Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works And Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission asks Unity House to seek variance for off‑site dumpsters and return with crosswalk plan
Summary
Commission classified Unity House kitchen renovation as Type 2 but directed the applicant to pursue a zoning variance for off‑site dumpsters and return with a pedestrian crosswalk plan if the zoning board approves the variance.
The Troy Planning Commission moved Wednesday to classify the Unity House teaching-kitchen proposal at 185 Earl Street as a Type 2 action and directed the applicant to apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance that would allow continued use of off‑site dumpsters, and to return to the planning board with a pedestrian crosswalk plan if the variance is granted.
Project team representative Greg O'Connor, of Architecture Plus, described the project as a conversion of an existing, largely abandoned two‑unit residence into a teaching kitchen and skills‑training facility for Unity House. "It's renovating an existing 900 ish square foot structure and a 500 square foot addition on the west side of the building," O'Connor said, and noted the team provided an accessible ramp requested by staff.
The staff report cited section 285-66, which requires refuse receptacles to be located on the subject property and not in the city right-of-way. Planning staff explained that because Pearl Street functions as an alley but is formally a street, the Zoning Board of Appeals would be the authority to grant relief from the on‑site requirement. The applicant asked the commission whether off‑site dumpsters could continue to be used across Pearl Street, where Unity House's current dumpsters sit.
Board members and staff pressed the applicant about pedestrian safety because students or program participants could be walking across the alley between the main Unity House building and the new kitchen. Commissioner questions focused on whether a painted crosswalk or signage would be needed given there is no sidewalk in the alley and the path traverses a parking area. The project team said the proposed crosswalk could be located at the start of the ramp or adjacent to the building and that signage and pavement markings could be used to alert drivers to pedestrians.
Action taken: The commission voted to classify the project as a Type 2 action and to require the applicant to seek a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for off‑site trash collection; if the ZBA grants the variance, the applicant must return to the planning commission with a pedestrian crosswalk plan. A commissioner moved to "classify it as a Type 2" and later moved that the applicant "get their variance through ZBA and then come back to us with an appropriate crosswalk plan." Both motions were seconded and passed by voice vote.
What happens next: The applicant said they will apply for the ZBA variance and return with an updated site plan and crosswalk/wayfinding details if the variance is approved. Planning staff suggested the applicant prepare updated drawings showing pedestrian routes and trash access for ZBA review and for the planning board's subsequent review.
Provenance: Discussion of dumpster variance and crosswalk considerations begins at 26:52–27:12 (project summary) and the motions to classify and to require ZBA variance and return with crosswalk plan occur at 40:01–40:45 and 40:56–41:24 (motions and votes).
