Albany Common Council, NY Albany Common Council Caucus, 30 Jun 2021

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: June 30, 2021 Caucus- work session

Description

Reviewed July 8, 2021 Agenda,

Presentation from planning department regarding USDO review.

A

B

It was actually drafted in 2017 by the law department.

B

It was originally included in the usdo ordinance, uh not within chapter 375, but in the wraparound, and I hear I'm getting an echo here, but um from there uh it was kind of pulled out of the final ordinance that was adopted with the intent that for further discussion, but that would be done in 2017. We never got back to it um it.

B

It basically moves the building department from chapter 20 over to chapter 42, which is where commissions building departments and commissions are.

B

It also makes some corrections to references which were outlined in the supporting memo and also the the usdo as we adopted it and as it currently stands has cross references to the building department as it exists in chapter 42. But since we never did that those cross references don't exist.

B

So it's basically it's a cleanup of something that was supposed to occur in 2017 um and uh that we never got to and as I say, it was uh originally drafted by dave gonzalez at the time in the building in the law department.

B

So I think uh you know, when rick with joy saw it earlier and uh rob they seemed okay with it. But if we can get this done, it's just basically a cleanup.

C

Okay, thank you, mr conti, that will be referral to the law committee.

C

That was local laws introduced next on to local laws. Hell we'll be taking up local lawsee by mr shea.

C

At our july, 8th meeting.

D

E

Comment on that, um the goal is to have everybody here when we take that up. I am.

E

C

Okay, thank you, mr o'shea, again we'll. If you want to delay again, we can we can. We can certainly do that as the.

C

Sponsor right and it has to be yeah yeah, one of the original.

C

All right uh that was a glossy uh next on to look like g by mr conte, we'll be uh number six on on the agenda under local lost hell, we'll be taking that up. Also at our july 8th meeting.

B

Yeah before you do that on this point, local law f uh by mr ballerin. If there are amendments that there you might be offering amendments to that at the next meeting,.

F

Yeah, it still has to age. The local law f won't be going up.

B

Right right, right, yeah.

C

That's why it would have.

B

To be amended at the next meeting and then age, yes, but you.

G

B

C

B

To offer amendments that night, okay,.

C

F

F will be amended.

C

um Thank you for that. Mr connor.

H

C

uh Go ahead, mr harvey.

H

Yeah I just wanted to find out with local f. I did try to watch the uh the here the committee meeting monday, but I couldn't understand anything that was being said.

H

Will there be a chance that somebody could you know, tell us what's changed from the um the original proposed law and what amendments have been made uh because I'm beginning I've been getting emails and postcards um people protesting that they don't want us to vote? They don't want me voting for it, but I just want to make an informed decision on on f.

C

Right so, mr uh ballerin, would you.

F

You want me to do it now or do you want me to do it some other time.

C

Yeah, we still have and is.

F

There, a clearer.

C

F

Of uh when we get the final cleo copy, we'll get it out so that people have an opportunity to look at look at it. uh We are still doing some cleaning up of the documents, so I want to make sure that you guys all get the final one. Some of the major changes that we did was we added language um to clarify that four units owner occupied were exempt.

F

Okay, I'm not being loud enough. Okay, um who also uh did some language regarding written leases, uh making sure that the the wooden leases were something landlords can get, um and we also did some cleaning up on um trying to remember the last part.

F

Oh, we limit. We changed from five months number 10 to 90 days and there's still some conversation about that. So those are the major changes, but the core of the legislation is still solid. We just took consideration that we we heard from landlords residents, colleagues and uh try to put it. uh You know clean up whatever language needed to be cleaned up, uh but with keeping the core of the purpose of the bill.

B

F

A

B

Version goes up and you make sure that at the same time, a track change document.

A

B

Out that shows, I think it would be helpful to see all the amendments from the beginning, because I know that there are two different versions: there's a 6 15 amendments and there are 628 amendments. But if all the amendments from the beginning can be shown in that document,.

F

I'll definitely do my best to do that. I'm not great with track. uh You know, but I work with rob.

B

Just so people.

F

Know what has been changed uh as best as as possible.

I

F

And I'll work with rob, but you may not get all of it, because there were some changes that we uh we discussed, that I don't think even got to the committee. So um I'll work with rob and see what we can do and try to make it as clean as possible for everybody.

C

Right and if the the addition uh with the track changes, is the easiest way for members to see what what what the differences are. So I would suggest you try to get that together.

J

Kelly kelly, it.

C

K

J

It was reported out of committee with to the council for a full with no recommendation so.

C

J

So I don't believe the intent was to go back to the committee at this point. According to urusu.

J

What it tastes, mostly.

C

Yet um so we'll be uh local.

H

We'll also be real fast. I just wanted to comment alfredo. One of the the things I heard was that the five months was very long, um that somebody doesn't pay their rent and that you can start to do something I'll try to find out, but 90 days seems kind of long too. I mean I mean 30 days, wouldn't be enough, I'm more leaning towards like a 60-day thing, but I don't know if it's too late to suggest that or.

F

Well, the 90-day, the five-month had nothing to do with, so there were originally ten that ten good courses, the new the after uh at the committee, we added an additional one. So there were 11.. The issue with the five months was on number 10, and the uh good course was. If you are a landlord- and you are looking to renew your lease and your tenant says they don't want to renew and you've, given them five months notice and they failed to take you up on that renewal.

F

And then you went out and got a new tenant and then they wanted to stay. You know that would be a good cause for eviction because you gave them the five-month notice. So we shortened that from five months to 90 days and there's still even discussions, if that's something that should still be there, because it's more complicated than necessary. So but the point being is the changes.

F

um I will do my best to make sure you can see the track from the beginning to what was changed and what was changed afterwards, um but at least at minimum, from the beginning to what's being presented on, so that everyone has an idea of what was added and, and all that has been changed and addressed have been based on concerns and situations that were brought to our attention and us doing the best. We can to try to ease some of the fears that are out there uh by addressing those concerns directly.

H

I'm going to talk to you after the meeting, so we don't tie everybody. Thank you. No.

F

C

Thank you, mr barron. Thank you, mr hoey. Okay. uh Number. Six on the agendas. Local law g will also be voting on that um by mr conte.

C

uh Moving right along uh agenda item number: seven: under local laws hell mr anani's local law h uh was amended and aging, so we will be taking that up at uh at the july. 8Th meeting also.

C

Next, on two ordinances introduced uh by um mr anani, uh it's 20 71 21. It's going to be a referral to planning mr anani. Do you.

L

C

We're discussing biped.

C

C

And not be illegal, yeah, okay, so okay, so this is uh sense of urgency. So.

C

C

Okay, yeah: if members are okay, it doesn't have to go to.

B

Yeah, that's a quick question: does this still require a referral to the planning board.

C

Special hearing.

B

By the planning board, or is that not required based on the court decision.

B

All right, but it doesn't have to as a usda amendment it doesn't have to go under that court decision doesn't have to go to the planning board.

E

We have had discussions.

J

B

E

Committee about.

J

E

Changes um and I tonight for let's say almost two years I proposed- which means to the cyborg- cafe um ordinance that have not worked on being patient having to be a part of our overall um usdo amendments. um I have concerns about how expansive this is. With regard to the permanency of some of the provisions that eliminate some of the controls over sidewalk updates, I hear from residents all the time about challenges that they have walking on public sidewalks, because patrons are backing up into the sidewalk area.

E

A

E

These are some very smaller people they have stuck under uh umbrellas, and that has always been the issue uh in my neighborhood. It helps that I pushed to have the sidewalk expanded specifically for that, but now we're seeing um that the walkable space is again being challenged in front of some of the restaurants that have sidewalk cafes, and it's been noted to me that you know somebody ought to be able to walk down the street arm and arm with their 95 year old, mother or grandmother.

E

uh You know side by side without being challenged. If you look at the specifics of this particular legislation,.

E

The details allow there to be, essentially you know nothing more than a single file in some places, getting around three areas or fire fragments, etc, because the space is measured from the curve and there might be some obstructions that then get excluded. But it's we really should be again taking a careful look um at the um you know what we're doing here before, certainly before making it permanent. You know it's one thing: if we want to maybe extend the uh provisions for another two months.

E

uh You know through this season, two or three months through this season, as is without doing a real, careful look with this stuff, but we really should be taking. You know, I'm a little bit.

C

Okay and just real quick, we have a member of corp council here that can.

C

Just extending it.

J

Yeah, you can't do.

L

H

B

B

Now I think what judy is saying that we can enact this with a sunset on it, maybe two months or something that deals with the immediate situation, uh but also allows us to have the longer term discussion in the context of our usdo discussions. Correct.

E

Yes, absolutely, and I want to point out that that does not it's not in any way contingent upon the governor's emergency.

A

E

Especially since this still requires.

B

E

With whatever the alcohol beverage control law is and ada provisions, so it's not waiving any provisions of any requirements of state or federal law. If we were to just um extend it, but we would be, you know there no longer has the authority to waive our existing.

C

Can we just hold on just one more second, mr anani is actually the sponsor and I should have started with him, but I started with you as the chair plan of the planning committee, mr.

A

I

Wow, I guess how people are feeling about this legislation.

I

I will say this um and I wrote some remarks down and I want to thank everyone who have been coming to me about particularly the small businesses who struggled during this pandemic and how this has been a lifeline for them to extend the outdoor uh cafe.

I

um You know many people, as we all know, I don't have to talk about how severe the pandemic was several months ago, and you know we were forced to quite frankly re-examine how we do business in the city uh for our local restaurants.

I

That change was drastic. You know it resulted in uh loss of businesses. It resulted in a number.

K

I

Restaurants, having to close layoffs, some of our neighbors who work at some of these restaurants had to be laid off because of lack of having customers of revenue.

I

However, for many restaurants in our city, uh one of the reasons they were able to survive and continue.

A

To survive is because.

I

Of uh the lifeline that this uh outdoor dining provided when.

A

We implemented.

H

A

Expanded outdoor.

I

Dynamic at the.

A

I

It was found inside at the same time, our restaurants could expand their capacity to serve more customers, thus bringing in more revenue and from the perspective of restaurants.

I

It was found to be enjoyable experience, and now we fast forward where that the state is at 70 percent of the adult population in the state have received the vaccination.

I

There are still some people who are uncomfortable while going inside to dine.

I

However, we need to learn from this pandemic and not continue the status quo. This legislation is supporting something that has helped so many businesses and I strongly believe we do need to make a permit. It worked for the restaurants, it kept many of our businesses afloat.

I

Why do we need to go back to way things were when out of a crisis when we created a new way for people to support local restaurants and people still particularly the pineal, neighborhood center square and other neighborhoods in our city. They enjoy this new way of dining.

I

That's the point of this legislation. The expansion of outdoor dining was such a success that we want to make it permanent for many of our restaurants, who are recovering from the financial habit of this pandemic.

I

Keeping expanded outdoor dining means preserving a new revenue stream to help these restaurants get back on their feet for residents and tourists we'll be preserving a new and popular way to enjoy the city of albany support our local businesses and, quite frankly, why go back to the status quo when we got something that works better and that's the reason why it's important to make this permanent, because out of all the chaos that's going on, this is going to give some silence to the businesses to know that the elected officials, the legislative body for the city is thinking about them and they support them and is to show to the restaurants and also even to some of the customers, that this body is moving to give them assurance that we care about the businesses and we want to support them.

I

So I urge my colleagues, you know there are some discussions as it relates to just making the two year. I mean two months. Three months, let's give some confidence into the small businesses by making a permit that we want to support them. We want to encourage and that the city is open for business.

I

So I urge my colleagues we could all support it. Make it permanent right being a businessman or business of women is hard in itself. The uh uncertainty sometimes could cost. You finances not knowing oh we're going to have the outdoor dining in one month or we're not going to have it, and I think our business community, particularly us small mom and pop businesses need something permanent, um so they can feel confident that things are going to be okay. Thank you.

C

Thank you, mr alani. Mr conte.

B

Yeah, I, and- and I think we don't need to have a lot of this tonight, but no one is suggesting not making it permanent, uh very clear.

B

uh um The suggestion was deal with the immediate issue of putting you know, giving a statutory base for the existing conditions that are in there pursuant to the emergency order, since we are doing a comprehensive usdo review, and since this is one of the topics in that comprehensive usda review, um we naturally- and we already have had some discussion on this topic- uh have this discussion in that context, so that we put we do what we need to do now to carry us through the outdoor season, uh with the understanding that we can make further refinement or you know, have whatever we need to do as far as that comprehensive review that we're doing that, some members have been participating in uh so that that's all that's being suggested, not not anything about.

B

You know not doing it or anything like that. um Just want to make that clear. No one is opposing this. uh It's just a matter of procedurally the best way and to have the best public input, but I I have no problem to deal with the immediate situation uh and then you know wrap it into the more comprehensive review undertaking.

B

But since this is not going to be acted on at the next meeting, um there might be some time for us to have some further discussion on this. I know we have the other presentation tonight. We might want to move on to that.

C

Right so we need to have further uh discussions. I would suggest trying to speak to members again, like mr conte stated, extending it doesn't, doesn't take it off the table for for uh for permanency so, uh but we should have the discussions there, members that have concerns and and made comments. So we have to respect that. uh Mr shea.

E

um I thought some of the discussion was that maybe we will go ahead and enact this at the next meeting without necessarily committing it to committee, which is why I was talking about having changing the effective date and have you know having it be time limited. I think we all reasonably expected these kinds, and I gotta say that there are some differences in this legislation that existed in the emergency order, um but we we expected those other um uh provisions, I think, realistically, to be in effect until september. We didn't expect the pandemic emergency order.

E

L

E

Is if the sponsor would be willing to go along with extending this to september 13, you know having the provision of sunset for extended september 30th, so that we could actually have unanimous consent to act on this um at our july 8th meeting um and provide some immediate relief without debating some of these. You know finer points that that was my suggestion.

J

Okay with that, okay, all right.

B

Just just one more quick observation, because I'm now just reminding the expiration of the executive order and um and martha- maybe I don't know it takes effect immediately, but there should be. Should there be a retroactive so and deemed to be in effect to whatever the date of the expiration of the executive order was yeah so that we.

B

I'm going to see quarter expires tomorrow, so these are definitely effects.

B

Yeah something like that, otherwise we have a gap.

C

Yeah use your mic. uh Mr argo.

C

Okay. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, mr igo. Okay, so I think uh it.

B

Can only get better.

C

We'll work on you, you know.

A

Yeah legislation so.

C

It's up to you, but also uh being mindful of mr conti just bringing up back dating or going back to the date. The order uh was canceled to correct that, but that that's the attorney stuff so.

A

We'll be all right with.

C

That, um okay, so that was that was mr nani's- be an intro and hold.

C

Next, on to resolutions uh introduced again by mr inani resolution, 5771-21r um and uh mr uh anani, would you want to the american americans with disabilities act.

A

I

As a city, we have come a long way in celebrating the rich diversity that we have uh celebrated everyone uh who called the city of albany home the american with disabilities act and to make it the pride month here also uh in the city. So I urge my colleagues to support.

I

A

I

Resolution that was uh set to be by one of my constituents, who has been a strong advocate for this disability community, and this is just another uh token of appreciation and also to bring some recognition uh with to americans with disabilities. Thank.

H

You uh councilman manny, I really like this, um but the disabled people up in the 15th ward would love to have sidewalks, so they could uh use their wheelchair to go down the street to the store and stuff. So um I'm glad we're we're putting this out, but there are parts of the city where equity is not taking place, especially with disabled people under uh the ada. Thank you.

C

C

Held number 11 on the agenda by uh miss love is resolution 44-51-21r uh celebrating benjamin garland and renaming a part of clinton avenue in his honor. We were making some adjustments mr ricciardo, here somewhere. Oh there you go. Did we get the amendment uh relating to mrs garland done to uh this resolution?.

C

Okay, so the intention would be to move it at our our uh july 8th meeting.

C

So that's that's it for the agenda, um so we can just uh before moving on to uh the usda any questions or comments. This is it's kind of weird we're just getting back into chambers after a long period of time we're having a few technical difficulties but we're getting through it um and it may take some time but we're trying to be as transparent and open as we have been throughout the year, one of the most open, transparent, continually uh available uh legislative bodies in new york state.

C

Since, since the pandemic started, I mean we got right into it. Our staff hooked us up and we've been going like gangbusters ever since with the zoom meetings. Unfortunately, unfortunately, now we're trying to do a hybrid meeting where we're trying to maintain that contact with our community, as well as being here in the chambers and we're working through some stuff, and hopefully we'll have it uh perfected soon.

C

For uh for the residents, um mr hoey.

H

Yeah, um a albany county legislator. I was telling about.

K

H

And he said why don't you reach out to the county we they they have really state-of-the-art chambers. um Is that something that we could maybe look into temporarily till we get everything here fixed up.

C

I mean yeah, I guess we could. We could go, take a look and speak with those folks.

D

I was just going to get going on introducing okay.

C

D

D

You know we passed the uh unified sustainability development ordinance in 2017 and we're required to do periodic reviews. uh The first was a six month review. We missed that uh that point and for a variety of reasons, and so we've been working very hard for the past year we passed on the technical amendments to the usdo.

D

I guess it was in april this year. Was it, and um so most recently since march, we've been working on uh more substantial, proposed amendments to the usdo um and and we're at a a point at which we thought it was important to update the full council on the work. That's been uh done so far. So tonight we have uh director brad, glass and uh senior.

D

What's your title, the senior planner zach powell here to do a presentation on the work that's been underway. Up to this point, uh we've been working every two weeks on this, so um brad you want to take it over here.

G

Good evening, good evening, everyone um thank you.

F

G

um We're getting pretty deep into this, this code review and I kind of just wanted to start by orienting everyone uh by where we started and how we got here. So um in 2012, the city adopted its first ever comprehensive plan.

G

um It was roughly a two and a half year process and one of the main objectives of that was to update our zoning and one of the things that we took upon ourselves to do when we updated our zoning is to collect all that other content in city code that related to to zoning and make it more of a unified development ordinance.

G

So uh you can find as many development regulations for when you need to do a project, or um you know if you're a neighbor who's interested in a project in one place uh within within the city code, so that was roughly a two and a half year process. uh As a part of that, we had committed to doing a review of the code um to make sure that we were aware of and addressing any unintended consequences.

G

um That is essentially what this is. um It took us longer than we expected to get here. However, one of the benefits of that is, we've had quite a bit more time to experience using the code and to hear from constituents have used code, and I think we have an opportunity here to to make some changes, some of which are related largely to reorganizing the code, to be more user-friendly, um but also content, as well as we've seen. Development projects come through and heard some feedback there's. Certainly some some items that have jumped out.

G

So my goal here tonight is to sort of orient everyone to uh what we've discussed in the process. Some of the changes we're making.

F

G

It's not gonna, be something where we can cover every small detail in this, but we do have um this available on our website and we'll show the link at the end of this presentation, of all the prior links to the videos and the powerpoints and supplemental documents that we've provided thus far, um and this review is it was- was began in march 2021.

G

That was shortly after we uh renumbered and uh edited our code for uh grammatical and copyedit errors and had that published on our general code uh online system, which is, uh I believe, much more easy to access than the pdf that previously existed.

G

um So uh you know the the current schedule has us going through roughly october on this. I think we'd certainly like to finish up by the end of the year, so we're we're kind of trying to elevate this uh discussion to tee up some issues that maybe we've talked about and don't have a resolution to and just make everyone aware of where we are going forward and the usdo consists of seven different articles or chapters um we've kind of been going uh article by our article through the code.

G

Although there are a lot of provisions and policies that really affect multiple articles, so in going this presentation, I've tried to um put content in the places where it may uh be most appropriate, but in in a lot of cases that will, if one change to a particular policy, may affect multiple articles of the code so feel free to to reach out to us at the planning department or through your council member. If you have questions about any particular items that we've discussed um going through uh the presentation tonight,.

A

G

Bell a senior planner with our office here and uh is actually working closely with me on this project and he is going to present uh article one and article three, I'm gonna present on two and four and uh at the end, we'll just speak briefly about articles five through seven. What exists in those articles, uh those articles we have not touched yet as part of this process, but we will be getting into in our upcoming committee uh meetings with the council, so zach I'll turn it over to you.

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

G

Yeah article two uh principally um creates.

A

K

Zoning districts.

G

That are available in the city.

G

um You know we're gonna go through some changes, we're making to this section uh we found, while this section is very graphically rich, um there's a lot of content, that's really duplicative and contained elsewhere in the code, and that creates some issues when we go to change the code, finding things in multiple places and making sure they align with each other, um and we just felt that those other sections of the code, in some case better presented the information in a coherent fashion where people were able to find it so part of our process here is, is realigning that information and making sure we have things in the right place, but also as we've gone through, we decided to look at some of our existing districts and some of the things we've come to conclude was our land conservation district, which includes all the open lands, natural areas within the city, as well as city parks and more active spaces.

G

We've proposed to split that into two separate categories or two separate zoning districts, one for parks and one for natural areas.

G

We believe that'll better, allow us to align appropriate uses and use specific standards that allow certain things to happen, uh more active recreational things in parks and activities that we may not want to see occurring in natural or preserved areas. Additionally and I'll get to this in a little more detail in the next slide, our form-based districts. We have four form-based zoning districts that were developed around certain areas of the city, but there are direct commonalities within those districts.

A

G

Really maybe speak more clearly to the regulations and.

A

G

So we're looking to realign and I'll show, for example, this is a perform-based zoning district that we created for the warehouse district.

G

The other four are for an area of the south end um involving the um the albany housing authority, uh lincoln square um areas around there, the uh dmv property and sort of that area in between the more core neighborhood areas that sort of been torn apart by urban renewal that we're looking to potentially piece back together and create more of a community and place there, as well as along central avenue and in the midtown area of the city.

G

So within each of these form-based zoning areas, and if you were to look at our zoning map today, you can just see this entire area, regardless of color referenced as a mixed use. Form-Based warehouse zoning district, but within these there are sort of, I guess, they're called regulating zones or or fronted zones that um all convey different regulations. For instance, the rate the the area in the red in the center here uh allows a height, uh that's greater than some of the area areas as well.

G

As um you know, it's where core sort of uses and activities are intended to occur, so we believe that by um you know, doing away with the more generic mixed-use form-based warehouse uh in place of these um zones um or sub-regulating areas. Mixed-Use core walkable center industrial warehouse, all of which already have dimensional standards.

G

Aligned to them, uh will be more easy for someone to view on a map, and it also gives us the ability, as we move forward, to have four or six new zoning districts that we could also employ in other areas of the city that may meet the needs in particular circumstances.

G

You know, I think one of the things that we we sort of concluded- and it was a it- was a hard balance when we did the code, but that we maybe could use a few extra zoning districts to tailor them more, particularly to individual circumstances. Again. We're a city that developed over a long period of time has a lot of unique characteristics in neighborhoods as well as we have some areas that are largely developed. That may have individual sites.

K

G

Need to be inbuilt, but then there are other neighborhoods that you know are much more um underdeveloped, uh either historically or more recently. That um could benefit from the additional flexibility that something like form-based code may offer. um Speaking.

A

Of the content.

G

Reorganization, this is what a current district page or three pages in this case in the code looks like the residential village district. For example, it has a concept drawing a purpose statement, uh some references to other sections of the code that may be pertinent: uh a an axio exonometric, drawing that shows sort of what's in the dimensional table below, however, that dimensional table, as well as those references, that's all located elsewhere in the code. So really what this does is add, I think unnecessary bulk to the code and it also when someone's doing a project.

G

They may want to look at multiple districts side by side in terms of what's the best location for them. They locate within so in article 4, there's a chapter that really contains the dimensional standards for each of the zoning districts, residential, commercial and industrial.

G

That more accurately, I think, speaks to uh and consolidates this in the in the in one referenceable location, also the concept drawings. um You know the drawing we see here, um it's it's nice, it communicates the point not particularly inspiring. uh You know. We don't see any green space or any color.

E

Sorry on the next, the next slide. Oh.

G

Yeah, so you could see um what would replace that image in the top left uh would be the image in the bottom right here the proposed rv. You can also see at the top uh the current image for the residential townhouse district and the proposed image uh again. We think that these are a little bit more uh well done and inspiring.

G

um They better reflect. You know where sidewalks and street trees- and things are more typically placed within the city as opposed to some of the concepts drawings that were done, the first time district plans. This is an example of content. That's repetitive! uh In these districts, you see here.

G

District plans are options are available in the residential village zone, the mixed use, community urban zone, mexico's community highway zone mixed use, campus institutional zone and in these individual district standards sections for each of the zones at the beginning, it essentially repeats the same content related to those district plan zones. So our goal here is to is to consolidate that content in one place uh in article four or in this case article five. um Now our goal here with the district plan. I think that is something that, in the future moving forward.

G

We need to take a look at whether that's meeting our needs. It's really conceptualized around uh institutional uh sort of campuses and uses. We did apply that a little bit more broadly, and I think we have mixed feelings about how that has resulted uh with respect to some developments or what benefit really achieves. So we do want plan on looking that uh in the future.

G

Don't know that we'll accomplish too far, but as part of this process, but um certainly looking for feedback on how we can do better with respect to district plan reviews and then one um I'm principally mentioning this, because this is something that council may have to pass a separate ordinance on. So we have this um obscure. um Well, it's obscure in the sense that it was adopted and passed as a historic district.

G

It's really an archaeological site that encompasses uh archaeological remains of historic railroad.

A

G

The first railroad in the united states from albany to schenectady, as well as an aqueduct um really, this should be designated as an archaeological zone. We don't currently have a mechanism in our code to designate archaeological zones, principally we have those in the downtown area around fort orange and the secondary district.

G

So we're looking to not only establish a process for designating archaeological districts or at least adapt the historic district designation process to encompass that. But we're looking to more properly reflect this district as an archaeological district, as opposed to a historic.

G

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

G

L

L

G

E

Are you taking um questions or comments during your presentation, one way to meet.

G

I mean we we might as well right. I mean.

E

I kind of thought my understanding is that you are still also looking at breaking down providing more definitions for some of the items and breaking down some of the items. For example, we talked about funeral homes and crematoriums are very different kinds of facilities.

E

We have learned there's also the issue of offices and um personal or business services um are large groupings, some of which uh people might find less objectionable in certain areas that we might expand. Some of the subcategories break it out. So we can expand some of the subcategories into mu and e, but it would not be appropriate to expand all of them into an m-u-n-e kind of um area, so I just wanted. I, I think those are pretty significant potential um changes that you have been working on.

E

I do want to also note that I'm not sure I'm comfortable with changing the definition of a fueling station to eliminate gasoline, because that then potentially has the effect of your not regulating gasoline stations at all. So I don't think that the deletion in that definition is the way to accomplish what you are talking about, and um that is something um maybe martha can can help out with and yeah.

G

Just responding to your last point, um what we actually did in the code mark up it with respect to the to the vehicle fueling station, we added a u-specific standard that speaks to it. uh I merely edited the definition for the purpose of the presentation, because it was an easier way to fit that on the slide. So our actual proposal, sorry for the confusion, doesn't involve changing the actual definition. uh It would just be a youth specific standard. That would say uh you know. No new fueling stations, selling, gasoline or diesel would be permanent.

G

Any other questions we can take while we're.

K

Yes, just in response to the uh fuel stations in the second world, we don't have a gas station so, um and I know that um you- and I have talked personally about a particular business that wanted to bring back the gas, and I think that that is hurting us as a community, because we have to drive to other communities to get gas or drive down to the um truck. Stop and people are uncomfortable with, um and they have voiced their um concerns about that.

K

And I think that that is hurting us as a community that we're taking that approach that you know we're seeing in the future that we're going to be going to electric.

K

But you know um many uh folks in our community may not be able to make that conversion to elect to electric and what about their needs and their concerns. So um you know, we've talked about this one-on-one and quite naturally I would want to address it tonight, because I think that that has handcuffs on our community.

G

Councilman johnson, thank you. I actually anticipated the question in the comment. We do have an active application currently for the fuel station. You were referencing, so uh one option would be to potentially resolve that would be to move that application forward.

G

I think it would potentially benefit that application or uh what we could do is we could put in the provision that says you know if a certain community or if there is not a vehicle fueling station, that sells gasoline within a certain radius of a certain location um that that wouldn't be subject to the prohibition in the same way, or at least not until that location. So that would give a little more flexibility on location, but uh the other way we're looking at is.

G

We do have an active application right now that we could potentially facilitate to fill that need.

K

J

J

G

So so there were, there were. It was that that was related to cafes, but there was a. There was a statement for cabarets too. So.

G

Well, actually, the reason I put that on the on the slide was we were having a conversation. We do have some uh existing establishments that have uh fixed barriers of some sort around their cafe. Currently, that's not permitted. Those came about by a very various means, some of which were approved by this body. I think some of which uh you know happened without a permit. uh It does create an unfair situation. Currently where a new applicant comes to us asked to do the same thing.

G

We have to say no, because the code says no, while the competitors may already have that ability. um Some of the feedback we got actually was that it helped could help in the case of some uh alcohol serving establishments to better delineate uh where.

I

G

Barrier is um you know, I think, as far as moving the things in at night, I would say practically that doesn't often happen, so we may want to be more flexible on that as well.

G

Yeah, no, I mean it's a fair point in that again as a couple your colleagues alluded to. We have been discussing cafes as part of the process, obviously seeing the need to respond in the immediate fashion to the emergency situation, but um there's certainly a number of improvements.

G

I don't know that those regulations have been looked at quite a long time so and with respect to the the cabaret statement that was on there, I just wanted to clarify, because we did get some uh feedback originally is you're going to allow cabarets in residential neighborhoods that doesn't really make sense and really.

A

G

Definition of the cabaret is very broad. It includes religious institutions, schools, anyone that has live music, that's essentially amplified in some way, so really the way that we regulate cabarets is through the cabaret, licensing procedures that gives more control over the operator, as opposed to use as it did via zoning. Historically. So really, this.

J

G

A recognition that, through that process, you.

A

G

There may be an accessory uh cafe or cabaret within any of the districts from the city, provided there's a there's, an institution or a business that has applied for that category.

G

So I am back on powerpoint. um I do not have zoom loaded up.

G

Any other questions- or you know any other we'll get into some. We always have more issues to talk about, but you know obviously some committee members here anything that they want to add. As far as discussion.

G

G

G

Yeah, I was kind of surprised that the powerpoint everything went down just before that.

G

L

A

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

G

G

G

G

G

We usually do it after.

A

G

All right come back.

C

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

J

J

I said that include those mini homes that are becoming popular in many states. You see them built into me, they're, like 12, by 12, when they put a little bug bed up over.

L

J

But the building codes would come tonight. You know you.

L

L

D

Zach, can you talk a little bit about setbacks and the size of the you know the freestanding unit, because it would be a very big change for.

D

Some of our neighborhoods.

L

L

L

G

I think it would be whatever the standard would be in the zoning.

L

G

Yeah, I didn't want to uh overwhelm anybody, uh you know and we had a lot of slides, so certainly we could provide. We have a list of you specific standards that would speak to this, and currently one of those is actually that one of the units either the the dwelling, the principal dwelling itself or the accessory unit- needs to be owner occupied. Now, there's been questions of whether we can enforce that.

G

um I think it's an open question, um but I think that there are many communities that that do this and I think if you were to look at a map- and we could certainly provide one- there are already.

K

G

Growing units within the city of albany, uh they may not be regulated appropriately or they may show up as two family homes.

A

There are actually nine.

G

uh Properties on the tax roll now I believe that are 215 property class code, which is a single family dwelling with accessory uh with an accessory unit. So it'd be interesting to kind of investigate those. But my my feeling.

B

G

This is something that's already been occurring for years with family situations.

G

Sure um I I was speaking to the fact that I think that to to a degree that may not be always recognized, there already are a number of similar style housing situations within neighborhoods within the city of albany that have occurred over the years a lot of times it involved a family member moving in that have, in some cases, do present physically separate dwellings, and it's also noting that there are actually, according to the assessment roles, nine nine, I believe, properties in the city that are assessed as a single-family dwelling with accessory unit.

G

um That to me would be an ideal way of sort of regulating and calling out. So it's it's clear. I mean, I know that, there's a lot of concern that this uh leads to essentially changing every single family neighborhood to a two-family.

J

G

uh You know, I feel that there are differences here that cause that not to be the case, and I feel like this is one of the more.

A

One of the less obtrusive.

G

Ways to develop the pre-existing neighborhoods uh you know as well as affordable, because the infrastructure already exists and.

K

Generally, there's a contextual.

G

uh You know sentiment with respect to how the drawing has to be constructed, as well as it's limited in size to 800 square feet, as we've currently proposed and some allow it to 600 square feet. So these aren't uses that are going to overwhelm. um You know existing neighborhoods. These are things that exist above garages or in basements that are currently largely unutilized, and they do have the you know: ancillary benefit of potentially uh creating more affordable housing and opening up opportunities for for people that can't live in some of those neighborhoods uh right now.

J

But you'd have to consider the zoning, the density of the zones that they're you might consider them in. I mean like if someone up on uh marion avenue wanted an accessory dwelling, there's no backyards in places whatever. So that would be one of the considerations, but it's also the density. I mean your low density neighborhoods. That would definitely affect.

L

J

I mean I'm looking.

J

I don't want to see everybody in the neighborhood using uh they're turning their garages into accessory units just an.

L

J

Would end up being rental someday? I don't know we can't keep. We.

L

Can't keep track.

K

J

Families that are being rented out right now getting in our own piece and think so that's a concern. That's a concern that I have in the future.

E

I share mr ago's.

E

Concerns I I have grave reservations about the enforceability of the owner occupancy requirement and therefore, essentially, potentially turning every neighborhood into um a two family.

E

You know we might as well just go ahead and zone everything to family and be open about it, and let the public know that that is the intent and, frankly, the arguments that are made with regard to all the arguments that are made with regard to allowing this apply equally to the concept of turning every single neighborhood, every single zone, into a minimum of two families being allowed on each and every lot um and.

E

You know I I think that there's a purpose uh to our zoning. I think that I think that it's appropriate to allow different kinds of housing to exist.

E

uh You know throughout our city um to to make it a desirable place for a variety of people.

E

You know with a variety of tastes and desired lifestyles to live, and I will note in my neighborhood that people zealously protect the single family dwelling. I've had at least five families of color move in in the last year and a half you know they're they're, specifically choosing um the neighborhood and I and I'm concerned about um diluting their investment.

E

Now that they're moving into my neighborhood. If every house on my block could then have another unit added into it, and then they are living in a um neighborhood for two families um and again there's the issue about the enforceability. So you could wind up with a lot of absentee landlords in that kind of situation.

E

This is not to say that I'm 100 opposed to it, um but I I think we, this is one of those areas where we need to be very cautious about it. I think it's.

E

You know in my particular ward, there's a wide variety of multi-family housing, um a residential village, two family, housing, um uh institutional. uh You know group housing uh for people uh with variety of uh challenges in their life. um I think that all of that is part of what makes my neighborhood so interesting, diverse and very livable, and so I I have concerns about um potentially um discouraging people from making an investment in a neighborhood in which they know it's zoned one family, but could easily be converted to predominantly two family homes.

J

And just keep in mind the parking issue.

G

uh Yeah we recognize some of those concerns. That's why we developed a number of uh use, specific standards associated with the proposed use allowance to speak to some of those and we're happy to you know further supplement. Those should need be to alleviate the concerns, but um you know I think this is something that's relatively common in in urban areas nowadays and even in suburban areas, and um you.

K

G

Some extent you know there are, we we've had a number of people.

A

G

Us about this scenario: they want their father to be able to turn their basement into a unit and reside, and it's hard to tell them. No, particularly when you know.

K

G

Communities, maybe in the area, allow this type of use, so we we are looking forward to continue to work on this to see if we can find something that provides enough comfort with everybody to um you know at least experiment- and um you know, hopefully at least provide an option for those people who choose to do so for reasons that some case uh are a need, rather than a.

L

L

L

E

Can we get one document with um guilderland bethlehem? uh You know, I, you often get emails that have like 15 documents that you gotta, you know open um uh and that's a little more challenging to go through what.

D

Can you speak up.

E

Oh, I'm I'm trying so uh and I feel like I'm screaming.

E

What I'm asking for is for us to get a document that actually provides us with, so we can look at what other municipalities are doing um for north um bethlehem, gilderlin. You know some of the other municipalities I'd like to see what they are doing to see. If there are provisions there, that would increase my comfort.

J

E

With what we are doing that, maybe we want to adopt, um but I certainly you know I appreciate hearing that because I do think that so often the city of albany is being challenged to accommodate people with special needs um and other issues and to um expect us to do it all without having other municipalities surrounding municipalities.

E

Doing that um concerns me. So I'm glad to hear um uh you know about that, and I look forward to looking at the documents and coming up with.

D

And I wonder if they have um numbers too, I mean how often that people take advantage of that in the in the surrounding suburbs. I'd be interested to know that.

J

In the city of albany, when people try to take advantage of it and they find out about it, they tell them, you can't have an in-law apartment and nowhere.

H

um Yeah I had a.

J

Couple of questions.

H

um With the, if there's an accessory building built, would that use the same address as the main house or would that have a new mailing address?.

G

It's a it's a basement unit, I guess it could use a basement mailing address or it could use a.

G

I mean. I think it would be the same physical address, whether it had a different unit number I mean I would say, likely yeah to distinguish between two.

H

And then my other question was utilities, would they use the main houses like water electric, or would they get their own service in.

G

I think typically you would use the main um I'd have to you know, that's something that I should probably follow up with albany water and see how they would handle it. I know that you know they have um specific requirements, sometimes when it comes to separate buildings. So I'd have to I mean that's. uh I'd have to look at that on a local level.

D

I think just what what judy was saying. I think enforcement is a key aspect of this and many of us remember a time when um we were having illegal. Three family homes turned back to the two family because it was such a problem there oftentimes it was. uh They were rentals that weren't, um you know uh the landlord wasn't doing a great job, with keeping it up to code and so on and so forth, and just putting these extra apartments in wherever possible.

D

So that's in the back of a lot of, certainly in my mind, because that was a real issue for other uh two family homes on the street that had these three family homes that weren't up to code in their neighborhoods, where the owner it wasn't uh owner occupied.

D

So I don't know how you begin to.

G

I mean yes, it would be interesting. I mean if you, if you look at the tax maps, the tax class codes with respect to single-family neighborhoods, there are in many cases, two three-family dwellings. Some of them were historically built that way, but some have been adapted over time. Some of those frankly might be accessory dwelling units um that could be, you know better suited through a regulatory mechanism that requires one of the units to be owner-occupied. Assuming that that's you.

A

G

Reasonably enforceable because we do see, people have created what are essentially essentially accessory dwelling units. You know and something goes on. The market and a realtor is sort.

G

D

You know just to add to that. I know um uh buildings and codes is trying to get a better handle on that, because the intention is to um get a more comprehensive view of all the rental properties here. So you know.

G

Well, I'm going to move on to article 4 changes and being conscious of everyone's time I'll I'll try to go quickly, but you know stop me if I'm going too quickly, uh article 4 is where uh the bulk of the content um resides within the code or most certainly will reside when we, um you know complete this process.

G

um This is the development standards section. So this is really. um You know. I think it was described when we did the code. How good does it have to be so.

A

Your landscaping.

G

Your screening, your stormwater management, uh you know all the things that you're considering as you're, going through the development review process for constructing a new building. Typically, although some of these apply in the case of an existing building at all as as well excuse me, um one of the things uh we looked at um was, as we stated earlier, sort of dividing up the form-based zoning standards um to more appropriately place. Those without the code and one of the things that we felt was missing, was a section on preservation standards.

G

This would not only house the content from the historic resources overlay chapter of the code, but there are some existing building preservation standards in our building and streetscape design section. So this new section, 375 402, would be where you would find uh any regulations pertaining to if you're, working or doing alterations to an existing building that are visible from the street and there's some level of regulation. That applies to every property. Obviously, as you get into historic districts and other uh specific scenarios conservation districts, we can talk about as a future opportunity.

G

G

You know the regulations are are a little a bit more uh detailed. um Also, we made a couple amendments to the uh subsection headings for uh dimensional standards. We changed the dimensional frontal standards to accommodate the form-based frontage standards that are being moved into that section, as well as landscaping, screening and buffering.

G

We elongated that section heading to include fences and walls, just so people kind of know where to go when they're looking for something regarding events in a wall right now, it's not entirely clear that that would be a landscape screening buffering mechanism, so just calling that out and then creating some new uh sections uh consolidating our stormwater management regulations.

A

And our floodplain.

G

Regulations uh into this uh single chapter, there were some um stormwater regulations in chapter 133 of our code, two um that were one of the sections we chose not to bring in when we originally drafted the code.

G

However, this does sort of result in people needing to look in more than one place when they're reviewing your stormwater management regulations. So we are looking at the potential of bringing those in to this new subsection, as well as creating a section for our affordable housing requirements. Currently, there is only a single provision listed in our dimensional standards section.

G

It didn't really seem the right place for it to me and really it's sort of a unique article. We do have guidelines that we have adopted since that are not reflected in the code, so we will be including those guidelines for how to implement.

K

G

The procedures as well as the as well as that general requirement uh for for building heights. uh You know we've had some interesting scenarios related to um the one half story provision, particularly in our commercial districts. Well, this is very important in our townhouse districts as well, where we have um you.

J

Know the number.

G

Of units are allowed by the number of stories and really delineating in what case, the basement unit really counts as a story for the purpose of that calculation is important.

G

Just going back to the the half story: provision for commercial districts, we are proposing to reduce the height allowances in three of our commercial districts to level them off. Currently, the munc district is a three and a half story district that would become three stories. The mu ch district is a five and a half story.

G

District that would become five stories and muci is a beats, eight and a half stories from eight stories, uh and you do this because you know, we've really had some difficulties in that you could potentially build a three and a half story, building that's taller than a four-story building, which also points out another need in that um you know. We really need a height measurement and feet as well as stories.

G

um So, in addition to doing some general formatting of our tables, I'm just trying to kind of consolidate, slides here, you'll notice, a lot of the tables in this section have been have been cleaned up to be more readable, but we've also split the categorization for building heights and measured in two different ways as the number of stories as well as the number of feet.

G

The original impetus for only regulating by storage was to not force people to sort of cram under an artificial height limit that limited sort of good building, design or creative features with respect to a new building. So we did place the height limitations a little bit higher in feet than you would traditionally find for a say. A five-story building wouldn't necessarily be 65 feet, so there's a little added flexibility, but we think the two standards complement each other well, and this will allow us to do other things.

G

Moving forward like taking into account the grade changes on a particular building site. uh You know with respect to regulating so um something we've made some preliminary changes and we hope to expand upon uh either in this process or moving forward with further code updates for um affordable, inclusionary zoning. We we have a requirement that was a part of the adoption it was. It was took place.

L

G

Went into effect as of december 1st 2017, that was six months after the adoption of our usdo and requires all projects uh containing 50 or more dwelling units. It's a new construction projects uh set aside at least five percent of its dwelling units at sales or prices, affordable persons earning no more than the than 100 percent of the area. Meeting income uh for the city of auburn. uh One of the things that we uh discussed and uh would like to do is change this to a regional.

D

G

That will uh require the reduction of that 100 percent number down, because the regional ami figures are higher than the city of albany, but that's generally, how hud and other agencies use as their denominator is the very immediate income for the region, so we're looking to align that better with those practices we also have an incentive and just to the right, is the the projects so far that have uh produced or expected to produce units under this requirement 79 in total.

G

One of our concerns here is the the number of units. Currently um it's hard to really justify from an administrative perspective. um You know it's it's quite onerous and I think that moving forward, we really need to think about how we administer this provision, particularly if we are going to enhance it anyway, to make sure that we have the appropriate staff to make sure. Not only that um you know the plans are put in place, but that they're, uh you know regularly enforced, um and you know we have been having discussions with. uh You know.

G

I know that hazard for all has a proposal.

A

G

Table uh we haven't speaking with them about that. um You know and we're looking forward to continue the conversation on this. Our opinion is, there are many ways to create affordable housing and we should look at all of them and frankly, we should be using all of them in a way that you know we can see which ones work the best and.

A

G

Know uh you know and adapt our policies accordingly, um but you know we do think this has potential and uh we we'd like to look at the incentive as well. Unfortunately, no one's taken advantage of the incentive.

G

We don't know exactly why that is, but we do allow for an additional building story, as well as reduction in parking to create to have a 20 set aside for units at 80 of the regional ami.

B

So I have a question on this one. Yes, um it's how you measure the number of units um so, for example, 25 delaware, avenue that that project is a totally affordable, housing, correct correct, so the number of units are more than the three, but if you measure it by this formula, you have three, but it's actually I forget, if it's 50 or 60 or whatever, um so that that kind of like distorts the impact, because even though it those units aren't there because of this requirement, they are there are more affordable there than not.

B

Are there any other those projects that like fall into a similar situation? I know most of those projects probably are not online, yet I don't know any of them online.

G

I mean you know, these were simply the projects that triggered the requirement.

F

G

Number of use that were required as a part of that requirement: they're, certainly not all the affordable housing units that are created. um You.

J

G

Think one of the questions here too, is you.

C

G

One of this is to create affordable housing, but the inclusionary part of it is important as well. um You know we see a lot of buildings that are coming online, that are either all luxury units or they're all affordable units, because that's generally how the funding mechanisms are set up. I know that uh the state departments are doing their best to sort of change that and integrate them more, but I think that's an important part of the discussion is to think about. You know what problems are we trying to solve?

G

uh You know affordable housing get created in a number of ways, but we do want to look at creating diverse and mixed income communities too, and this policy may be a part of that, because you know that's that's something that you.

C

G

Often see resistance to individual projects or propose richard, you do raise a good question with respect to uh you know. When a project comes online, that's regulated by the state, that's completely affordable. uh You know. Are we regulating that through um this process? Did we still take those three units and maintain paperwork for those? I think there were a lot of sort of things that were left open-ended when this was originally adopted, because it kind of came up at the end of the process. So I think this is an opportunity to sort of iron.

G

Some of those out. We did a little bit of that with the um with the guidelines that we put forward and we're playing in the codify, um but I think they're still unanswered questions a lot of them. I think revolve around administering the program which you know again if this is a program that got larger. um Certainly, you know that that's a um that's going to require staffing.

F

I'm just going to go on the fact that I I do think this is something we need to really take the time and uh you know address you know: we've been, there have been several series in times union about, you know the consequences of wetlanding and and how it's divided our city and how it's divided our neighborhoods, and this is one tool we can use to try to address that issue, because when you look at where affordable housing is being built and then when you look at where luxury buildings are being built, you can go down the line on central avenue and you can see the divide and by increasing this from 5 to 20 percent.

F

um It makes it so that you have more affordability in the luxury uh universe, so you actually will actually address some of those generational divisions uh with future development. So I do think I look forward to the conversation on this issue. I know brad we've spoken about this I uh over a year ago we had we had meetings on this issue, so I I look forward to it. I think it's something that you know we have an opportunity to do something uh and we have an opportunity to address something.

F

That's you know been a you know black eye in our city's history. uh You know, I think we should look at and use this tool as one of many tools to to address that and make sure future development uh has that type of inclusivity mentality in it. Thank you.

B

Yeah I mean yeah inclusionary housing has a good policy purpose in terms of creating more diversity within neighborhoods citywide, as opposed to restricting affordable to certain parts of the city. I think we have to look at also, you know, what's the appropriate threshold, how do we enforce that and what are the incentives that are being created one way or the other?

B

So it's, I think it's something more complex than just say, raise it for 20, because that may or may not work, uh and you need to uh to look at a lot of different issues, but I it's, I think it's a little bit of a complicated issue that deserves some discussion.

F

It definitely is a complicated issue and it's definitely going to deserve discussion, uh and uh I look forward to those discussions because I think we we can't uh you know this was an issue that was brought up late in the process. Last time.

J

F

I want to make sure that it's not something that we oversee or we push through just to get the the document finalized. um So that's why I'm bringing it up now I I brought it up to brad and and his team. Last year last summer we had the conversation uh about this. We had several meetings about this uh specific topic and at that point I was looking to try to bring it up from five to fifteen percent.

F

uh Now that we're looking at the entire document uh and and we're reading, uh you know or I'm reading uh these, these news articles, I think it's important that we get even more aggressive in trying to address that issue in our city.

C

Right- and I I uh and so of these projects here- how many are online they're a lot of these aren't online right. That's correct!.

G

That's we really don't have really much or any experience with actually administering and enforcing the regulation.

C

Right yeah, we need something in place. Obviously, we've all been talking about that, but also we don't have a luxury housing shortage. We have an affordable housing shortage, so I mean that that's something we really ought to focus on and- um and I just think uh in terms of mechanism you were talking about- maybe- or you said you guys didn't- have anything in place to administer this. I think that's an important piece, whether you're doing the five or you're doing the 20.

C

You I mean you can't take the developer's word that they're doing everything they need to do. Someone has to to oversee this.

G

Yeah, I mean, I guess it was frustrating.

L

G

From planning department's perspective, when the when the law was passed because there wasn't a lot of guidance as to how we would implement it, so you know I appreciate the the intent the first time around, but I really think we need to iron out those details. If we wanted to be successful uh and the other thing I was just speaking to some of the um you know the luxury there is a certain you know.

J

G

Where you're going to have to provide a subsidy, if we raise that number of units that we're requiring there's a point where the economics don't make sense, so what that number is, I don't know if it's 5 or 15.. We don't really have that analysis, which has always sort of concerned me about moving ahead without you know, knowing the consequences. So that is something that's still in the back of my mind, but I think you know it's a policy that a lot of communities employ. It's, not it's not out of order.

G

I think it's just a matter of facilitating those conversations that allow us to reach those conclusions and we'll be comfortable about them.

C

Right but aren't we you talk about providing the subsidy in a lot of instances we are to through.

A

C

B

C

Doing it we just you know, I don't think we're getting the bang for our buck.

D

um Actually uh they capitalized on me does have those kind of um figures that you're talking about they've come in and talked to us about. um You know the difference in cost for a developer, to build here in albany. You know and meet these requirements versus building out in outside of albany, so it might be worth having a conversation with them again.

D

G

Absolutely I think they need to be part of the conversation.

B

Yeah I mean changing, the incentive does have an impact on how what an applicant will seek from the ida.

B

Anyway, it's not, as I say it's, not a it's a complicated discussion.

D

Well, I think it's a good point, though, that you raised too about just how the grants are set up, so that it's either four or four you know all affordable or not. um That message that you know we're trying to create mixed income units is a really important one to give state and federal officials.

G

It's difficult to build housing today without subsidy in a lot of markets, because the costs are significant and you know, and if the rental revenue doesn't support that you know, people aren't going to build unless you're providing them some sort of a subsidy.

G

Preservation standards um again this this moves in the the sec, the uh standards for um we spoke to this already. I think I can skip this.

A

G

Coverage, so this is a a there's, a there's.

J

A regulation in.

G

The landscaping and general landscaping, which is a very I thought, odd place for it that speaks to any development or redevelopment requiring that landscaping, screening and buffering achieves at least an equivalent of 30 block coverage by vegetative material to the greatest of the depression.

G

Typically, the way that coverage is regulated in the city is through uh impervious lot coverage which is assigned by district, and that includes in addition to the building, it includes any uh paved areas. That's not that aren't pervious um it's important, because you know in the past we had situations where you know the building only took up 30 percent a lot, but you know someone thought it was a good idea to go and pay for the other. You know 70 percent of their lot, but there's no prohibition against that.

G

So I think we really needed to get at that. We also have you know, issues in the city with stormwater management and while major projects, uh you know, go through a process where they have to submit a formal report and show that they're not enhancing the burden on our system. You know that's not often practical for smaller projects, so we do need to be conscious of what people are doing on smaller lots to a certain degree as well with respect to the vegetative coverage.

G

I think we all know that there are areas of the city a lot, a lot of areas in the city that can't practically meet this requirement.

G

When we went through our code doing the code and assessing the districts, we took a really hard look at the actual built environment and tried to give the lock coverage to the exact existing conditions on the ground, and that was to alleviate existing non-conformities that apply to properties in the city. um You know, potentially, with new development there is, uh there are opportunities to go in a different, require a different direction and require more green area.

G

However, um you know the lot needs to be, I think, practically of a certain size to do that, and I think we really need to think about what that green area is. Achieving I mean: is it just leftover space? That's lost taxable value, or is it providing some purpose either to the adjacent neighbors to the city or to the users of the complex um you know, and just for an example.

G

I just- and I I pulled this only because you could pick any number any number of areas in the city, but this is new scotland avenue. I pulled this only because the way my arcgis wasn't working and the way the map aligned happening perfect with the context of the slide here, um but on the on the north side of the street, you see a mixed use, neighborhood center district, um and you see the lot lines where the buildings take up the entirety of the lot.

G

I mean we imagine that one of those buildings were to uh go away for whatever terrible reason um you know. Would we practically expect someone to leave 30 percent of the redeveloped lot vacant? In this context, I don't think that we would, I think, there's same scenario in our downtown neighborhoods as we go across the streets of the residential neighborhoods, that's more common. They don't need to accommodate parking and other facilities to serve their use.

G

To the same extent, that a commercial business does so, I think we really need to be careful about how we employ this. In our commercial districts, there have been two projects where this came up, specifically 563 new scotland avenue and 60 colvin avenue.

G

We did work with both of the uh council members and the project applicants to meet that number on both of those projects. The three percent number. However, there was some disagreement on whether a green roof should be included within that calculation.

G

I would defer back to our definition for pervious lot coverage, uh which does include it excludes the surface area of any green roof for the purposes of block coverage calculation, so that's essentially giving credit to the green roof for essentially being a green area for the purposes of calculation. So, in my opinion, uh that was the right call to allow the green roof to count in that case, um and we haven't really come to a determination on this.

G

I would personally I you know I would advocate for just removing this provision from the code. I think we have uh ample uh provisions in the code through the lock coverage regulations as well as in our our multi-family use. We do require uh 10 percent of the site to be active, passive recreation area.

G

We could look at expanding that component so that those are more amenable because I think in some cases we're really talking about having amenities and open space for residents that are living at a property, not necessarily uh having open space on a on a plot with a with a starbucks in its parking lot, for instance, uh fences. um You know I put this in here, uh not because we've reached any conclusion as to changes, uh but we do get a lot of applications for fences to be placed on corner lots that exceed our allowances.

G

So you'll see here, uh you know a corner side yard, uh for the purposes of our code is considered the front yard and in front yards. Fences cannot exceed four feet in height and can not be more than sixty percent solid. uh We are going to switch to using the word solid versus opaque or opacity. I think that's easier to understand, presumably define it appropriately.

G

There was a little confusion over that last time being me included, but we really do want to look at it's another similar to the cafes.

G

But I'd say more, so we have a lot of existing fences that exceed the requirements in our code, sometimes they're overly egregious sometimes they're they're more reasonable, um but you know, I think we have a lot of well-meaning people that come to us that submit an application to have a fence to include what is essentially would be anybody else's side yard, but because they're on a corner lot, it's considered a front yard and they're often rejected because they don't meet the standards. For that. But we've had a number of situations.

G

You can go around the city and see them everywhere, where these fences have been put up, sometimes without a permit or historically you know different zoning boards different members have granted variances to allow them. uh So I think we have somewhat of an uh you know, inequitable scenario here that we need to take a look at. uh I still would think there need to be caveats with respect to sight lines, particularly for pedestrians and for drivers.

G

um You know, and there are aesthetic considerations, uh how heavily those should be weighed, but you know if you're looking down a side street and you have a row of houses that are set back 20 feet, um you know and then the corner lot has a fence that protrudes at six feet, high and solid. uh It does potentially disturb the aesthetic and the look of that streetscape um that's more important in some neighborhoods than others. I mean modern, suburban neighborhoods.

G

um You initially have the same level of architectural detail on houses, so you know again it's something we could look at by neighborhood, but um I think it's something that comes up a lot. That we'd like to at least have a.

G

Conversation, you know, they've been considering them. You know we found that the majority of those have been denied by the bca. um You know again, the bga, I think, is playing the role that they're intending to play. It's the really tough, tough uh toughboard towards um you know, applications that don't meet our code. uh You know, but sometimes I I see sympathy uh you know in their faces and in their eyes when they're reviewing the applications, um because you know they do they do and they've. You know they've granted some and the.

G

G

G

I I I guess, I'm just advocating it. You know at some point. We may want to look at a policy change as opposed to the variance it's a lot of work for everybody on the board or the applicant, um with respect to putting the application together trying to make the argument. um But you know some people frankly come to the zoning board too and they say well, you know I have a dog, that's going to jump over the fence and you know I don't know a convincing argument. So.

G

I mean we're bringing it up because we see something that that should probably be looked at. We just don't have a solution at this media.

L

G

uh Stormwater management regulations again this is really just consolidating those provisions. uh In a one section of the code that people can easily reference, we do have sort of two scenarios in the city, uh the areas that are served by combined sewers in areas that are served by separate sewers.

G

The regulations are more onerous in the combined sewer system, uh for, among other reasons, that were under consent order from ddc, as well as every urban municipality.

A

G

Built before x-state that didn't put in separate sewers and it's a very difficult situation to create, we um we're looking to remove the requirement um to provide some sort of potential provision on small lots less than a quarter acre.

G

We found that in some cases this applies to someone that's building a house. They habitat for humanity and sheridan. Now is building a house and now they're putting a tank in the backyard to contain storm water. That's then, uh you know putting the owner in a situation of having periodically maintain this uh one of the ways that we could look at moving forward even on larger projects, is having the fee and lou provision, uh and this has actually been done in a couple of cases. I believe home leasing on clinton avenue that project.

G

There was an initial proposal where they were to meet the requirement. They were going to have to dig up the entirety of the sidewalk and put in a small detention area in front of all the individual buildings at extreme cost. So what they did is they paid a fee to the auburn water board? Who did an off-site um installation somewhere in that vicinity? That uh achieved the same uh in a much more economical way, so I do think we need to get some female provisions into.

K

G

And I think we need to be a little easier on the small lots and it's my understanding that the albany water department and water bar are in agreement with those changes, and then you know green roofs just getting into better defining what a green roof is. Some green roofs are are more substantial and accomplish uh aims that others don't, and I think we need to to be sure um you know, council, member dosha has been on sort of the forefront of this.

G

Is that when we're offering an incentive that someone's build, you know give an additional allowance um from our code. We need to make sure we're getting an adequate return, and you know that's what we felt with some of the green roof blue roof incentives that were in our code were well intentioned, but really didn't have enough detail in some cases and really didn't provide the benefit that justified the additional provision.

G

Listen, that was what the code was at the time. You can't go back and change that, um but we can learn from.

G

G

uh Yeah they're they're looking to move forward this year. I believe um they've satisfied at least six and seven conditions of their approval. uh The the final item is a sign off on a maintenance and protection and traffic plan uh for the construction period. uh How how pedestrians and vehicles are gonna be moving throughout the site so yep and signs. You know we talked a little about science.

G

Last night we were reminded that it's an extremely controversial issue, so um you know, I think, we're going to be more delicate with this with this section than we intended to uh talk to luis about that, and I think he agrees, and um you know there are a couple things that we need to deal with, particularly uh for shopping classes. We really don't have a good uh mechanism to deal with multi-tenanted signs.

G

um You know. Currently we allow a provision that would appear to speak to you, get one sign per.

C

G

Frontage, so typically that's one sign per property, but when.

A

You have an entire.

G

Shopping plaza on a property uh you.

K

G

Practically every every every business is going to need to sign so how we have been regulating that is um to to allow each individual business the the sign allowance for that district.

G

um But I and and frankly I don't think there have been any overly egregious situations created from that, but I think just for our legal grounds and standing. We need to clear that up in the code, and that goes not just for the wall signs, but for the um you know the monument or the directional science as well.

G

You know and then.

A

G

Continually get um these requests for the led, leaderboard signs which are uh completely you know reasonable, appropriate uh for some of the intended users. uh We have a lot of schools. uh You know the city school district employs these, so we have private schools and charter schools.

G

That kind of fairness, I think, are probably deserving of the sign, but there are uh federal court decisions that really greatly regulate how much we can assign different sign allowances to different types of business or different types of uses or different types of content, and I know they came up a little bit last night. It really challenges a lot of our provisions, because you know political signs and real estate signs and all these things count counter signs for pursuances allowance. So we need to be very delicate.

G

The board of zoning appeals has considered and granted a couple of variances uh in these cases, um but I think we need to be careful that we're uh not setting ourselves up for an instance that um a more commercial oriented establishment and a more egregious sign applies and tries to you.

A

G

Point to another instance, where we, where we granted the bearing so um just pointing that out, is something that that is on our radar. We did talk a little bit about two making sure these signs aren't overly bright, um maybe making sure that they're, uh if they're illuminated that they should be turned off at some point at night. um You.

J

G

There's pros and cons to that, but.

J

H

Hey brad, I went going home last night. I looked at so many signs. It was that I never noticed before so what.

G

Someone needs to do, I mean I'm not saying to you tom, but I mean um you know we we talked to the number time about sending out a member of staff or getting an intern or something going out catalog. What signs in the city do we like and what signs don't we like, and why and why not.

G

So I think that's a little bit more of an involved process to get to to get the conclusion.

J

G

We did talk about box signs, I think, there's a difference between a sign that has content and a whole sign is illuminated in the back and then there's instances where you're just eliminating letters, there's definitely more of a tolerance towards just eliminating letters and eliminating the whole.

L

G

L

Don't think it does, I think we.

G

Need to button up.

G

um And then just moving forward, uh you know.

E

These are continuing.

G

Conversations- and there are still three articles of code that we haven't gotten to um you know these dates are all on. Our website looks like our next meeting is on august 3rd and we'll be talking about article 5, which is the administrative enforcement.

G

So you know what boards review, what what the process is, how much notice there has to be, and so on and so forth, as well as what the triggers and some of the thresholds are for requiring a certain type of review, and I think we do need to look at our development uh plan review sections.

G

uh What may may not require of you in some cases there are apartment conversions happening, downtown that are required to go to the planning board who's very busy uh that we really don't get any feedback or or difficulty from that you know. Maybe we need to lower those to a minor development plan threshold, um but we've also had a circumstance um out in jack, flynn's ward, the 15th, uh where we had a cluster subdivision.

G

It was built out a number of years ago. There happened to be some open, open land in there, um and someone went in and built something that really didn't import with the existing character. That's subdivision, the subdivisions are cluster subdivisions in particular, are are all very unique. Typically, there was open land that was set aside uh in exchange for allowing those houses to be clustered closer together. So there's.

A

A number of peculiarities.

G

In each of these that uh you know, I think it's probably justifiable of a something going to the planning board uh whenever something new is constructed, uh just with respect to making sure that it's coherent and cohesive with that original sub, uh subdivision plan layout uh and making sure it's not being built in an area that was designated as as open space as a part of the approval. uh In this case it wasn't.

G

uh Nonetheless, um you know there were some people that were uh caught off guard and unhappy uh with the product and then rules of constructions. Definitions uh really looking at some of these more generic definitions, like development redevelopment making sure they align with the actual intent the code as it applies to specific provisions, um and you know moving some of the the exonometric drawings and other content from article two.

G

uh You know and still keeping those those images and graphics- and you know using them to- I guess- be more of a resource as to you know showing specifically what the what the uh lot setbacks, yard requirements with depth and things are in a visually interpreted way and then.

J

Finally, article.

G

Seven uh application fees- um you know our consultant when we were doing the code uh he advised us to. They advised us to remove these from the code. Most modern codes. Do that allows a little more flexibility to adapt to the circumstance.

G

I don't know that there's really a strong opinion here either way. We probably should take a look at the fees and make sure they're meeting our needs, and I think there does at least need to be flexibility where a new application is created so that the chief planning official can create a fee affiliated with that associated with that without having to go and wait to go through a legislative process for that.

G

um But I think there's there's the potential too, to just remove these uh from the code and have them as a separate document subject to the chief planning officials approval but I'll leave that all to your determination and guidance um usda review webpage is on the city of albany website. There's a link here in the powerpoint, but it's also pretty easy to find.

J

G

You navigate to the planning and development page under land use and zoning there's a section for the usda review that will give you all the meeting, dates, presentation, materials and other content that we've produced thus far, and I do want to say you know, feel free to reach out and engage us. But we are a relatively small staff.

G

We do not have a consultant on board for this project and we're not going to be able to tackle every issue and item, um but the whole goal of this, I think in the end, was to be a living document, so there will be opportunities and we look forward to working from you as we move forward in the years to come.

G

E

E

I just want to um thank staff again for all their work and uh for hearing uh committee members um concerns and you know the input um and um you know so much of what you are doing as a result of a lot of input that has come in over the years and that's very much it. I.

L

E

Want to know that, while we are organization um especially of article 2 and article 4, is pain, um I think it's a very worthwhile uh project. It makes a lot of sense and I do think the result is that this document is going to be more user-friendly in the.

E

E

E