YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → City of Albany Planning Board April 7, 2026

City of Albany Planning Board April 7, 2026 — Transcript

by City of Albany, NY · 11,565 words · 1,879 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

3:25[snorts]
3:27All right. Um, good evening. We are
3:30calling the meeting to order. Um it's
3:33now April April 7th, 2026 at 6:00 p.m.
3:38We have a five member board and we have
3:39four members present. Um one member we
3:42are still waiting for um to be
3:44appointed. So we do have a quorum. Um
3:47with us we have Sadi Kadivi, Rachel
3:50Breedster, um Paige Barnum, and I'm Glen
3:53Gillard and I'm the chair. Um, so we
3:56have a quorum and we're going to move
3:58forward with today's
4:00itiner agenda. So the first thing on the
4:03agenda is our consent agenda which is um
4:07application number DPR0165.
4:10It's a development plan review. The
4:12property address is 1361 Broadway. The
4:16applicant is Harmony Primo Lofts and the
4:18representing agent is Mr. Hersburg from
4:20Hersburg and Hersburg. So we can Mr.
4:24You want to move
4:26>> for consent?
4:27>> No, you don't need to. You don't need
4:28to. I'm sorry. I don't want you to move.
4:30>> Okay.
4:32>> From here. [laughter]
4:39>> No. Went forward quite a while. Waiting
4:42for approval from New York State BC.
4:45>> Okay.
4:45>> Sewer extension. say now require if
4:48you're generating more than 2500 gallons
4:50per day
4:54they need and once we get that start
4:58>> all right um so right now the ex
5:02basically what you said what we're
5:03considering is an extension of approval
5:06for this project DPR0165
5:09does anyone want to make a motion to
5:11approve the extension
5:12>> so moved
5:14>> anybody second
5:15>> second
5:16>> so it's been properly moved by Rachel
5:18Bster and seconded by Paige Barnum. Um
5:21any all in favor?
5:23>> I.
5:24>> Any opposed?
5:25>> All right. Motion carries. Thank you. So
5:29now we'll move to the hearing agenda. We
5:31have one item under the hearing agenda
5:34which is our public hearing. Um this
5:36item is CU-2026-7
5:40is for a conditional use permit for 581
5:43Clinton Avenue. Um the applicant is JBT
5:47Solutions LLC. Um you have 10 minutes to
5:51present. Please state. Um so we'll go
5:54through the slides. So handing it over
5:57to you and please tell us your name and
5:59how you're um representing.
6:02>> Danny Sanders, Harris Sanders
6:04Architects, architect for the um 581
6:08Clinton Avenue project.
6:11And you are sir Jamar Thorne um a member
6:14for JBT Solutions.
6:16>> Okay.
6:21>> So I can speak to uh the site uh being
6:23at 581 Clinton Avenue and
6:27[clears throat] existing
6:29re uh well twotory with basement uh
6:32project building. And these are the
6:35photos taken from the front and side.
6:38This was the um previous application,
6:41previous approach to the design for the
6:44um apartment, but um it did not meet the
6:48um natural light and ventilation
6:50requirements for the living space called
6:52the great space and the bedroom being in
6:54the front. So, it was revised to become
6:57a studio apartment. um similar um
7:01configuration for the exterior but no
7:04interior walls to break it up into
7:06bedroom and living space. So now the
7:09studio apartment as um shown
7:14meets the natural light and ventilation
7:17requirements for a living space.
7:22the approximate square footage is 850
7:26and um the entrance way would remain the
7:29same. The exterior egress will remain
7:32the same and uh that's pretty much the
7:36approach that the owner elected to take
7:38for the conversion of the lower level
7:42lowest level.
7:47I don't know if there's anything else to
7:48add from our end. Um it's well
7:50maintained. You've had the building for
7:53um approximately since um September.
7:55>> Yeah.
7:55>> Of last year.
7:56>> Yes.
7:59>> Um any questions from any members?
8:01>> I do. The last time that back room was
8:04listed as storage. It's no locker
8:06storage, right? On top
8:08>> the Lshape.
8:09>> Yes. It is still be a storage area. Yes.
8:12>> It's for the tenant.
8:13>> But and does it mean to be aggressive?
8:15It is a storage.
8:16>> Yes. There's two back doors back there.
8:18Um there's one that leads to the um to
8:20the storage area and there's one that
8:22goes outside the um
8:24>> there's yeah it still goes back through
8:26that room.
8:27>> I mean it's part of it's not really a
8:29storage room and that flammables or
8:32anything like that can be kept in it.
8:33It's just for the resident to have some
8:36additional space. I mean they're not
8:37it's not living space. So
8:39>> it's not living space.
8:39>> No no.
8:41>> And so like what if there's something
8:42blocking it in terms of this storage? Um
8:46I don't think anything will be blocking.
8:48It's just um labeled that as storage. Um
8:50it's just the hot water tank and
8:52everything is over there and it's just
8:53the open space. So
8:56>> I was talking about the top part.
8:58>> Yeah,
8:58>> the egress
8:59>> the egress.
9:01>> So if you want
9:03the storage piece
9:05>> this L shape, but that right there is
9:08the door. Am I right? This
9:09>> correct that goes right
9:10>> that goes to the backyard. Correct. Yes.
9:11>> So they do have the DS.
9:13>> Yeah. But sometime I mean so typically
9:15Danny know this you can't have it eress
9:18with separate like you can't have stuff
9:20in front of an actual
9:21>> egress.
9:22>> So you want to make sure there's
9:24>> um
9:26>> Oh that's possible. Yeah that's possible
9:28separation.
9:29>> Yes definitely
9:30>> because if someone ends up putting
9:31something there and because your windows
9:33don't meet the requirements from the
9:34front.
9:35>> So if there's something that someone
9:37needs to get out from the back and
9:38there's stuff blocking it because it's
9:41technically stored. You can't exit from
9:44>> put on the door. Is that right?
9:46>> Yeah, we can do that.
9:48>> But it's something
9:49>> we can use that work with the building
9:51department to note that on the
9:53>> Yeah, we can put the separation
9:56partitions between
9:57>> Yes. So for the egress is clear
10:01>> just to make it.
10:02>> No, absolutely. That's good. Good point.
10:05>> I saw it last time locally storage.
10:10So it's really mechanical.
10:12>> Yeah.
10:12>> Settle for that on the right side and
10:15then storage on the left if you do that
10:17because that's water heaters in there.
10:20>> Okay. Thank you.
10:21>> Yeah. Does it look like there's any any
10:24other questions from board?
10:28>> It doesn't any written or public
10:30comments. Does that change at all?
10:33>> All right. So
10:35do you have any comments left from the
10:38staff?
10:39>> I'm sorry. All right. I just have one
10:40more comment. Can you go back to the
10:41plan? Where are your trash bins
10:43collected?
10:45>> Trash.
10:46>> Um, normally the tenants um well the
10:49tenants that's upstairs and um on the
10:51first floor and second floor, they put
10:52it outside on the side of their
10:53apartment.
10:54>> In the front?
10:55>> Yes.
10:57>> Not in the front, but
10:58>> not in the front, but it's on the side
11:00of the area. And um same thing with this
11:02here. It's an area in the back um in the
11:06backyard where they can place the trash
11:07cans at as well. You cannot put them in
11:10the notch in the back but behind the 9
11:12foot dimension right here.
11:14>> Right here.
11:15>> Yes.
11:17>> I would just note that because you want
11:19to be considerate in terms of like
11:21>> people make trash. You want to make sure
11:23they have enough room to put it properly
11:25so it's not overflowing everywhere.
11:27>> Oh, it's definitely a place to put it
11:28there.
11:29>> Where do they put it on the other tent?
11:31>> Yeah. On the side.
11:32>> On the right side. Okay.
11:35>> You want to go back to the photograph
11:37for a second? Let's go back to the photo
11:39because I I you have room
11:41>> on the right.
11:41>> Yeah, on the right side of the house
11:42they put pictures that
11:44>> over that area. Yes.
11:46>> Maybe on that side.
11:50>> They do have some space.
11:51>> Yeah, that's an open space. It's like um
11:53a local garden area.
11:55>> It's still there. Okay. That's the only
11:57concern I would have.
12:01>> Nice that you're using it.
12:03>> Yes.
12:08So just keep on.
12:10>> Yeah. All right. Any other questions?
12:15>> The staff notes quickly. U so this
12:18requires this particular use requires
12:20the change to add a unit. So it's going
12:22from a two to a three in this district
12:25requires a conditional use permit. Um
12:27the action itself is classified as a
12:29type two action under seeker. So no
12:31further actions required uh under
12:34seeker.
12:36They have about 25 feet of frontage
12:37along Pin Avenue. So again, they have
12:39they have some space on both sides of
12:41the actual dwelling itself.
12:44Um this project was referred to Alden
12:49County Planning Board and they defer to
12:53local consideration.
12:55Looking at the block of wind here and
12:58not including this particular property,
13:00we identified five single unit
13:01buildings, 12 two unit buildings, nine
13:04threeunit buildings, one multi-unit
13:07building, so generally four or more, and
13:09then 10 vacated parcels. So just
13:12establishing that there's already a good
13:13mix of um properties, specifically
13:16residential properties on this block
13:19to a unit and above for what they're
13:21looking to do.
13:23And then just for code compliance
13:25itself, the main considerations we
13:27looked at is that to check if it has the
13:30appropriate square footage, which it
13:32does, um, but it's not resulting in a
13:35total number of units above what the
13:36code currently allows, which it would be
13:38compliant with. Um, and that the any
13:42external alterations wouldn't be
13:45um out of character with the
13:47neighborhood. They're not really
13:48proposing any external changes. Um, and
13:52it would also require a certificate of
13:53appropriateness, which I believe is
13:55something that's already been underway.
13:57>> Yes.
14:01>> Um, they meet the requirements for the
14:0450% of upgrade, the ceiling heights, um,
14:08designated containers located on the
14:10property, and we just talked about that
14:12being at the rear of the property. So,
14:13we'll note that on on many permits. Um
14:17and each unit would occupy one one floor
14:19of the building. Uh also a code
14:22requirement for uh compliance to have an
14:27additional unit.
14:29And with that uh we're recommending
14:31approval of the condition.
14:36So with that um any last questions?
14:41All right. Do we want to vote to approve
14:42the conditional use permit for project
14:45number CU 20-2026-7?
14:49>> So moved. Okay.
14:51>> Second.
14:52>> All right. Moved by Rachel Greenster. Um
14:55seconded by S. Good evening.
14:57>> Shotty.
14:57>> Shotty. I'm sorry.
14:59>> Don't do it on purpose. [laughter]
15:02>> Um all in favor, please say I.
15:04>> I. Any opposed?
15:06>> All right. Motion passes.
15:08>> Thank you very much. Hi.
15:12>> All right. So, now we're going to go to
15:15our meeting agenda, which is our public
15:18meeting. And the first project on the
15:20agenda is application number CP
15:2320226-30.
15:25This is um they're looking for a waiver
15:28for off streetet parking. They're also
15:30looking for the conditional use permit
15:33and development plan review. The address
15:35is 135 Ontario Street. The applicant is
15:38Patrick Chu of Upstate General
15:40Construction and representing them is
15:42Danny Hersburg of Hersburg and Hersburg.
15:45So,
15:46>> thank you,
15:48>> Madam Chairman. Very very nice to see
15:50you there.
15:53>> Uh the project was before this board
15:57three about three months ago. Um
16:01and [clears throat]
16:02uh they haven't changed the plan very
16:04much. It's pretty much the same plan.
16:06[clears throat] This is the existing
16:08building which sort of sets the stage
16:10for what we're doing. That building on
16:12the corner is a little taller and a
16:14little a little more massive. And the
16:16building down the side is is a one-story
16:19warehouse with some variable roof lines.
16:23Um [snorts]
16:23so that's who we had to work with and I
16:26think essentially we could they had some
16:29methods of getting it more beautiful
16:31than it is now.
16:33Dan, you want me to speak to the to it a
16:35little bit? You're all right. You want
16:37me?
16:38>> Dan Sanders to come up and interrupt me
16:40all you want. [laughter]
16:42>> Yes. So, the um putting the addition on
16:45the building uh when we reviewed some of
16:48the um concerns is that we work with uh
16:52some of the existing fenistration on the
16:54building and uh develop off of that
16:58vertically. So as we build up this was
17:01required um to present an existing
17:04building elevation and showing the scope
17:08of the work
17:10for
17:12sort of not really a rhythm of windows
17:14or openings that's there because it's
17:16been a series of openings over the time.
17:18So it's going to be a you know a
17:20challenge. So what we did on the next
17:23slide was
17:26show the front
17:28And that's sort of turning the corner.
17:32Um, but then do you have the the
17:35proposed elevations?
17:36>> Yeah, post elevations come next.
17:38>> Come next. Okay.
17:41>> After we get done with the engineering
17:42drawings, erosion sediment control,
17:44which everybody's always interested in,
17:46I'm sure, but it's a [clears throat]
17:47plan we have to develop. New York State
17:49requires on every project. Now I think
17:51we have there's the floor.
17:52>> Okay. So the plans are pretty much
17:54working with the configuration of the
17:55building that's existing and the uh
18:01allowable areas to
18:04add windows potentially if it's nearby a
18:06property line or setbacks. And then um
18:10so fortunately there is some open area
18:12where we can put some windows per code.
18:14But the other challenge is we've got um
18:17alleyways and the like that would be it
18:20difficult to add some windows. So
18:21generally we put windows only where we
18:24could. I don't have to get into the
18:26details of it but as you go through the
18:28plans um that's what these plans reflect
18:31and when we get uh the total number of
18:34units are noted at
18:38>> there two two bedrooms and
18:40>> it's shown on the other chart. Yeah.
18:42>> Yeah. There's two two bedrooms on each
18:44floor. A total of 34.
18:46>> Why is that bottom one in red? Just by
18:48accident.
18:50>> That was the um I believe that was that
18:54may have been
18:56>> You made it red so we can reproduce it
18:57in red.
18:58>> Yeah, I don't remember why that was.
19:00>> Was there something about it? Okay.
19:02>> Yeah,
19:02>> we do have to do What about the rental
19:05units? Was that maybe where it was the
19:08the
19:09>> exclusionary that Yeah, those
19:11>> I think that's what they were. Yeah. So,
19:13we'll check the code on our um key, but
19:16getting to the elevations. So, what we
19:20did is um create work with some of the
19:24openings on the ground floor, center the
19:27windows where we could above those, the
19:29Juliet balconies, and um maintaining the
19:33masonry on the lower level, which
19:36because of all the openings and and
19:37infills and everything like that, we
19:39propose to um paint. Um it's been
19:42painted several times. And then to kind
19:46of uh scale it down a little bit in
19:48terms of a three-story building, again,
19:51we're adding the two floors on top of
19:53it, but from a material standpoint,
19:55breaking it down to um the brick and
19:58then a siding on the third level.
20:04So, it's a challenge in terms of
20:06creating an elevation and working with
20:08some of the openings. But not only that,
20:11from a material standpoint, not making
20:13it look so too institutional and
20:15breaking it up horizontally um with the
20:18material break onto the from the second
20:20floor to the third floor. And then
20:22that's really in the um on the west
20:25side. So, it's not as
20:27I would say apparent being in the We get
20:30back to that on the plan where that is,
20:32but that's in the uh less seen areas.
20:37Okay. And the rear elevation of course
20:40is the south side.
20:43So, I will leave it up. Okay. You've got
20:46enough site stuff to probably present
20:47too, right? So, I'll leave it back.
20:50>> Not really. again that the floor the uh
20:52the site plan really because the
20:54building occupies this the entire site
20:56was the building plan. So Dan did a good
20:59job of presenting that. Here's where we
21:02show it. We we uh we do have uh some
21:05street trees that we added. We discussed
21:08it with uh the city forester Jay Lavine.
21:12Uh and uh we picked the tree that they
21:14wanted and they we originally had five
21:16trees. He said they didn't want the
21:17fifth tree. It was too close to a power
21:19pole. We ended up with four new trees
21:23and uh other than that they uh
21:27>> a bike storage.
21:28>> What's that?
21:29>> Bike storage.
21:30>> Oh yeah. In internal rebuilding we have
21:32bike storage and we have a bike rack. So
21:36[clears throat]
21:37we meet we meet that requirement with
21:38the with the internal storage down that
21:40corridor is a bike rack and a trash
21:43room.
21:46>> We have a fitness room for the
21:47residents. And then on the upper
21:52um level.
21:57>> And what do you mean by inclus
21:58inclusionary unit? Is that someone
22:01that's 88
22:03>> rental?
22:04>> Affordable. Got it.
22:06>> Affordable. Sorry.
22:07>> It's called inclusionary under code.
22:09>> Okay.
22:11>> I guess it includes more people who can
22:12rent them. And then the third floor
22:18right there is pretty much identical,
22:20but they're on they split on the two
22:22floors, the inclusionary units.
22:26>> Um, can you speak to the the fence and
22:28then also the design of the I know if
22:32you just go back to the
22:34rendering of the I think it's the side
22:37view. Um,
22:42maybe.
22:45Yeah, right here. Just uh why there's no
22:47windows there with the residential
22:48property next to it.
22:51>> Oh, because it's attached to something.
22:53>> It's it's very close, but
22:54>> yeah, it's it's within 10 ft.
22:56>> Yeah.
22:56>> So, that's really not permitted here,
22:59>> right?
23:02>> And then the other is stairwell. I'm not
23:04sure which area specifically, but yes,
23:06that that's the the challenge was on the
23:08rear elevation. We couldn't have because
23:12it's it's cut back sort of and and at
23:15that area it's within the 10 ft
23:19which is restriction putting any windows
23:22on a property within 10 ft of a property
23:24line.
23:26>> Is that why there's no lights on the
23:28east on the south and west elevations
23:31too?
23:32No lighting pictures.
23:35>> Yes. Right now, unless that's something
23:36that you want to have include, we didn't
23:39have that.
23:41>> The only place we show.
23:42>> It seems like a nice opportunity if it
23:44is such a out like you're going to have
23:46those spaces in shape.
23:49>> Which sides are you looking at?
23:50>> This one,
23:51>> the south and west.
23:52>> South and west.
23:52>> South.
23:55>> But how close are they to your
23:56neighbors? Cuz that's the only concern
23:58that I have.
23:59>> The homeowners came the first time
24:00around, right? Because this is like
24:02their backyard that all of that looks
24:04into, right?
24:06>> And now we have lighting on this side
24:08here,
24:09>> right? Minimizing with no lighting on on
24:12this side
24:13>> because it's it's it's neighboring other
24:15property, right?
24:16>> Because they're right on the property.
24:17>> Really? Yeah. The closest building would
24:19be right here. So I guess anything
24:23at night.
24:23>> Is that lot where your cursor is, is
24:26that part of that the homeowner
24:28>> is that private?
24:30>> Yeah.
24:31Yeah, it looks like a backyard.
24:34Okay,
24:34>> that's their that's their back pool,
24:36right?
24:37>> So, that makes sense because there's no
24:38alleyway or anything.
24:39>> No, not really. [laughter] I mean,
24:40>> that's a main thing.
24:41>> But the other part is there's not a lot
24:43of windows over there either because of
24:45the property.
24:47>> But yeah, that is tight
24:49>> because if you go back to the south
24:51elevation,
24:54if I'm understanding it correctly, like
24:56all so this dark gray part is what's
24:59immediately adjacent to the residential
25:01building, right? And then all of those
25:03windows are in their backyard.
25:05>> Oh,
25:05>> they're there now. They're they're set
25:07back a little bit.
25:09>> That's
25:09>> But it's still facing their backyard.
25:11>> Yes.
25:11>> Yeah.
25:13>> That's like I was just like thinking
25:14about like, oh, there's our pool in our
25:16backyard and these low windows.
25:18>> These low windows and these people that
25:20are not
25:21>> right
25:22>> our family are like it's like they're
25:25closer than you and I. And
25:27>> right,
25:27>> I don't think it's that. I mean, I
25:29understand why you've done it that way.
25:30At first, I thought there was an
25:31alleyway behind it.
25:32>> Not that side.
25:33>> Yeah.
25:34>> But the other the side that is has
25:36lighting.
25:36>> No, only Bradford and Ontario have light
25:39fixture. Two two
25:41>> side facing the street,
25:43>> right?
25:44>> Yeah.
25:44>> So, that side
25:45>> Bradford and Ontario.
25:48>> Okay.
25:48>> Now, what's behind there, though?
25:51>> Well, that's his other building that he
25:52just renovated on the left.
25:54>> Okay.
25:54>> Those are apartments also.
25:56>> Okay. 260 Bradford that right there.
25:59>> It looks like there may be a alleyway
26:01between those two.
26:02>> There's some space between them. Again,
26:04it's right on the our building is right
26:06on the property line, right? Brad 260
26:08Bradford is is
26:11>> width of a normal width of it's like 1
26:13foot 10 in.
26:14>> Yeah.
26:14>> I can't get down that alleyway.
26:16>> Right.
26:17>> That alleyway now.
26:18>> But the windows are set at what height
26:19like like can a kid over like what is
26:22it? What are people looking at? probably
26:23about 3 ft
26:25>> off off the ground off the floor.
26:27>> Well, that's why there's there's a
26:28proposed 6 foot fence
26:31>> for the rear.
26:32>> That's why that's why you have to talk
26:33about Okay.
26:34>> Wait, where is where's the fence?
26:38>> Fence all the way around, isn't it?
26:40>> I think it might have been added to the
26:41next to like the most recent plans, but
26:44>> it basically be over here.
26:46>> Yeah.
26:46>> So, the windows look at a fence
26:48>> for this section just for the bottom.
26:50Yeah. But there's nothing separating the
26:54tenants that would be on that. Yeah.
26:56Right. Right there. Right. There's just
26:58like windows into a backyard.
27:00>> There is.
27:01>> Is there a fence there, too?
27:02>> That That's That's my big concern.
27:04>> Yeah. I don't think we called it on our
27:06plan, but I would assume that my
27:08applicant would like to fence it off.
27:11>> I think that should be a fence
27:12>> so that we could add
27:14some sort of probably six foot uh
27:17privacy type fence along those two
27:20sides. Well, and then so what would be
27:22the diff? What would be the dimensions
27:25between this fence and the window that
27:27you're basically opening a window to a
27:29fence?
27:29>> Yeah.
27:29>> Right. Well, you're
27:31>> that not the south, the other, the west,
27:36you see.
27:39I mean, we could have those windows a
27:40little higher.
27:41>> Could you have them as transom windows
27:42where they get cropped view of the
27:44skies, right? And that way at least like
27:47just in terms of like thinking about how
27:49someone uses the space internally,
27:51you're at least looking above the fence
27:54versus at a fence.
27:55>> I think yeah.
27:57>> See if it works out dimensionally.
27:59>> I'm just like really concerned about
28:01windows into like a private backyard
28:04like like the other on the south side.
28:07>> Yeah.
28:07>> But that's going to be fenced.
28:08>> That's going to be fenced. We should be
28:10working. What kind of fence though? Are
28:12you looking for a solid fence or a chain
28:15link?
28:15>> I a six foot privacy fence. So, it would
28:17be solid.
28:18>> Solid. Okay.
28:19>> Chain link is
28:20>> right. That's that's why I asked the
28:22question.
28:22>> Well, we can review the window heights
28:25>> just in terms of elevation.
28:27>> Absolutely.
28:28>> Yeah. It's like at a height above where
28:30it's not like I'm watching our kids swim
28:32in a pool for fun.
28:33>> Well, that fence is going to be privacy
28:35>> as long as there's like fence.
28:36>> That's the non-issue. The other the
28:38other side is what you're saying is the
28:40fence that's not really looking into the
28:43pool.
28:44>> And if the windows are that high, does
28:46the fence need to be six feet?
28:49>> Right.
28:49>> Well, the six feet means that the
28:52>> the windows like 3 feet above the
28:53ground, the windows,
28:55>> somebody stand behind the window is
28:58>> is looking out at the fence. So if you
29:00have it less than six foot high, it
29:02doesn't do anything visible with regard
29:05to the
29:07>> people can see into them and they can
29:08see out.
29:09>> We want to make sure you can make it six
29:11feet. It makes it more private for both
29:13sides,
29:14>> right?
29:15>> As long as like you're not getting a
29:17view of a fence from the inside.
29:20>> No, but if the window is higher off the
29:22floor like five and a half, six feet,
29:24and then it's about a three foot or two
29:26foot at least window. That's what you're
29:28saying.
29:28>> Yeah. If you have the You have the
29:30ceiling height. That's great. Yeah,
29:32>> we can [clears throat] do that
29:33>> just so you get some.
29:34>> And that's mainly on the south elevation
29:36because the other one's going to be
29:37looking [clears throat]
29:39>> not an issue because they have a fence
29:40there which is privacy and they're not
29:42>> just in terms of access, right? Like
29:44uncomfortable.
29:45>> Well, yeah. Like you said, it's for both
29:47parties.
29:48>> Both parties.
29:52>> Pretty sure the person living on the
29:53other side would feel okay would not
29:55feel okay with somebody being peeping
29:57into their window.
29:57>> Yeah.
29:58>> At any time. and vice versa.
29:59>> Right.
30:00>> Yeah.
30:00>> Right.
30:01>> Sitting in my backyard watching what all
30:03of you are up to next door.
30:07>> That's a hard elevation.
30:10>> Yep.
30:10>> And a hard [clears throat]
30:11lot line. It's like
30:16>> any other thoughts or questions?
30:18>> I didn't see was in the plans. Is there
30:20a place for trash?
30:21>> Yes, there's trash rooms.
30:23>> If you go back to the first floor, I can
30:24point out where it is. We have We have a
30:26>> bicycle storage. Bicycle storage fitness
30:28room, right?
30:30>> But there's a bicycle storage and trash
30:32room in that
30:32>> over to the right
30:34>> there. There's a trash room.
30:37>> And the trash room is on every floor.
30:40>> No, the trash room is repeating another
30:42floor, but the bicycle trash.
30:46>> Great.
30:49>> On the other floors, it' be like storage
30:51for
30:52>> Got it.
30:56>> Yes. Was there any study about the
31:00shadow the building having a whole new
31:03floor on it? It's going to cast on
31:06>> adjacent properties.
31:07>> I mean, it's not the tallest. It's there
31:10was other two and a half stories. It's
31:12taller. I mean, there's Bradford right
31:15next door 260 is a twotory with a
31:18pitched roof. This is a threetory with a
31:21flat roof. So the overall heights I
31:24think we're within aren't we within the
31:26guidelines for the heights?
31:27>> Yeah, we we don't need a variance for
31:28height.
31:29>> Yeah.
31:29>> Yeah. As long as you're within the
31:30guidelines.
31:32>> And Bradford's fair. It's not a narrow
31:34street in terms of you know casting
31:37right on.
31:40There's no commercial or resil
31:43towers which is
31:44>> very
31:47well the sun moving this direction would
31:50give you a light on the front and light
31:52on the back as it goes as it go as it
31:54traverses the sky. So again the only
31:58dark side is the alley on the uh between
32:01us and 260. That's that's going to be
32:03really dark. Right.
32:07>> Any other questions?
32:10All right. Do we It doesn't look like we
32:14have anybody for any comments. So, we're
32:17going to go into um staff
32:20recommendation.
32:23>> Um so, the multi-age is requires the
32:26conditional use permit because of the
32:29area that it's in a form based
32:32regulating plan which is the general. Uh
32:35under seeker, this is classified as an
32:37unlisted action. Um but the coordinated
32:40review is not required in this instance.
32:42Uh we do have the parts one and two of
32:44the [snorts] short environmental form.
32:46Um we'd be looking for the negative
32:49declaration on seeker before any other
32:52motions. Uh this was referred to the
32:55county planning board and we received
32:57the advisory and [snorts] recommendation
33:00notes um that are shown here. So for the
33:04advisory they noted they for
33:07recommendation rather they noted the
33:09local fire department should evaluate
33:11for public safety to service access
33:14water availability and any sprint system
33:16that might be required by building code
33:18under the advisory the city should
33:20consider the precedent setting nature of
33:22allowing the construction of buildings
33:24with property line without allowing for
33:26adequate setback and that the board
33:28request that the applicant the county
33:30planning board request that the
33:32applicant submit a revised site and
33:33clearly identifying access points for
33:35apartments one, two, and three as
33:37discrepancies are noted between the
33:38first floor plan and site plan details.
33:41Um
33:43now we having gone over these we do have
33:46some issues uh or concerns with the
33:49advisory and recommendation
33:52comments. Um go to the next slide. So
33:56it's already noted that all all of these
33:58have to get routed to departments of
34:00just fire and water already. they are
34:02going through the perceived sign off. Uh
34:06water is still pending. That' be a
34:08condition of the approval.
34:11Um
34:15additionally, the development plan
34:17review, which is what's before us today,
34:19um is typically is typically going to
34:22precede any of the building and
34:24regulatory compliance or code reviews.
34:26Um although
34:28codes is part of the technical review
34:30committee that would flag any major
34:32issues with the project beforehand, none
34:35were identified. Um
34:38and then just regulatory process note
34:41that we have is that in accordance with
34:43the general municipal law, uh we're
34:46looking to go over rule recommendation
34:47from the county planning board has to be
34:50a majority plus one. So in this case it
34:52be would be need [clears throat] four
34:53four members um to go to override the
34:57county um recommendation and advisory
35:00notes. In this case, we are recommending
35:03that the planning board, the city's
35:05planning board incorporates the decision
35:08to overrule the county planning board's
35:11recommendations in the final decision um
35:14as their recommendations already met
35:15through the standard referral process
35:17outlined in the code uh and our general
35:20review application procedures. Um and
35:23then in if you go back one more um in
35:26regards to the advisory notes about the
35:29precedent setting nature of allowing the
35:30setbacks or not really sure what that
35:33means given that setbacks here are
35:35allowed to be up to the um they're
35:39allowed zero foot setbacks but also it's
35:41an existing buildings
35:42>> existing building setbacks we didn't
35:44want to change those right
35:45>> uh so it's not really applicable in this
35:47case
35:48>> um and then the final final site plans
35:50and stamp plans for actual
35:53um building permits would be pending
35:56these stamped plans after the water
35:58department issues their their final
36:00permits as well.
36:04General code compliance under the zoning
36:06code. So they have met the requirements
36:09for the indoor outdoor um passive active
36:12recreation. They also have the laundry
36:14facilities outlined on the plans. Um
36:19confirm that the rooftop mechanical
36:21equipment will [snorts] have the
36:22adequate screening uh so that's not
36:25visible. Revised floor plans um
36:30showing additional pictures and first
36:33floor window replacement because we can
36:35just note that there was a request for
36:38um additional reision revisions for the
36:40window transom
36:42um
36:43>> on the on the south side.
36:45>> Yeah. Thank you. See,
36:49I'm sorry. Go back just one more. And
36:51then
36:54as noted by the applicant, DGS and the
36:56city arburous did recommend there be a
36:59reduction in the street trees. Um
37:02for a variety of reasons with utility
37:04complex, curve cuts, things like that.
37:07Uh and then our latest revised
37:10elevations include the coach lights and
37:11security lights with the required cut
37:14offs.
37:17Uh as for department reviews uh from
37:20engineering they all the comments have
37:22been addressed and they uh provided
37:23their approval March 25th. Uh department
37:26of general services provided
37:29um their approval January 30th. Fire
37:33provided their approval February 2nd and
37:35water has um been working with the
37:38applicant to go through additional
37:41utility comments but nothing that would
37:43change the
37:45the elements discussed before the board
37:48tonight. Um,
37:51and therefore we would recommend
37:53conditional approval with pending the
37:56water department's um final approval for
37:59the project. So there's a bunch of
38:01different parts of this um this
38:05approval. So the first thing would be
38:07declaring a negative declaration under
38:09secret for this this whole project. Um,
38:13additionally, we would recommend
38:14approval of the commission use permit,
38:17approval of the waiver for off- street
38:20parking requirements and subsequently
38:22the approval for the development plan
38:24review. Uh, with the development plan
38:26review, we are listing two conditions.
38:29One of them for prior to the issuance of
38:31the building permit, final approval
38:33shall be obtained from the department of
38:35water and water supply. And the second
38:37being prior to the issuance of the
38:39certificate of occupancy, the applicant
38:40shall implement an affordable housing
38:43compliance plan with the prevailing
38:45section of the USDO or zoning code.
38:47That's in regards to that um that
38:50requirement. I believe right now they're
38:51they're showing the
38:53three units on the plan which is in
38:55compliance. Um but there are pending
38:57updates to the to the city code in that
38:59regard. So we just want to make sure
39:00that when it's actually constructed, it
39:03complies with the affordable housing
39:04requirement.
39:07If there's any questions on the various
39:11items,
39:12>> you suggest we vote on it one by one.
39:16>> Yeah. And specifically the the seeker um
39:20negative declaration.
39:22>> Not at all. I do have a question
39:24regarding the off street parking.
39:26>> Um I know we talked about it the last
39:29time that this came before us. They're
39:31waving having to have any off street
39:34parking because of just where it's
39:36located near the bus stop. All of those
39:38conditions are are met. Correct.
39:40>> Correct. Y
39:42>> yeah. So there's
39:44a variety of provisions in the code to
39:46establish the minimum parking. Um
39:49>> first we take the reduction from the
39:51change of what it used to be to now.
39:53Basically
39:55we get down to that. Then we also
39:57subtract the amount because of its
40:00proximity to um
40:04to high frequency bus stops. And then
40:06there's also reduction for uh or credit
40:09towards the on-site parking which we
40:11counted at least 11 on Ontario and
40:14Bradford. But also noting that there's
40:16additional parking spots along the
40:19street that tend to be open and a lot of
40:21the um adjacent parking lots and parking
40:24garages tend to be empty as well. Okay.
40:30So unless there's any other comments or
40:33questions, we're going to go through
40:34each one one by one. Um so the first
40:38recommendation
40:40is to declare um a negative declaration
40:42under seeker for this project. Do we um
40:46do we have anybody to make a motion for
40:48this?
40:50>> So moved.
40:51>> Okay. Seconded.
40:53>> All right. It's been properly moved and
40:54seconded. All in favor?
40:56>> I. Okay. The second is the chief
40:59planning official recommends approval of
41:01the conditional use permit on this
41:03project. Um any motions for that?
41:11>> Second.
41:11>> All right. Um properly moved and
41:14seconded. Any um
41:17if all in favor please say I.
41:19>> I.
41:19>> Any opposition?
41:21>> Okay. The third one is um approving the
41:25recommendation of the from the chief
41:27planning official a waiver for off
41:30streetet parking and do we have a motion
41:32for this?
41:35>> So moved.
41:37>> Second.
41:40>> All right. All in favor?
41:42>> I.
41:43>> Any oppose.
41:45All right. And then the last one is the
41:47approval of the development plan review
41:50with the following conditions. Uh prior
41:52to the issuance of the building permit,
41:54there should be a final approval
41:56obtained from the um department of water
41:58and water supply. The second condition
42:00is um again prior to the issuance of the
42:03certificate of occupancy,
42:06the applicant shall implement an
42:07affordable housing plan in compliance
42:09with the prevailing USDO section
42:10375-415C.
42:14All in favor? Oh, I'll move it.
42:16>> You move. Okay. Second.
42:19>> Second it.
42:19>> All right. All in favor?
42:22>> All right. It carries. Thank you.
42:26>> All right. Thank you.
42:28>> That last one is good.
42:29>> Yeah.
42:33All right. So, the next project we're
42:35going to discuss is DR26-1,
42:39which is a demolition review of 262 267
42:43Second Street. The applicant is the
42:45Alurn County Land Bank. And can I'm
42:49assuming you're here on behalf of the
42:51land bank. Can you just introduce
42:52yourself?
42:53>> Sure. My name is Lynette Terret. I'm the
42:54director of operations at the bank.
42:57>> And uh I'm Jason Chcoy. I'm the
42:58development specialist at the Land Bank.
43:00>> All right. Thank you. So you have 10
43:02minutes to present starting now.
43:04>> Yeah. Thank you. And I just kind of
43:06grouped uh where I could um all three
43:09properties together just for the sake of
43:12time. So you'll see the the um the all
43:16the project numbers listed at the top of
43:18the first slide. Um and so we're so
43:21we're discussing uh 255 First Street,
43:23256 sec First Street. Um those are the
43:26two properties here and then 267 2nd
43:29Street. Um so
43:31>> give me one second. Can we look at all
43:33of these together and make motions on
43:35these or do we have to separately?
43:37>> Yes, they can go through them all some
43:38time and then we could do a motion on
43:40each one separately. Okay, not a
43:42problem.
43:44>> No, thank you. That's it's helpful. Um,
43:46so yeah, you can see on the map they're
43:48all um they're all in the same they're
43:51all located in West Hill um within block
43:54approximately one another and they're
43:56all zoned uh R2 district.
44:00Next um so first uh 25 uh First Street
44:04um this was built in 1872. The land bank
44:08acquired the property in 2017. Um, and
44:12our estimated rehab cost right now, we
44:14we we looked at um four properties that
44:17we've rehabbed in the last two years,
44:19one of which is on Second Street um
44:22nearby. And so we're estimating rehab
44:25costs at 260 approximately
44:28$260 per square foot to get the
44:31estimated rehab costs. Um we've had
44:34structural evaluations done of all three
44:36properties. um they were included in our
44:38our application. Um and for 255 First
44:42Street, it noted significant damage um
44:44from roof leaking and water damage. So
44:47the the flooring is unstable um
44:50especially in the rear of the building
44:51is starting to collapse. Um we'll have
44:53pictures later on that kind of that that
44:56show that dam water damage. Um and then
45:00this will be the same for all three
45:01properties. um our proposed use for site
45:04for site post demolition. Um they're
45:06going to be included in our uh our our
45:10foot the block project is what we're
45:11terminating. So uh I think um the last
45:14time the land bank presented to the
45:16planning board was 2024 and we mentioned
45:20uh I I think we kind of uh referenced
45:22this project a little bit. Um so it is
45:24starting to to uh move ahead. Um we've
45:28submitted uh the application to homes
45:30and community renewal would be the
45:31funding source for this project. Um
45:33they've given us some edits back and
45:35we're working on those edits now and we
45:38are also in the middle of uh procurement
45:40for architectural services. So it's um
45:43and so all three and I'll go into more
45:46detail on that on a few slides. Um and
45:50then um it's going to be the same for
45:51all three properties to to follow the uh
45:54the demolition debris diversion plan in
45:57the requirements that a minimum of 35%
46:00um of material is recycled or
46:02repurposed. All three properties have a
46:05lot of um damage um some fire damage on
46:09one of the properties but um they also
46:11all as as basses. So that's one of the
46:13one of the concerns. um we include this
46:17information um in the RFP and then the
46:21and then this requirement of meaning
46:23[snorts] 35%.
46:25Um
46:27and then uh 256 first street um this is
46:31is across the street from 255 built in
46:341872. This property we we acquired in
46:372023.
46:39Um, so, uh,
46:42probably one of our more recent
46:43acquisitions. Um, and it's always been
46:45the the idea has been to include this
46:48property in the Flip the Block project
46:50from the start. Um, and again, we're
46:53estimating approximately $260 per square
46:56foot for for rehab. Um, this property,
47:00um, there's some fire damage and and
47:02that that we'll see on the interior
47:05slides. Um and uh because of this and
47:09because of the concerns noted in the
47:11structural evaluation um uh the city of
47:14Alb's condemned this property. So we I
47:16have a letter from uh March 16th
47:19condemning the property. Um as I noted
47:22this will be included in the in the flip
47:23the bond project as well. Um and then
47:26we'll see this later on. There's a
47:28concern with this site um because it is
47:30adjoining uh has an adjoining wall with
47:33a neighbor. Um, so we we're we we've uh
47:37been in contact with that neighbor um
47:40the the the property owner. Um so we're
47:43going to do a site visit. We we have a
47:46date plan for a site visit um to look at
47:48the basement to see if the basements are
47:49joining and if there's any structural
47:51work that needs to be completed be prior
47:53to demolition. Um so we're going to
47:56follow up on that process. Um and um and
48:01then 267 2nd Street um is it's a
48:04existing single family property. Um it's
48:07a little bit smaller than the others,
48:08which is why we're estimating uh lower
48:12rehab costs um but still above the the
48:16cost that we can sell to a to a
48:18homeowner. Um and then there's the big
48:20issue with this property is there's
48:22structural concerns in the in the rear
48:24of the building um due due to water
48:26damage. the the back corner is starting
48:28to collapse. Um and then there's damage
48:30to foundational brick walls
48:33around the site or around the bottom of
48:36the the foundation. Um again, this is
48:39going to be included in our project. Um
48:42and uh due to this one has a larger lot
48:45size. So we're we're um planning a two
48:48family home on this site. Um and then
48:51with all three properties, uh we started
48:53the RFP process with demolition
48:56contractors. We did a walkthrough
48:58yesterday of of all the sites um and
49:02they they had some concerns about the
49:05the unsafe nature um of the property. We
49:08did we did obtain asbesa surveys um to
49:11see if it could be abated prior to
49:13demolition. Um but we were in um all all
49:17the contractors yesterday informed us
49:19that it was too unsafe to do abatement
49:22prior to demolition that um they
49:24recommended that we try to obtain uh get
49:28the buildings condemned. Um just so just
49:30so they can follow that process just
49:32because it's too unsafe. Um so that was
49:35the suggestion that I think all of them.
49:39>> Yep.
49:42And then for site restoration, um we
49:44included this in the RFP, um that all
49:47contractors, you know, demolition, uh
49:49removal of the entire structure,
49:51including the foundation, um and to fill
49:54with uh top soil and grass seed. Um
49:58again, we're planning this for
50:00redevelopment um hopefully within the
50:02next the next year or at least starting
50:05on construction in 2026. Um and I can
50:09talk more about that uh project really
50:13quickly. Um so this is kind of uh a new
50:16focus for the land bank. Um historically
50:19the the land bank has focused on um uh
50:23you know property management and and um
50:25you know selling vacant lots. Um and
50:27we're trying to move to a more
50:29communitydriven development model um and
50:32and starting to rehab and develop um new
50:35construction homes um where there's
50:38especially where there's vacant lots. Uh
50:40so this this project is is really the
50:43our our leaping off point of of that
50:46strategy. Um so I noted the map here of
50:49First and Second Street. You can see
50:50Clint at the bottom and Henry Johnson on
50:53the right side pointed vertically. Um
50:56and then all of the orange uh properties
50:59are plan two family sites. You'll know
51:03you'll see um I yeah we labeled 267 all
51:06three demolition sites and the the blue
51:10um lot blue sites are single family and
51:13that's primarily it's really due to lot
51:15size and just how how large of a home we
51:18can fit on the on on this on the parcel.
51:23Um but yes and you know and our and our
51:26goal is to meet the the our two
51:28standards of you know mixed um you know
51:31single and two family homes um in next
51:34hill. So that's and then uh the last
51:36thing to note is 257 second street. I
51:39just we we also labeled that because um
51:41that was our first kind of step in the
51:44in this project. Uh it was a rehab that
51:46we completed and was sold to a homeowner
51:49uh last year.
51:53Um, so this is the external view of each
51:56of each property. So, um, starting with
51:59255 First Street. Uh, the our our
52:02concern with this one, I didn't mention
52:04earlier, but our concern with this one
52:06is the tree out front. And you can see
52:08the power line is kind of going in
52:10between
52:12>> um uh in between the the the branches.
52:15So, actually, and yesterday we could
52:17hear it kind of rubbing up against the
52:19tree. Um so we call National Grid today
52:22um to have someone come out and look uh
52:26at the site. Um so that that is the
52:29concern with that one. Um uh 256 First
52:32Street, you can see the adjoining
52:35uh the adjoining property. They you know
52:37they have the same roof line and
52:39approximately the same size. So there's
52:41questions kind of some thoughts
52:43yesterday that they might have been
52:45built at the same time or together. Um,
52:47so that's why we need to investigate
52:49further. Uh, we did, but like I said, we
52:51did contact the homeowner. He said it it
52:53like it kind of seemed like it wedges
52:56like it's wedged, so it's like there's
52:58more space in the back. Um, but we just
53:00need to investigate more um, and include
53:03that uh, in the RFP. We're going to
53:06update the RFP as we go and include that
53:10those findings before we start any
53:12demolition. Um and then um then moving
53:18to the interior photos.
53:21Um this is 255 First Street. You as you
53:24go through the prop the building um it
53:28it's worse as you go to towards the
53:30back, but you can see some of the
53:32flooring starting to degrade and the and
53:35the framing um just collapsing because
53:37of some water damage.
53:42Um And then 256 first um shows some of
53:46the ex like the fire damage. Um this one
53:49we did not enter yesterday and this is
53:52the one that's been condemned. Um but we
53:54haven't entered this this site in in
53:58a long time because just because the
54:00there's some holes in the flooring and
54:02it's just um unsafe to really enter the
54:04property. And then um the 267 um kind of
54:09shows the back corner that's starting to
54:11collapse. Um, and it's there's water
54:15damage from the second floor down
54:17through the first floor. So, it's kind
54:19of all like rotting out and and
54:22collapsing. And um the other concern
54:25with this property is is uh we're not
54:27able to access the basement just because
54:29it's too unsafe. So, we're not able we
54:31we did a limited asbesus survey, but we
54:34don't have um an idea of if there's any
54:37what's located below. Um, so that's part
54:40of the part of the challenge with this
54:41property.
54:42>> But you can also just assume it's all
54:44friable and positive, right? Yeah.
54:46>> And when you demo according to those
54:48standards.
54:48>> Exactly. Yep. Yeah. When when we can't
54:51when we can't reach it, we just assume
54:53that. Yep.
54:57>> So, we don't have anybody listed for
55:00public comment. Um, unless that's
55:03changed. No, we're good. All right.
55:05board. [clears throat] Do we have any
55:07>> public?
55:09>> I'm sorry.
55:13>> My name is I
55:14>> No. Are you Are you commenting on this
55:17project? Yes. Okay. You can come up here
55:19and when you do, can you please give us
55:20your name and your address?
55:22>> My name is uh Brian Lesley.
55:24>> Okay.
55:24>> I'm at 274 Second Street.
55:26>> Okay.
55:27>> I'm adjacent to um I would say opposite
55:32267. Can you go back to
55:34>> Is that the one for demolition?
55:36>> The first one.
55:38>> Second Street. 267 Second Street. Is
55:40that
55:41>> going to go back so we can see?
55:43>> Let me just see.
55:45>> Yep. That one. Okay. So, you're right
55:47next to
55:48>> Well, I'm across the road.
55:49>> Across the street.
55:50>> Across the street.
55:51>> Okay.
55:52>> Literally about um I would say 50 ft.
55:55Okay.
55:56>> Yeah. So, um
55:59just just just a concern I had um with
56:03the uh demolition cuz I I
56:06[clears throat] want to believe that the
56:08um the building it's it's as best as
56:11containing material mostly the sidings.
56:14I can look at it and I can tell. So I
56:17was concerned if
56:19um we would be notified as to when this
56:23will be done when the um demolition is
56:27staged for you know at least give give
56:29the residents or give persons that
56:31living close by um a heads up as to when
56:35this is going to be taking place and
56:37what are some of the steps that will be
56:39taken to contain
56:41the um asbestos. Right. It might be
56:45fryable material. Yes, but if it's
56:48crumbled, I know it's asbesto as
56:50containing a slate on the outside
56:52composite. So, um, we would like to
56:54know.
56:55>> Yeah. So, that's something that we don't
56:58cover here as to answering those
57:01specific questions. Okay.
57:02>> We do cover, you know, one of the things
57:05that we do cover here is, you know, if
57:07you have questions about the project
57:08itself and you have a really great
57:10question, it's just that's just not
57:12within our scope.
57:14>> Okay. Um, one of the questions that um,
57:16Shottni did ask is how they were going
57:19to demo, which was to make sure and
57:21assume that there's freeable asbestous
57:24that can get out in the air. So, they're
57:25going to de he confirmed
57:28>> that they're going to demo with that in
57:30mind.
57:31>> Okay. Statements and so on. I would
57:33definitely connect with them after our
57:36hearing today and they should be able to
57:39provide you hopefully
57:40>> with their contact information so you
57:42can ask them more questions about their
57:44process and when they're going to do
57:47this and how they're going to do this.
57:48>> So who's the contact person with Al
57:51Bank?
57:51>> Yep. They're right here. So after here
57:54connect with them.
57:56>> Okay.
57:56>> And then you know
57:58>> hopefully they'll give you a way to
57:59contact them.
58:00>> Okay. So you can answer those types of
58:02questions
58:02>> as to when it's going to be and stuff
58:04like that and what to expect.
58:06>> Yeah. I'm literally, as I said, 50 ft
58:08away from that.
58:09>> No, understood.
58:10>> You know,
58:11yeah. So, um, yeah, that was my only
58:14concern.
58:15>> Understood. Thank you. [laughter]
58:17>> Thank you very much.
58:18>> No problem.
58:20>> Yeah. Question.
58:22>> You have questions for the applicant.
58:23Okay.
58:24>> Can I ask a quick question? Are there
58:27demolition requests?
58:36>> Um, for when someone pulls. So, there's
58:39um
58:40there's requirements for when it comes
58:43to a board, but not when someone goes to
58:45pull the actual permit to do the
58:47demolition.
58:50>> Is that a building department? Yeah,
58:53>> you can use I mean
58:55>> you'd have to do a little bit of
58:56research yourself, I guess. I imagine
58:58they'll inform people, but you would be
59:00able to see the permit online if you
59:03were to go to the online portal.
59:08>> Hi, we we still have questions for
59:17[clears throat]
59:17>> Thank you. [laughter]
59:20So um my first question I just and it's
59:23gentleman left but somewhat related to
59:25to his question. If I understood
59:27correctly did you say that all of the
59:29contractors said it wouldn't be possible
59:30to remove the asbestous prior to
59:33demolition?
59:34>> Yes. I guess my concern is so what is
59:38how do you carry out a demolition that
59:41ensures that the asbestous is completely
59:43contained and not exposing neighbors and
59:47and workers to that if it's not abaded
59:49first. Um
59:51>> right. So I'll echo on what you're
59:53saying. So there's specific requirements
59:55per asbestous contractors to remove per
59:58lehip which is basically like if you
1:00:00look at the site there's playgrounds
1:00:02there's certain requirements that have
1:00:04to be followed per EPA
1:00:06and they are very regulated so if a
1:00:09contractor is saying like we're just
1:00:11going to contain it like I'd get some
1:00:12clarification on what that containment
1:00:14is um because there's per code rule in
1:00:18New York state your demo contractor
1:00:20would know this but there's specific
1:00:21requirements so I was just looking on
1:00:23the site plan. Um there's the
1:00:26playground. Those are like very critical
1:00:29spaces.
1:00:30>> Yeah. And
1:00:30>> absolutely we would take every
1:00:32precaution to make sure that we're doing
1:00:33this.
1:00:34>> I feel like that they would, but that's
1:00:36something to echo.
1:00:38>> Absolutely.
1:00:38>> I think I mean I remember in my last
1:00:41house when I needed to have renovations
1:00:43done and I had several contractors tell
1:00:45me like we we can't we can't work with
1:00:47the asbestous. And I was like but you
1:00:49have to. And it was like I I felt like I
1:00:51had to like fight a little bit. And I
1:00:53know you guys do this for a living.
1:00:54You're not a single homeowner, but it
1:00:56just it it raises like a little red flag
1:00:58to me that they're saying like we can't
1:00:59contain it prior to demolition.
1:01:01>> Oh, no. So, what's happening is that
1:01:03they're saying that the structure itself
1:01:04is not safe enough for them to go in and
1:01:07do the abatement work.
1:01:08>> And are they saying that we're just
1:01:10going to sue the whole thing?
1:01:12>> Yes. All and a standard to which they're
1:01:15going to
1:01:17I just wanted to make sure. That's what
1:01:19I thought I heard.
1:01:19>> Oh yeah. No, absolutely. Treat it as
1:01:21it's loaded for the most part.
1:01:24>> So, we're going to take every precaution
1:01:25to ensure that,
1:01:27>> you know, it's safety first.
1:01:28>> So, my my question goes back to the
1:01:31building you've had since 2017.
1:01:34You know, um you've had it for almost 10
1:01:37years and so it doesn't sound like much
1:01:39has been done with it since it was
1:01:41acquired and now we want to demolish it.
1:01:43I I know that in looking at the photos,
1:01:46there's really nothing you can do now,
1:01:48but what can be done? So once you
1:01:51acquire a building, we're not having it
1:01:53sit and rot for 10 years because that's
1:01:54not helpful to the neighborhood or the
1:01:57community.
1:01:58>> Absolutely. So, in the past, I think um
1:02:01Jason mentioned their their process was
1:02:03mostly focusing on property management
1:02:05and real estate transactional like
1:02:08transactions, just acquiring the
1:02:10property and selling them to um bring
1:02:12them back to productive use. But we've
1:02:14shifted, we're a brand new team.
1:02:15>> Um we've been in place like um Sean
1:02:18Magcguire who's our executive director,
1:02:20he's been there for now two years and
1:02:22the rest of us we've joined after that,
1:02:24but we're shifting more into that
1:02:26communitydriven development model. So,
1:02:28we actually want to take the properties
1:02:30that we have and, you know, with grant
1:02:33funding and rehab that because we know
1:02:35that we can do that with grant funds. A
1:02:37lot of these um development projects,
1:02:40you'll see they they cost a lot of
1:02:41money, 500,000, 600,000.
1:02:44>> The average person doesn't have that
1:02:46much money to put into it and then try
1:02:47to sell it, you know, to uh to some to
1:02:51make it affordable. Um it's just it's
1:02:53impossible to do it that way. But we
1:02:55can. We know that we can. So that's the
1:02:57whole purpose of like flip the block
1:02:59program. We have all of these vacant
1:03:00lots. We have buildings like these that
1:03:03are, you know, something probably should
1:03:06have been done at some point, but again,
1:03:08their focus was just different than um
1:03:11where we're focused right now. So um
1:03:14yeah, we we definitely assure you that
1:03:16moving forward that's not going to
1:03:17happen because as we acquire properties,
1:03:20we're going to program them or put them
1:03:22up for sale. Um and we have some other
1:03:24ideas too though
1:03:27on that.
1:03:27>> Yeah, I was just going to add that um I
1:03:29I know just you know through our
1:03:31understanding that um especially back in
1:03:342017 um but through you know probably
1:03:37the last couple years the land bank had
1:03:39a lot more properties than it does now.
1:03:41Um and and and um you know the
1:03:45properties that were sold uh to to
1:03:48either um developers or home buyers um
1:03:52were usually the the properties in
1:03:54better condition that were easier to
1:03:56rehab. Um so we're at the point now
1:03:59where uh we're either left with
1:04:02properties that were not did not receive
1:04:04much interest. Um so there was attempts
1:04:06to to this property was put up for sale.
1:04:10Um but uh that that's the challenge is
1:04:14so now we're and now we have less
1:04:16properties just simply because the the
1:04:18the county's process uh has changed and
1:04:21it has to go through the auction
1:04:23they have to go through the auction
1:04:25process. So we're focusing now on the
1:04:27properties that we do have. How do we
1:04:29make the best use out of them? Um you
1:04:32know can we build junior builds? Can we
1:04:36rehab them? Um and so the proposed the
1:04:40proposed use of funds um for the
1:04:42demolitions, part of that is funding the
1:04:44demolitions, but the other u majority of
1:04:47that grant would be to rehab properties.
1:04:50Um some of that in West Hill, some in
1:04:53the south end.
1:04:55>> And what's the timeline of this? Yeah,
1:04:58we we just uh are we just um as I
1:05:02mentioned started the RFP process. Um
1:05:05that's due, you know, by the end of
1:05:07April. Um our walkth through with the
1:05:11property owner at 258 First Street would
1:05:13occur after that. So we would ideally do
1:05:16that with the the contractor. Um and so
1:05:20we're thinking probably maybe a May, you
1:05:24know, May start
1:05:25>> may start by May demo. Uh yeah,
1:05:28>> I would say towards the end of like end
1:05:30of May. End of May. Yeah, we want to
1:05:32make sure that again we take all the
1:05:34precautions.
1:05:34>> A lot of it depends on the amount of
1:05:36work that would need to be done to
1:05:38structurally to 258
1:05:41um first street to, you know, make make
1:05:44sure that's short up before we start any
1:05:46of this work. Um and then our and then
1:05:48the other I don't think we mentioned
1:05:50this but um uh 258 First Street any
1:05:54adjoining wall we want to make sure is
1:05:57we've done this with other demolitions
1:05:59um but we will make sure that it's uh
1:06:02weathertight and insulated um so that
1:06:04wall's protected going forward.
1:06:09I definitely think it's great that there
1:06:12is a plan when things get demoed because
1:06:15that's where the gap happens in terms of
1:06:17as you can see it's very hard to rebuild
1:06:19at that cost per square foot.
1:06:21>> So it's really important to maintain
1:06:23that and that's very exciting to see. I
1:06:26just hope it
1:06:27>> initiates momentum to where you can see
1:06:30it through.
1:06:32>> I do have a question for staff or maybe
1:06:35the applicant. Um, you know, these homes
1:06:37are very old. Is this is this in a
1:06:41historic district? Do they need to
1:06:44>> is it's not um but they did
1:06:48did um survey this to
1:06:52>> the
1:06:55state um
1:06:58>> yes
1:07:02the office of parks, Recreation,
1:07:04Historic Preservation.
1:07:06um which determined both there are no no
1:07:09properties including archaeological and
1:07:10or historic um resources listed in or
1:07:14eligible for New York State or National
1:07:15Registers of Historic Places that'll be
1:07:17impacted by this project. Um so that was
1:07:20that was for all three of these these
1:07:22demos. I imagine for the other
1:07:24properties in the um for the block
1:07:28project as well. But Clinton Avenue is
1:07:31>> Clinton Avenue.
1:07:31>> Clinton Avenue is definitely
1:07:33>> and
1:07:35Lexing parts of Lexington.
1:07:36>> Parts of Lexington are too.
1:07:38>> Yeah. A is only just a block away from
1:07:46>> any other questions.
1:07:50>> All right. Um staff notes.
1:07:55Um there are the nine criteria under the
1:07:58demolition of use standards. Um and just
1:08:01based on those applicant has has
1:08:04demonstrated that they they meet the
1:08:06requirements for the demolition. Um
1:08:09the property is again all all located in
1:08:12the R2 um zoning district.
1:08:16The demolitions would encompass the
1:08:17entire structure for all three.
1:08:21Um these would be classified as unlisted
1:08:24actions under seeker. So again we have
1:08:27the um parts two and three prepared as
1:08:31well. Um be recommending a negative
1:08:34declaration for each of those.
1:08:37Uh and while none of the projects are
1:08:39specifically tied to a development plan
1:08:41review as of yet um because they haven't
1:08:43been submitted, we are expecting that
1:08:45those properties would be submitted for
1:08:48redevelopment. um and the the outcome of
1:08:51the of the grants. Um go to the next
1:08:54slide.
1:08:56Just noting that the comp plan does call
1:08:58for the stabilization and the use of
1:08:59existing structures essentially when
1:09:01possible. Um
1:09:04but in this case noting that they've
1:09:06they've noted the extensive structural
1:09:08damage um provided reports from
1:09:11structural engineer and then just the
1:09:13conversation with the contractors as
1:09:14well. Um in addition to one of the one
1:09:17one of the structures being um condemned
1:09:19by the city's building department
1:09:23um the land bank has also attempted to
1:09:26sell all three of the properties at
1:09:27various points um unfortunately
1:09:30unsuccessfully.
1:09:33the
1:09:37estimated cost to rehab uh which we
1:09:40looked at from different projects um and
1:09:42other some prior applications for the
1:09:45land bank as well appear to be too high
1:09:48to actually rehab these properties.
1:09:53They're complying with the degree
1:09:54diversion plans and the requirements of
1:09:57the zoning code. Um, we've also noted uh
1:10:02potentially if there's any materials
1:10:04that are
1:10:06um
1:10:09they're able to reuse or recycle
1:10:11essentially having those be salvaged and
1:10:14providing them to appropriate
1:10:15authorities.
1:10:17Um,
1:10:21so here we'll just go into some of the
1:10:23staff on on the specific properties
1:10:25themselves.
1:10:28We noted with 256 First Street, the
1:10:30building was registered as vacant since
1:10:32at least 2017. Um, as the case with all
1:10:35three of these, we noted that they
1:10:37largely vacant prior to the county and
1:10:40then the land bank taking possession of
1:10:41them. Um,
1:10:44we have the note about the asbestous
1:10:46testing. So for 256 First Street, we
1:10:49would have a condition, we would
1:10:51recommend a condition that the variance
1:10:54from the state TC [snorts] be obtained
1:10:56prior to the actual building permit
1:10:58issued. That's that's in relation to the
1:11:01assumed asbesus. We got a um county
1:11:06planning board recommendation back just
1:11:09deferring to local consideration. And
1:11:12then for this properties of 26 first um
1:11:16the engineer reported that the first the
1:11:19first floor was had curated flooring um
1:11:24significant fire damage and no access to
1:11:27the second floor at the time of the
1:11:28inspection.
1:11:31This one for 267
1:11:34second street. Um
1:11:39here also listed as register as a vacant
1:11:42property.
1:11:44Images that we could find indicate it
1:11:45may have been vacant at least on and off
1:11:48since about 20 uh since about 2007.
1:11:52Again, this one actually did not require
1:11:54a referral to the county planning board.
1:11:56Uh and that's just based on like its
1:11:58proximity. Some some do, some don't.
1:12:01um similar notes from the structural
1:12:03engineer, but knowing that it's not um
1:12:06that there is significant damage to the
1:12:08brick foundation, the walls,
1:12:11uh we also know there's a building
1:12:12permit filed in at the end of uh 2024
1:12:16with the replacement of stairs and
1:12:18railing after there was a auto accident.
1:12:20Um but that work did not not appear to
1:12:23actually be completed. I think just
1:12:25based on the overall uh condition of the
1:12:28of the building. And then lastly for 255
1:12:31street um
1:12:35again registered since at least 2017
1:12:38uh appears to have been vacant before
1:12:41that as well. This one was referred to
1:12:44the county planning board got the same
1:12:45recommendation back which is to defer to
1:12:47local consideration and then the um
1:12:50structural engineer report noting
1:12:53challenges with the property flooring.
1:12:55Uh there's foundation for this one as
1:12:58well. Framing
1:13:00um
1:13:04the back half of the f of the first and
1:13:06second floor significantly deteriorated
1:13:08and not safe. Basement stairs are not
1:13:10safe.
1:13:12So our recommended actions would be
1:13:15declaring a negative declaration under
1:13:17secret for really be for for each of
1:13:20these demolition reviews and then
1:13:22approving the demolition review. Um
1:13:26that'll be the same recommendation for
1:13:27all three, but specifically for 256
1:13:30first street, we would just know we
1:13:31would have a condition that the issuance
1:13:33of the building permit for the
1:13:36demolition itself not be approved until
1:13:38DC approves the the variance for the
1:13:42assess.
1:13:43>> So do you have a um slide like this for
1:13:46all three of them or this slide? Just
1:13:48let's go. You do? Okay, perfect.
1:13:52>> All right. So before we get to moving
1:13:56any other questions, comments from the
1:13:58board.
1:14:00All right. So the first part, the first
1:14:02one we're looking um at is project
1:14:05number DR 2025-13 which is 256 First
1:14:09Street. And I need a motion declaring a
1:14:11negative negative negative declaration
1:14:13under SECA seeker.
1:14:16>> So
1:14:18second
1:14:19>> it's been moved and seconded. All in
1:14:21favor? Um, please say I.
1:14:25>> I.
1:14:26>> Any opposed?
1:14:28>> Okay.
1:14:28>> So, the next um we're looking for a
1:14:31motion to approve the demolition review
1:14:34um with the following conditions prior
1:14:36to the issu issuance of the board of the
1:14:39building permit for demolition. Nice
1:14:41deck approval um for demolition would
1:14:43need to be in place for assumed
1:14:45asbestous. Um and when you say will be
1:14:48provided that means back to
1:14:50>> back to the building
1:14:51>> building department. Okay. Um do we have
1:14:54a motion for this?
1:14:56>> So moved.
1:14:57>> Seconded.
1:14:58>> All right. All in favor?
1:14:59>> I I.
1:15:00>> Any oppose?
1:15:02>> All right. So we're moving forward. The
1:15:04next project is DR-2026-1
1:15:09for 267 street. We um we need a motion
1:15:13to declare a negative secret de
1:15:16declaration on this project.
1:15:20>> So moved.
1:15:20>> Okay.
1:15:21>> Second.
1:15:21>> All right. All in favor?
1:15:23>> I.
1:15:24>> Any oppose?
1:15:26Okay. And we also need um have a motion
1:15:29on the floor. Need a motion on the
1:15:30floor. Sorry. To approve the demolition
1:15:33review for this project.
1:15:35>> So moved.
1:15:36>> Second.
1:15:37>> All right. And um all in favor?
1:15:40>> I. Any opposed? Okay. And the last
1:15:44project is
1:15:48DR 2026-2
1:15:51255 1st Street. Uh we need a motion to
1:15:54declare a negative declaration under
1:15:56speaker.
1:15:58So moved.
1:15:59>> Second.
1:16:01>> All in favor?
1:16:02>> I.
1:16:02>> Any opposed?
1:16:04And then we also need a motion to
1:16:06approve the demolition review. Um,
1:16:10anyone moves? Move to move. Second.
1:16:13>> Okay. All in favor?
1:16:14>> I.
1:16:15>> Any oppose?
1:16:17All right. So, everything pass.
1:16:22All right. We now need a motion to
1:16:23adjourn.
1:16:26>> Thank you. And we've adjourned the
1:16:28meeting at 7:13 p.m. Thank you. Thank
1:16:33you. Thank you.
1:16:35>> So, do you want to go over

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of City of Albany Planning Board April 7, 2026 by City of Albany, NY, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 11,565 words across 1,879 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.