually not filling within the floodplain. And then at the frontage of the site, just naturally how it worked out with the grades that we're actually cutting slightly at the entrances into the parking lots. So that would actually provide additional flood storage in that zone.

And I just think that actually really requires, like I want you to visually show everybody that because I think that is a little more detailed if you will.

Can you see me the cursor? Yes. Okay. Yeah. So the existing building, the price dropper sits back here, right? So that is actually the high point currently of the site and we're relatively closely matching back to that existing grade. So that is around elevation 34. That's going to be our finished grade at that edges of the building. Then at the frontage here, like I said, that's in the range of 28 to 29. So we're just to make the parking lot easier slopes and to provide the accessible parking at the main entrances to the residential. We are slightly cutting in these zones, like the upper or the front one third of those lots. So that's going to have additional flood storage. And I guess the reality of that is that if there was a flood scenario, we have our separate storm system that's going to collect that and it's going to send it to the river as opposed to just flooding and trying to continue to overtax the combined sewer.

Thanks. Thank you.

So just to be clear, the implication being that, sorry.

The implication being that beyond a rain event, right? If there is a flood event, this actually helps to improve the reduction of the time by which the area may flood. And so instead of a flood lasting certain amount of time, it is reduced. And so understanding the critical infrastructure that the site supports with respect to this neighborhood, pending any additional improvements to the existing infrastructure by the city, I think is a very important point. I understand residents are concerned of the impacts. What Kelsey's clearly explained is that this actually increases the resiliency of the neighborhood. And that has been very carefully thought out, right? And then just so it is clear to everyone behind me, even though I'm addressing you guys, the residences are two feet above the current floodplain. while not certain, it is potential they are going to drop the floodplain. And so potentially these residents will be five feet above the floodplain. So these residents, Again, that is speculative. I don't know. Ultimately, I see the lawyers looking at me. No, I'm joking. We don't know where that will end up. OK, but it is a consideration. And so every residential unit will be outside the floodplain and properly secured in the event of a flood to which we have to design to.

OK, thanks. You all set?

Since we're taking no action on this, we'd like to close this portion of our meeting tonight and proceed on.

Thank you very much for your patience. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Okay. Next order of business is PLZBA-2026-0059-272, Hoosick Street. Please come up to the podium, state your name and your affiliation with the project.

Good evening, Mr. Chair, board members. My name is Rob Stout. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Whiteman, Osterman, and Hanna. Here on behalf this evening of the Free Store Mission, Inc. on two area variance requests that we have. Kyle Engstrom, excuse me, Kyle Engstrom. our project engineers here as well to address any issues or questions that the board might have. I figured I would start with a very brief overview of where we're at before the planning board with this matter so the board can understand the context within which we're requesting these two area variances and understand the operations of the free store. And then I'll get into a conversation of those two variances, the first one being for sidewalk connection across the existing driveways and the other being for shade trees in the parking lot. So our client is proposing a reuse of the former Rite Aid on Hoosick Street that's been vacant for approximately a year. They're going to reuse it as a free store for shoppers to obtain items at no cost. and also provide the community with the means of finding new owners and uses for materials that would otherwise be disposed of as trash. The store will be available to all. There's no proposal to limit the income levels of those who can shop there. So we've been before the planning board on this matter in June. Unfortunately, we were not before the planning board in July because that meeting was canceled, but we had a very good conversation at the June meeting with the planning board at which several concerns were raised with respect to the potential for items to be disposed of at the property in the parking lot, given the nature of the operations of the facility. We understand those concerns. Frankly, we share those concerns because it does our client no good to have a facility that's used as a dumping ground that would be antithetical to the purposes with which they're putting the property. So to that end, we're working with the planning board to identify appropriate conditions to put on any approval. We're agreeing to gate the entrances such that after hours, people cannot access the property to dispose of material there. The donation area, which will be around the rear of the existing Rite Aid in the vicinity of the former drive-through, will be monitored by cameras and lights. The existing trash collection area will be repaired and then locked at all times and accessible only to employees of the free store. So both the shopping process and probably more importantly, the donation process will be by appointment only. So that'll be a means for our client to control, number one, the nature of the things that they're receiving, and also a means of inventory control such that if they have a surplus of a particular item that's not moving for whatever reason in the free store, they will not accept more of that thing such that they will not create a backlog where there will be excess inventory that creates a problem for them. And to the extent that any of those donations are not accepted by our client, they will go home with whomever arrived at the site to donate them as opposed to being disposed of on site. So for that reason, there will be no extra containers on site for trash. Frankly, we think we'll have less trash than the former Rite Aid there because the materials that are donated will not come with all of the packaging and other things. material that more traditional retail items sold in a Rite Aid would come with, nor will there be any donation bins on site for people to simply show up and drop things off or place things next to. It will be appointment only, not drop off. As of the opening of the store, the applicant intends to operate for customers and donors on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays between 9 and 3. And as they gain experience with the store, those shopping hours could change or be adjusted. But we're testing out a more restricted run initially in order to make sure that the site can be managed appropriately. Our client's experience at this site will be informed by the site that they currently operate in Bennington, Vermont. which is going quite well, where they do not have any of the issues that we're trying to guard against here and try relative to dropping off items and creating a nuisance type situation or allowing things to pile up. So they do have some experience doing this already. And we expect these conversations to continue with the planning board at its next meeting in August, where we'll hopefully progress the matter further. Now, the reason why we're here tonight is because two issues were identified first by planning department review, and then by the planning board at its meeting in June relative to, as I mentioned, the sidewalk connection and the shade trees. So those are the two areas of relief we're seeking from this board. First, we're asking this board to consider issuing an interpretation that the sidewalk requirement does not apply. And when I mentioned the sidewalk requirements, specifically section 28570J of the code provides that any driveway crossing a sidewalk must maintain the existing concrete sidewalk, which is being displayed here right now in the cursors showing that entry. I believe that's the Burdette side that's being shown. There's one entrance on Burdette and another one on Hoosick. That section of the code also says that the standards of this section shall apply on lots with construction of new multifamily, commercial, or other non-residential structures in the city of Troy. So in the first instance, we believe that this code section simply doesn't apply because of the language applying it to new structures within the town, excuse me, within the city. So that combined with the fact that The language of the code says that the driveway must maintain the existing concrete sidewalk, suggests to us that it simply doesn't apply because as that entrance has a sidewalk that terminates on either end of the driveway, the sidewalk doesn't currently cross the driveway apron. So in order to comply with the request that's being made of us from the planning board and the planning department, that asphalt strip would have to be ripped up, regraded with concrete poured there to connect either end of the sidewalk which would be done at a considerable expense and disruption. So our proposal, alternatively, is to stripe that. No striping exists there today. We feel that if we were to stripe it, it would create the visual distinction that the code is looking for in requesting that sidewalks be maintained from one end of the driveway entrance to the other end of the driveway entrance. thereby achieving the safety goals of the code without having to go through the process of actually ripping up the sidewalk, regrading the area, and spending a considerable amount of money to put concrete there. So initially, for the reasons I mentioned earlier about the code applying this requirement to new construction, we think this board would be on solid footing, issuing an interpretation saying this requirement does not apply and effectively also accepting our offer in return to instead provide striping there. If for whatever reason the board believes that the requirement does apply, our submission steps through the requirements for the issuance of an area variance to establish that any harm associated with this to the community is not outweighed by the burden placed on the applicant. So if the board wishes, I can just briefly step through those criteria that were in our submission. The first one is whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance. As the driveways exist today, there's no concrete sidewalk connections that span the driveway entrances. We're simply looking to or proposing to improve the conditions by adding the DOT compliant striping there. So the avoidance of the requirement to install a concrete sidewalk across the driveway apron would not create a detriment to the character of the neighborhood because this represents the condition that exists here today. And the only thing we would be doing would be improving it by putting striping there. The second criterion, whether the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. Our submission notes that at the June planning board meeting, there was a discussion in which the city's engineer participated, where there was an observation that it would be difficult to continue the sidewalks through the curbs based on the existing grades at the driveway entrances. So to cut material from the existing driveway and grade in order to pour in the new concrete connections could take a significant amount of costly work, given that the fact that this applicant is a not-for-profit organization and in identifying this property for purchase as an already developed property that was operated by a national retail chain, part of our client's goal was to identify a site that required minimal further construction once it was acquired and minimal further expense, frankly. So we do believe that we've identified the most feasible option to address this concern, and that would be the striping. Three, whether the requested variance is substantial. We do not think it's substantial. Again, given that we are proposing to place the striping there, which would be an improvement over the existing conditions, creating that visual connection between the sidewalk ends, thereby improving the situation so we don't view the deviation from what the code otherwise would require for a concrete connection to be substantial. Four, whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in a neighborhood or district. As I mentioned before, there's no concrete connections that exist there now. So we don't think the continued absence of it will have a negative or adverse impact on the neighborhood. And finally, whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the ZBA, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance. This is not self-created. This is a situation that was existing under the occupancy of a prior tenant or prior owner Rite Aid when they were there. So it's not an issue that the applicant created itself. So perhaps I should pause there on this first variance request.

Since the applicant is proposing striping, are you doing that? Have you brought that to the planning board? I can't remember.

That was included in our last submission to the planning board.

So would the applicant be amenable to, if the board saw fit to grant the variance, to have the condition that it be striped and maintained, striping maintained?

Yeah, absolutely.

And if you were to install a concrete sidewalk in that apron, it would be at the level of the apron, right? It would have to drop down to the level of the apron anyways. It would be at the level of the current driveway, except that then you would have your ramps on either side would not be ADA compliant. They're too steep. They would be too steep.

That's my understanding of it. Yeah. the town engineer, I believe, I wasn't in the previous planning board meeting, but he did address that the slope was such that it would need to be regraded. I think that it's possible that we would have difficulty maintaining ADA compliance, but I haven't detailed it any further.

Is it appropriate for me to ask a question now? Yes, absolutely. With regards to the sidewalk, in that area up and down Hoosick Street and some of the side streets, National Grid is replacing a number of sidewalks as part of their overall project. Have you looked into whether they plan to do it at that location?

We know they're doing it on Hoosick Street right now. In fact, there are some pictures that Kyle has that shows that the existing sidewalk is torn up. What we do not know if there are any plans to actually excavate the asphalt entrances to the property and put sidewalk down where sidewalk does not exist today over the driveway that exists there.

Have you contacted them?

No, not with respect to this question, because frankly, we are trying to avoid having the entrances to the facility torn up and worked on because that could have an adverse impact on when we're able to open and operate.

Understood. They are working along music here. Right now, this entire asphalt is broken up.

You do need to speak into the microphone.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

They are working along Hoosick. And so what I just showed there, this whole asphalt strip is what they're working on. I don't believe that they would be doing any work at these driveway entries shown here. And I just want to point out too that this is not an uncommon condition along Hoosick. Some have sidewalks, some don't. And so anyway.

I have a question for you. I used to go to Rite Aid as a pharmacy. I'd be in and out of there probably twice a month. The parking lot was in tough shape. That ramp that goes up to the parking lot from Burdette was always being chewed up, clawed up, plowed up. there'd be potholes, you could feel your wheel drop down into it. Is there anything that your applicant could or would do to repave that parking lot and repave that ramp area to the parking lot in lieu of having to put a sidewalk in?

Yeah, those parking lots going to be repaired as necessary. And we don't expect that issue or those issues to arise again because there won't be any tractor trailer truck deliveries or large truck deliveries that primarily create those issues. It's going to be passenger vehicles where these donations are dropped off in primarily.

Snow plow issues too.

True. Yeah, that could contribute to it.

But yes, the plan is to repair the... To repair or to resurface the entire parking lot. Yeah.

My understanding is that that's slated to be done as part of the improvements to the site is essentially repaving of the asphalt there in the parking lot.

All the asphalt. Redoing the driveway. Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, because we'll get into the next variance request. We're also proposing to put two tree islands in to address the shade tree requirement.

To meet what?

The shade tree requirement. That's our second area variance request. So part of the parking lot rehabilitation resurfacing, if you will, will include the installation of those islands to plant four trees in the parking lot that don't exist now.

That's a requirement?

Yes. They're asking you to modify that. Go from 12 to 2.

Right.

Because Rite Aid never had islands in that parking lot.

Right. We have a new zoning code.

Yes, we do. 2023. You're right. Thank you, sir.

Perhaps it makes sense for me now with that segue to discuss that area variance briefly. So here we're at a different posture than we expected to be at this meeting because there's a requirement in the code that requires the planting of, excuse me, one large shade tree for every 1500 square feet of parking area. The code also provides the planning board with the authority and jurisdiction to approve alternative landscaping plans in the event that for whatever reason, full compliance with that requirement is not feasible. And That ability of the planning board to approve an alternative landscaping plan is very similar to this board's ability to approve an area variance from the requirement. So our initial thought had the July planning board meeting taken place was to propose these four trees that we've been discussing as the alternative landscaping plan to see if the planning board would accept them. And if the planning board did not accept them, come back to the ZBA and ask for a variance from the requirement. So we've essentially flipped that now because we haven't been before the planning board yet with that question. We're going to be asking for the area variance to issue from this board. Two things, again, with this requirement. First, we're asking the board to consider an interpretation. There is language. The requirement for the sheet tree is in section 16. 285-67 subsection G of the code, which says in full, shade trees shall provide for at least 20% of the paved parking area using the following standard. One large shade tree for every 1500 square feet of parking area. The subsection immediately above that 285-67F states that the requirements in this section apply to all new or expansion of parking lots of 10 spaces or more located adjacent to a public right-of-way or visible public right-of-way up to 50 feet. And it goes on. Our point here is that, again, this is not a new parking lot. This is not an expansion of a parking lot. So if you read the language of 267F strictly, it says that the requirements of this section, which would include 285-67G, don't apply. That said, if the board finds that the requirement does apply, we step through the area of marriage requirements that discuss our proposal. And the proposal, it's up right here to create those two new tree islands, which would be trees that are 30 feet at maturity, consistent with the code's landscaping requirements, planted about 35 feet away from each other. in order to allow adequate room consistent with the code and to supplement the existing perimeter trees that already exist around the parking lot, which provide a degree of shade over the spaces that you can't see at the bottom of the screen right there.

Can I ask a question regarding that particular sentence? So it looks like it's arborvitae around here, right? Okay. So can you not plant shade trees in there? Like some maples or some. I mean, you're saying you're going to supplement, but right. Why can't you supplement with like hardwoods?

Speaking to the mic.

Yeah, you mean eliminate the islands?

Well, I'm just, I mean, there's what, 12 you're supposed to have? Or what is it that you're supposed to have if you were doing a brand new parking lot?

We're 12. It says four trees. Our understanding is that if you were not to give us quote unquote credit for those existing trees around the end, that we would need up to 22 trees. Totally. Total. If you were to take into consideration the shade afforded by those existing trees around the outside, we would need closer to 10 trees. So the relief we're looking for in looking for four is either six on the low end or 16, 18 on the higher end.

So, I mean, just my thought is putting an island in is taking parking away, isn't it?

It is, yeah. That's a trade-off we're trying to make in order to comply with this section of the code, which is a new section of the code.

So does the code specify where these trees have to be?

Yeah. It doesn't seem to be explicit about that from what I can remember, but I think that in our review with, did you see anything?

It's the fact that it has to provide 20% of the paved park. So you get a bigger bang for your buck if the trees are in the middle. Right.

Yeah, it seemed like it made more sense that way.

So what you're proposing is the two islands, two trees per island. Correct?

Correct.

So I'm suggesting that if we were to do something like that, your proposal, could you not also add a few more hardwoods in the areas where you need to supplement?

You're saying on the edge of the parking lot?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Where we have this instead of the islands?

Which would just reduce... Instead of going from 12... or whatever, 20, how many ever you're supposed to have to four? Yeah, I mean, take the four that you're proposing, which would shade the asphalt area.

I see that that Google image is dated July, 2018. So I think the existing conditions are probably more robust.

I don't know what they look like right now.

Yeah.

It's a pretty chock full line of arborvitae down and across the back. I drove through it yesterday.

So I don't think there's really – I'm not familiar with any concern having been expressed by the planning department in terms of the degree of shade that's currently afforded to those spots there. So adding more trees along that line probably isn't going to make it any better.

But I thought I heard you mention that you proposed the four distributed between the two islands and to fill in other areas, I thought you said.

Yeah, so –

See how far I can travel with this.

No, back to that. If the islands were over here, I don't know if you can see where I'm pointing.

No, where the area lights are.

Exactly. You're going to create shade there where it doesn't exist today. Adding more trees in closer to the other parking lots along the perimeter of the lot isn't necessarily going to create any more, much more shade than exists there today.

So what were you referring to before, or did I just mishear you?

No, he said he was going to supplement around for a minute or two.

No, if I said that, I misspoke. I apologize.

Oh, yeah, because that's what I mentioned.

So just quickly running through the criteria here, whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Currently, the only trees that exist are around the perimeter of the paved area. There's no shade trees in the middle. So any trees that we add to the middle are going to improve the existing situation there. We looked at the neighboring parking lots along that Hoosick Street corridor. Couldn't really find any of them that have trees in the middle like the ones we're proposing here. we will unquestionably be improving this lot and improving the neighborhood, not creating a detriment to the neighborhood. Two, whether the benefits sought by the applicant be achieved by some feasible, some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. We don't think so. Given the need that for the trees to be a certain size, no less than 30 feet in height and maturity, creates the need to space the trees appropriately. So they need 30 to 35 feet in between them. in order to grow to that 30-foot height. And that spacing requirement limits the feasibility of planting 10 to 22 trees in the lot that would consume almost all of the parking spaces at that point. Three, whether the requested area variance is substantial, depending on whether we look at 10 or 22 as the underlying requirement, you could say that that's a fair deviation from the requirement. But again, that said, we're looking at something that's going to be a dramatic improvement over the existing conditions where the existing lot will be broken up by the trees. So we don't think the fact that there's a divergence in the underlying number is something that should be dispositive on the question. Four, whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood. As I said earlier, it's only going to improve it because we're putting trees where they don't exist now. And finally, whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant, but shall not necessarily preclude the planting of an area variance. This was an existing site that we purchased. The prior occupant was not required to plant trees there. So it hasn't been created by this applicant. It's been created by the fact that the code changed. So if you have any other questions, I'd be happy to.

Just one. It has nothing to do with trees. One of my concerns was the control over people bringing stuff, dumping it, leaving it. I was happy to hear you use the term gate, controlled hours.

Mm-hmm. Yeah, but we're going to install gates. We're going to, for the proposal now, and we don't have the approval from the planning board, but we envision one of the conditions being that the Hoosick Street side is closed off because we frankly don't need it. So there will be a gate there that- You wouldn't need the Hoosick Street. No, no, we can operate primarily and solely with the Burdette.

And that would be the Burnett side.

Correct.

That would be your envision of the gate.

And that black fence there is existing. So we would do a gate that is consistent with what we have there already. Piles of material deposited on the property would be just as annoying to our client as it would to the city and the neighborhood. So we want to do everything we can to prevent that.

And you said you would re-phase or resurface the parking lot?

Correct.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there any questions from anybody in the audience? Anybody online?

I was going to add one thing. Just thinking about those shade trees on the edge here, if you can see my cursor, that really is the border of where the property line is. I think it's fair to say that a 30-foot canopy shade tree on that edge could present problems down the road at full maturity with the roots spreading and the canopy overlapping the other property. Yeah.

Just, I'm sorry, one final point. I noticed on the agenda, this was identified as a secret unlisted item. The planning board had already confirmed their view that this is a type two action because it's a reuse of a commercial property. So just for the record, I think it would be the same, or it would be the same for this board.

So it's unlisted? What did you say? We have it as unlisted.

We have it as unlisted. The planning board, did they already declare it a type two action?

Could you just repeat what you just said?

Sure. The planning board at its June meeting confirmed that it's a type two action. SIGRA 617.7, excuse me, 617.5. Did the planning board vote on NAGDEC? Type 2 action, no NAGDECs necessary. Oh, no NAGDEC type 2. Yeah.

I apologize.

So yeah, 18 and a specific language of the type 2 action is reuse of a residential or commercial structure or a structure containing containing mixed residential and commercial uses where the residential or commercial use is a permitted use under the applicable zoning law ordinance, including permitted by special use permit and the action does not meet or exceed any of the thresholds in section 617.4 of this part. It does not exceed those thresholds. Those are the type one secret thresholds. So we think we've pretty clearly fit into that.

I'm sorry.

This is not mixed.

This is not mixed use.

Right.

No, it's a commercial or mixed use.

It's a commercial or, did you say commercial?

Yes, commercial or residential, commercial, or mixed.

OK. Correct.

No, it's not coordinated. If it's a type 2, there's no review.

Yeah, right.

But if it's unlisted, we could all vote. So did the planning board declare it was type 2? EV, do you have what you need?

EV.

the variances don't change the categorization because it's not residential.

Correct, because this type two action applies to either residential or commercial or mixed.

So the amount of square footage involved with your proposed islands and your proposed striping, is it less than 4,000 square feet?

I know you're getting at a different type two action. In terms of the changes that we're proposing at the facility to the extent there are already is it less than 4,000?

Yeah, because the two variances. The area involved, the square footage involved, specifically the variance.

I would think that the two entrances plus the two islands would have to be less than 4,000 square feet.

But the overall parking area where the islands are.

Is it in excess? It's in excess. Okay. Yeah, I still think we can rely on the first reason for the type 2 action.

I think it's just type 2.

So where were we at? Type 2. Type 2, yeah. You want to confirm that?

Ready for my motion? Yeah. OK. I'm adaptable. OK. Mr. Chairperson, in regard to PLZBA 2026-0059, as supported by the staff reports, and current information. I ask that the board find this proposal to be a seeker type two action with sufficient information available upon which to state that no determination is necessary or required.

I'll second that.

Yes, I would vote. Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Or yes.

All right, do you want me to do this? Do we have to take...

Individually.

Yeah, yeah, I'll do it individually. I move the board approve the variance PLZBA-2026-0059 for 272 Hoosick Street. The applicant is asking for alternate landscaping plan consisting of two tree islands for a total of four trees where 12... trees are required. The variance will not create an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood. The benefits sought by the applicant, it's not feasible in another method. It is not a substantial variance. If granted, it will not have an adverse effect and it is not self-created because it's a pre-existing situation.

I would second that motion.

I vote to approve.

Approve. Approve.

Approve. In regards to the same PLZBA-2026-0059, the area variance to permit crosswalk striping across a pre-existing driveway where continuous sidewalks are required to be maintained, I move the board approve the variance that he may go ahead and do striping instead of digging up the whole parking lot entrance. The variance will not be an undesirable change. The benefits sought is very logical and the request of variance is not substantial. If granted, it will not have an adverse effect and it is not created because it's pre-existing.

I would vote to second. I vote to approve. Approve. Approve.

Approve.

Thank you all.

Yeah. Thank you.

The planning board.

That's the planning board.

We'll make sure they know.

Like they did with us.

Yes.

I don't know if you have anything else. All right. So I'm going to say good night.

Are you going to miss my circuit comments?

Yes. I may come back. Thanks.

I have an audience for everything.

Thanks, Rick. Thanks so much.

I think you should stay in the email chain, though.

Okay. Our last business tonight is PLZBA 2026-0063, 2412 15th Street. Come on up. Come on up. Got an empty house.

Apparently nobody in that position.

Hi, my name is Alex Lin. I'm the son of my father, Shui Sing Lin, and mother, Trey Ping Lin.

Alex, just move a little closer.

Hello, hello.

There you go. That's good.

So we're here today to file for use variance for the property owner is in a single-family neighborhood. We've had a business there previously for well over – We had it running for well over five years, and then we're looking to rent it out, being the spa that we had it previously. But we were unable to find a renter, but we did find one back in 2022. We applied for additional use variance on top of it for half being a spa, half being a takeout restaurant. We were approved for that use variance, but the renters finally... at the end backed out after we did all that. So we're just here today because we have, we were trying to sell the building instead now, and we have a company under contract, but they're proposing to use the building as a office spaces instead of the spa and a takeout restaurant. So they're asking us to get the use variance before they finalize the contract and everything.

So your intent is to sell the property.

Yes.

But the buyer wants you to get a use variance for a commercial office.

Yes, because we have the hardship and everything to prove. They don't have anything to back them up with it. We have... So we've owned the building since 2014 before this zoning law was in place. I believe 2017, we had to get the used areas to run the spa for a few more years and COVID came by, then we shut it down. Post COVID, we were trying to find a renter. We were never able to find one. And then when we did find one, they didn't want to keep it as a full spa. We have two different sections of the building. there's a downstairs area that can be turned into a convenience store takeout restaurant that's what they proposed to us so that's why we went and got a use variance uh back in 2022 uh to for them but then they ended up backing out so then we tried to uh so we've been trying to sell the uh property since then and because you're in a single family residence area We're not allowed to put a business into that building.

But it's already being used. I mean, you were using it previously as a commercial space.

It's always, since we, even before we bought it, it was a commercial business in that property.

Before you bought it.

Years before we came in. We changed everything over to a spa. And then we ran the business for upwards of five to six years, then shut it down due to COVID.

It's probably immaterial, but do you know what their plans are?

They're proposing for recruiting medical personnel. So this company works with St. Peter's Hospital, most hospitals in the Capital Region. They're recruiting medical personnel, nurses, doctors, what you call it, retirement home nurses, how long till the sale goes through? As soon as we get a variance, he said, as long as we get the variance, we can sign the contract for them to buy and they will start renovating. The insides already previously was office spaces. We just made the rooms into little spa, spa rooms. So all they really have to do is renovate the little, the basement to their liking. There's a kitchen in there for them to use already. And then there's going to be a reception area in the front.

So there's no construction work required other than modifications that the new buyer would want to make?

I believe so. No major construction. It's been vacant for five years. We had a survey done two years ago. Was it two years ago with Andrew Donovan? I believe everything was up to code then. Nothing has changed since we've been trying to sell it.

Well, you were before us for parking spaces, weren't you?

Yes. I believe Andrew Donovan was also here for.

So the building's actually been vacant for five years?

Yes. We've been paying vacant fees for five years.

I don't have any problem.

Council, is there any

I would just call your attention to the staff report where it stated that the building department has raised concerns about work that was taking place on the property that may or may not have been compliance, may or may not have had the required permits and approvals. And then the staff recommended that the applicant update the board on what code violations or outstanding issues have been addressed since receiving site plan approval.

Has that been completed?

What do you mean?

So can I interject here? Only because I'm a real estate agent. Theoretically, when they do title on this property, if there's code violations, those should show up on title. And then... they would either either the new people are going to have to change whatever they're doing and go up to code or whatever violations they have would have to be satisfied before they can close to the best of my knowledge and that's correct but i think as a policy the board should

Do you granting any type of approval reluctantly if there's the potential or possibility of existing code violation, which we don't know.

Correct. So should we have them go back.

It's also something that could be ameliorated through a condition of any approval that we're, we're approving the request, subject to confirmation that the building is code. Yeah.

And if there's any outstanding.

Result.

Yeah. Okay.

Okay.

You guys understand that?

Yes.

Do you?

We, so.

Have you done any work? Are you aware that you had some perhaps code violations?

I'm just trying to help them sell it right now. I understand.

I understand. So, okay. So how would he get that information? I have two phones.

if you were to make approval contingent on that, we can find out from Carlo or the building department to see if there's an active code violation. If there is, then it means that

They have to satisfy.

They have to satisfy.

So do you understand what she's saying? Yes. Okay. So if we approve your variance tonight, it's going to be contingent on you cleaning up any code violations that already exist right now.

Wouldn't it make sense to clear up the code violations first?

Well, just then it's got to wait a month.

Well, wouldn't they be aware of existing code violations?

Last time I was in here, we were trying to get a work permit because we were thinking of keeping it after not being able to sell the building for well over two years. So then we were thinking of keeping it and changing to our own little spot, maybe keep it half takeout restaurant. have a spa. So we went and got a building permit right around last year also. And they didn't tell me any violations we were in. We have a building permit as we speak right now for the property, but we never did the renovations because we found a buyer and we are now under a contract with them.

So your last approval from planning department, from planning board.

Yep.

You didn't get a CEO on that, a permit from building department?

I have a building permit for the property right now.

Do you have a CEO certificate of occupancy?

No, we do not. Is the building permit valid? I believe so for a few more months.

Have there been any inspections?

Not since.

that may be the concern the building department is raising. If there's a building permit issued, there's usually a schedule follow up inspections. And so if their paperwork sees that a permit was issued, but there's been no inspections, that may be the concern they're raising.

So what do you think is the best way to do this? Should we have them go clean up there?

Thank you. Well, go back.

What do you say?

There's no open code violation for none, but that was the concern that it's not been an inspection of the place.

There's an open building permit. There's no record of any follow-up inspections on what's taking place. So they said, we don't know what's taking place since the permit was pulled. So what should we do? I think...

What's the logical way for them to move things along?

Sure. There's two paths you can take. You can table this until that is officially confirmed and resolved, or you can consider the application, but any approval be contingent upon satisfaction to the building department that there are no code violations on the property. We've just received some indication that that is likely something that can be resolved with the building department.

But if they're under contract already and they proceed, enforcing that condition might be difficult. How do you enforce it?

Well, the building, the use variance wouldn't be valid until all the conditions were complied with. So if a condition of their contract, which is not our concern, that's theirs between private parties, but if their contract sounds like it's conditioned upon then obtaining the use variance, they can't deliver that use variance to the prospective purchaser because the conditions have not been met. That use variance, if you grant the use variance, it only becomes operative once all the conditions are met.

My own would be it would be cleaner to have code go back in, tell them you're not going to go ahead with the building permit, ask for a certificate of occupancy, and you're good to go. And then you come back and you get your bearings?

Yeah, and I think what you can do is you can talk. Do you have a listing agent?

We do.

Who's your listing agent?

What's her name? That doesn't matter. Wang Ye. Wang Ye. It's a family friend.

So tell them that you came here, that we will approve. Am I speaking out of line that we want to approve this for them but we're, we're leaning, we're leaning towards giving you your variants, but there's a little bit of stuff that needs to get cleaned up first, so that. You guys can still continue on. Go get your inspections. We need the building code department to go do their inspections, clean up anything that needs to be done there, and then we can proceed.

How quickly can the inspection be done, do you think?

I don't know. Usually they can inspect within 48 hours.

Is this a cash deal or a mortgage deal?

I do not know, personally. We have lawyers dealing with that end right now.

So, I mean, if you've got to wait 45 days, that's, I mean, because it's going to be a month before you come back here. You could close right after that. But you could do all the other stuff in the meantime.

Gotcha.

Because you're going to have, your buyers are going to have to do their own inspections and all that stuff.

Yeah, I get you. So, you guys are leaning towards yes, but we have to check with the building department if there's any violations right now.

You've got to clean up the back.

And it probably is in your best interest that you wouldn't want one of the terms of the contract to fail. Yes. If the inspection is done and problems arise. Got it. Okay.

So we're going to table this, but what are we asking him to do for homework? To go down to code?

No.

and request a what, a code inspection? What's he asking for?

Either withdraw the building permit, close the building permit, which would require a closeout inspection, or something that gets a memo to the planning staff that says there are no issues here in the building department for this property.

Do you understand? Close the building permit out and get a memo to go to planning saying you're good to go, there's no code violations.

And if there are, you got to clean them up.

Got it.

And one other thing on a different issue, that the prior variances that you obtained, I believe the view is that if you get the current variance that you're seeking, that prior variances will be extinguished. They will not exist. So if you want to, you know, If something falls apart and you want to go back to what was, then you have to start fresh.

Yep. Understood. And just to confirm that, you're seeking a variance for a professional office. Yes. If that's granted, that would replace the prior variance for the spa and the takeout, which would no longer exist. Yep.

which is probably a better way to do it anyways, because that way clean up whatever is in the back drawer and then tell the buyers we're all clean. And then if they back out, you don't need to come back here, but you've got yourself cleaned up.

Gotcha. All right, thank you.

Yeah, you're welcome.

Thank you guys.

And you'll be first instead of last.

Thank you.

I make a motion to table this.

I would second the motion to table this. I vote to approve.

Approve. Approve.

Approve. How about a vote to adjourn? Motion. I vote to adjourn.

I second that. I vote to approve.

Approve.

Approve.