Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 87 Vliet Conversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board approves conversion of 87 Vliet Street to six units, with Historic Board review required for any exterior changes
Summary
The Cohoes Planning Board approved a site plan to convert an existing three-family building at 87 Vliet Street into six residential units, subject to conditions including reappearance before the board if plans change and Historic Board review for any exterior modifications.
The Cohoes Planning Board voted June 8 to approve a site plan allowing the owner of 87 Vliet Street to convert an existing three-family, 13-bedroom building into six residential units with a proposed 9 bedrooms, subject to conditions and follow-up review.
Brian Sipperley of Verity Engineering presented the application on behalf of 87 Vliet Street Holdings LLC, describing the project as an interior-only conversion that would reuse existing water and sewer laterals and avoid exterior grading or new structures. Sipperley said the applicants have not yet engaged an architect for full building plumbing, structural and electrical design and that floor plans shown were illustrative.
"If something comes through during the design process that triggers [Historic Board review], they will go to that board," Sipperley said; Sharon Butler, Commissioner of Building & Planning, confirmed that any exterior changes would require Historic Board review under the code. The board found the proposal to be a Type II SEQR action because no land disturbance or exterior alterations were proposed at this time.
Board members questioned interior circulation, the treatment of a bump-out visible on plans, ADA/accessibility implications if the number of units increases, laundry and parking configurations, and whether landscaping and access would be adequate for the new unit count. The applicants said each unit would have individual washer/dryer hookups and that parking would remain on-street; Planning staff confirmed the code requires one parking space per unit and the applicants estimated six required spots for six units.
Member Carroll moved to approve the site plan for six units; Member McCormick seconded. The motion carried with the conditions that any significant changes to the final project would require the applicant to reappear before the board and that any exterior work be presented to the Historic Board for review and approval.
Next steps: the applicant will proceed to building-plan design and, if exterior changes are proposed or the final unit count changes, return to the planning board and Historic Board as required. The board recorded the approval as Type II under SEQR.
