Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mechanicville board tables MP3 Rentals subdivision after residents raise parking and curb‑cut concerns
Summary
The Mechanicville planning board tabled MP3 Rentals’ proposal to subdivide 303 North Second Avenue and grant two area variances after neighbors and board members pressed for evening site visits and clearer evidence on parking, curb cuts and neighborhood impacts. The item was set for Jan. 20 for further review.
Bruce Steves, attorney for MP3 Rentals, told the Mechanicville Planning Board the applicant wants to split the existing parcel at 303 North Second Avenue into two roughly equal lots and construct a new four‑unit building on the second lot, but needs two area variances because the city’s code requires 10,000 square feet per residential lot and the proposed lots would be just under 7,000 square feet each. “We’re not seeking approval for a six‑unit building. That was a prior iteration of the plan,” Steves said, and emphasized the proposal would provide on‑site parking and exceed required green‑space minimums.
Neighbors at the hearing contested those assurances, citing persistent parking shortages, evening congestion and the lack of curbing on Chestnut Street. Neighbor Dominic Danalo said the nearby restaurant generates pedestrian and vehicle activity and warned that “from 6:00 to 2, parking for residents is a problem.” Renee Dell and other residents urged the board to consider safety near a nearby ambulance station and to verify whether a proposed driveway would remove existing street parking.
Steves responded that the project “is going to be adding more parking than we’re taking away. We’re taking away one space, but we’ve got six spaces proposed for lot one and six spaces proposed for lot two,” and offered to include screening and to return with final site plans. Residents disputed some of the applicants’ daytime photographs and asked the board to observe the block during peak evening hours.
After board discussion, members agreed to delay final action to allow multiple site visits at evening peak times and to consult code‑enforcement findings about curb cuts and driveways. The board voted to table the application to January 20; the motion passed on a roll call vote with six yes votes and no recorded no votes on that motion. Earlier in the meeting the board also voted for a negative declaration on the SEQR short form for this application (vote recorded with one dissenting vote).
What happens next: the applicant will be expected to return with a final site plan and any necessary special‑use permit applications if the board moves the subdivision and variance requests forward after the scheduled site inspections and follow‑up review.
