[Amended 1-6-2025 by Ord. No. 27.91.24; 3-17-2025 by Ord. No. 65.111.24]
This section lists the different types of development applications that may be required in order to develop or redevelop land or buildings in the City, or to conduct a specific use or activity on land or buildings in the City, as well as the procedural steps, decisionmakers, and approval criteria for each type of application. These provisions supplement, but do not replace, the general procedures described in §
375-504 above. On any topic not addressed in this §
375-505, the provisions of §
375-504 will continue to apply. Where conflict occurs between the provisions of this §
375-505 and those of §
375-504 as they relate to a specific type of application, the provisions of this section shall apply.
(1) Project review determination. All applicable provisions of §
375-504 (General procedures) apply unless specifically modified by the provisions of this subsection.
(a) Applicability. An applicant may request a project review determination, which is a formal written statement by the City based upon the information provided that details the permits and approvals required for development of a lot or parcel within the City.
(b) Procedure. The Chief Planning Official shall review the application and make a determination within 45 days.
(2) Lot modification.
(a) Applicability.
(i) No existing lot line shown on a recorded document or subdivision plat, as applicable, may be relocated between two abutting lots or tracts unless the Chief Planning Official has first approved that relocation pursuant to this §
375-505(2).
(ii) Two or more existing lots shown on a recorded document or subdivision plat, as applicable, may be consolidated into a single or fewer lots for purposes of application of the standards in this USDO or the City building code only after the Chief Planning Official has first approved that consolidation pursuant to this §
375-505(2).
(iii) This section includes subdivisions of land creating four or fewer new lots for which no new public infrastructure is required to be constructed (except for utility connections from new lots to existing utility lines).
(b) Procedure. An application for a lot modification shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) An application for a lot modification shall be approved only if it is determined that it is consistent with any provisions of this USDO and the Albany City Code, such as:
(i) If each of the existing lots and the structures on those lots complies with the requirements of the USDO, then after the adjustment each of the resulting lots will still comply with the requirements of this USDO.
(ii) If one or more of the existing lots, or a structure on one or more of those lots, does not comply with the requirements of this USDO, the proposed adjustment will not create any new nonconformity between the requirements of this USDO and any of the lots or any of the structures on the lots whose lot lines are to be adjusted.
(iii) If any of the lots are legally nonconforming, the lot modification will either remove the nonconformity or improve it.
(3) Development plan review.
(a) Applicability. The development plan review procedures and standards in this §
375-505(3) shall apply to any development plan associated with the following:
(i) Major development plan review. The following development activities shall constitute a major development:
A. Development involving construction of a new building, or buildings, with 10,000 square feet or more of cumulative gross floor area on any single or contiguous lots.
B. An addition to, or expansion of, an existing multi-unit, group living, nonresidential, mixed-use or special purpose use that will increase the ground floor area by more than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area.
C. Conversion of an existing residential structure to a nonresidential or institutional use (excepting the establishment of a home occupation).
D. Conversion of an existing nonresidential structure to a residential use containing 50 or more dwelling units in the MU-DT Zoning District, or 20 or more dwelling units in any other zoning district.
E. New surface parking lots with 10 or more parking spaces, or expansion of any existing parking area by 10 or more parking spaces.
F. A change of use in the MU-CU or MU-CH District on a lot containing 20,000 square feet or more of lot area.
G. A change of use in the MU-NE or MU-NC District on a lot of 10,000 square feet or more of lot area.
H. Any land use, structure, or activity in the Normans Kill Overlay (NK-O) Zoning District that is anticipated or could result in the disturbance of more than 10,000 square feet of surface land area or excavation of more than 100 cubic yards of dirt or fill.
I. Any contiguous area of land in excess of one acre where more than 50% of the existing trees or vegetation are proposed for clear-cutting or removal over a period of five or fewer years.
J. A subdivision of land that will create five or more new lots, or for which and for which new public infrastructure is required to be constructed (in addition to utility connections from new lots to existing utility lines).
K. Construction of a new principal structure on lands previously platted as part of a cluster subdivision, or the resubdivision of lands platted as part of a cluster subdivision in order to facilitate the construction of a new principal structure.
(ii) Minor development plan review. The following development activities shall constitute a minor development:
A. Development involving construction of a new building with less than 10,000 square feet of cumulative gross floor area.
B. Residential or mixed-use development qualifying under the affordable housing incentives of §
375-401(5)(b).
C. An addition to, or expansion of, an existing multi-unit, group living, nonresidential, mixed-use or special purpose use that will increase the ground floor area by between 1,000 and 10,000 square feet of gross floor area.
D. Conversion of an existing nonresidential structure to a residential use qualifying under the affordable housing incentives of §
375-401(5)(b).
E. New surface parking lots having fewer than 10 parking spaces or expansion of any existing parking area that would add between five and nine parking spaces.
F. A change of use in the MU-CU or MU-CH District on a lot containing between 10,000 and 20,000 square feet of lot area.
G. A change of use in the MU-NE or MU-NC District on a lot containing between 5,000 and 10,000 square feet of lot area.
H. Any expansion or substantial renovation of a use in the vehicles and equipment use category not subject to a major development plan review.
I. Demolition of principal structures located within the I-2 Zoning District and containing less than 20,000 square feet of gross floor area.
(b) Procedure. The Chief Planning Official shall review the application and make a decision on the development permit within 45 days.
(i) An application for development plan review shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(ii) If the Chief Planning Official determines that a minor development as classified in § 375-504(3)(a)(ii) is unusually large or complex or may create significant adverse impacts on the surrounding area, they may refer the application for consideration and decision by the Planning Board for a major development review.
(c) Concept review. An applicant may request a concept review of a major development plan with the Planning Board in accordance with §
375-504(7). However, no public hearing shall be required, the discussion shall be informal, the Planning Board shall take no action on the application, and the City shall not be bound by the results of any discussion held or opinions stated at a concept review meeting.
(d) Review criteria. An application for development plan review shall be approved only if the person or entity responsible for making a decision determines that the proposed development:
(i) General criteria.
A. Will not create significant adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood, or any significant adverse impacts will be limited to a short period of time;
B. Will not create risks to public health or safety;
C. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and
D. Is consistent with any provisions of this USDO and the Albany City Code.
(ii) Additional criteria for applications involving clear-cutting. An application for a development plan review involving clear-cutting shall be approved only if the person or entity responsible for making a decision determines that:
A. The clear-cutting is for a recognized silvicultural purpose;
B. There are adequate buffers on the shorelines of lakes, ponds, rivers or streams; along major travel corridors; and, if necessary, along property boundaries around dwellings on adjacent lands so as to preserve water quality and visual quality, to control noise, and to prevent drainage or erosion problems;
C. Habitats of rare and endangered species and other key wildlife habitats will be protected;
D. Regeneration of timber is assured;
E. If proposed and if allowed by the Board, any use of pesticides and herbicides will be strictly controlled;
F. Harvest will be controlled by qualified personnel by contract, marked stand, direct supervision or other adequate means;
G. Wood roads and skid trails will be located and equipment will be operated so as to minimize erosion on slopes and elsewhere;
H. The storage, mixing or bulk handling of fuel, chemicals or other hazardous materials will be strictly controlled; and
I. The Timber Harvesting Guidelines for New York (New York Section of the Society of American Foresters, June 1975) will be adhered to.
(iii) Additional criteria for applications involving new development within existing cluster subdivisions. An application for a development plan review involving construction of a new principal structure on lands previously platted as part of a cluster subdivision shall be approved only if the person or entity responsible for making a decision determines that:
A. New principal structures are in keeping with the character of existing principal structures within the subdivision.
(e) Waivers.
(i) An applicant may request, in writing, as a part of a development plan review, a waiver or modification of any of the development standards in Article
IV. Such request shall set forth the specific relief sought and the reasons why the same are necessary.
(ii) The Planning Board may grant waivers from the development standards established in Article
IV, except that the Planning Board shall not grant a waiver of the dimensional standards established in §
375-401 or the standards relating to signs established in §
375-409.
(iii) In making its determination as to the granting of a waiver, the Planning Board shall take into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the waiver is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood or community that may result from such grant. In making such determination, the Planning Board shall also consider:
A. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the waiver;
B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than a waiver;
C. Whether the requested waiver is substantial;
D. Whether the proposed waiver will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; and
E. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Planning Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the waiver.
(iv) The Planning Board shall only grant such waivers to the minimum extent that it shall deem necessary and adequate while at the same time preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
(4) Certificate of appropriateness.
(a) Applicability.
(i) This section applies to all applications for permits for work involving any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction or moving of a landmark or a property within a historic district; any material change in the appearance of such a property or its windows, light fixtures, signs or awnings, sidewalks, fences, steps, paving or other exterior elements visible from a public street or alley; or any grading or roadwork on a designated landmark property or property in a historic district.
(b) (i) A certificate of appropriateness shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(ii) The Chief Planning Official shall refer the application to a staff member or member of the Historic Resources Commission or member of the Planning Board with knowledge of historic and/or archaeological resources for review, at the Chief Planning Official's discretion pursuant to the examples outlined below:
A. Major certificate of appropriateness. The following activities shall constitute a major certificate of appropriateness:
1. Demolition of a structure;
2. Construction of a new structure on a site containing a landmark or in a historic district;
3. Substantial alterations to the facade of a landmark or a property within a historic district;
4. Replacing historically appropriate materials with nonhistorically appropriate materials; and/or
5. Any subsurface excavation, grading, or roadwork on a designated landmark property, or in a historic district, or in the Fort Orange/Downtown Albany Archaeological Review District.
6. Other actions that do not qualify for review as a minor certificate of appropriateness.
B. Minor certificate of appropriateness. The following activities shall constitute a minor certificate of appropriateness:
1. Replacement of a feature that is an element of the structure;
2. Restoring original materials on a structure or site;
3. Changes in-kind to a sign on the property;
4. Replacement of nonoriginal or replacement windows;
5. Replacement of nonoriginal or roofing materials;
6. Replacement of nonhistorically appropriate materials with historically appropriate materials based on physical or pictorial evidence.
(iii) If the Chief Planning Official denies an application for a minor certificate of appropriateness, the applicant may request review of the application by the Historic Resources Commission. If so requested, the application shall be referred to the Historic Resources Commission for a decision made pursuant to §
375-505(4)(b)(ii)A (Major certificate of appropriateness).
(c) Review criteria. A certificate of appropriateness may be approved if it is determined that:
(i) A cultural resources investigation indicates that it is not likely that significant archaeological features exist on the site, or that the proposed activity will not damage or disrupt any significant archaeological features on the site, or that the applicant has committed to adequate protection or relocation of any significant archaeological features likely to be found on the site.
(ii) Changes to a property or site visible from a public right-of-way conforms to those guidelines in §
375-206(1)(c) (General guidelines), §
375-206(1)(d) (Rehabilitation guidelines), §
375-206(1)(e) (New construction guidelines), §
375-206(1)(f) (New construction in or adjacent to the Downtown Albany Historic District), and §
375-206(1)(g) (Fence, wall, and accessory structure guidelines) to the maximum extent practicable and/or the applicant has mitigated any departures to the maximum extent practicable.
(5) Major subdivision of land.
(a) Applicability. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to all divisions of land within the City that will create five or more new lots, or for which new public infrastructure is required to be constructed (beyond utility connections from new lots to existing utility lines).
(b) Procedure. An application for a subdivision of land shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures). The Chief Planning Official and Planning Board shall also ensure compliance with the procedures for review set out in General City Law §§
32 and
34, and General Municipal Law §
239-n.
(c) Review criteria. An application for major subdivision of land shall be approved only if it is determined that:
(i) All proposed lots created meet the dimensional standards for that district;
(ii) The proposed development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
(iii) The proposed development is consistent with the provisions of General City Law §
33, this USDO, and the Albany City Code; and
(iv) The proposed development complies with all requirements and conditions of approval of any prior development permits or approvals applicable to the property.
(d) Post-decision actions and limitations. The post-decision actions and limitations in §
375-504(12) shall apply to the application except as follows:
(i) Expiration of approval.
A. Approval of a subdivision plat shall expire within 180 days after the resolution granting such approval unless all requirements stated in such resolution have been certified as completed.
B. The Chief Planning Official may extend by not more than two additional periods of 90 days the time in which a conditionally approved subdivision plat must be submitted for signature if, in the Chief Planning Official's opinion, such extension is warranted by the particular circumstances unique to the site or proposed project.
C. A subdivision on which all conditions of approval have been completed does not expire, but shall remain valid unless and until the subdivision plat is subsequently amended in accordance with this §
375-505(5).
(ii) Certification of plat.
A. Within five business days of the adoption of the Planning Board resolution granting conditional or final approval of the subdivision, the subdivision plat shall be certified by the Chief Planning Official as having been granted conditional or final approval, and a copy of such resolution and subdivision plat shall be filed in the City Clerk's office. The original subdivision plat shall be filed in the Office of the Albany County Clerk.
B. A copy of the Planning Board resolution shall be mailed to the owner.
C. In the case of a conditionally approved subdivision, such resolution shall include a statement of the requirements, which when completed will authorize the signing of the certification. Upon completion of such requirements the subdivision plat shall be signed by the Chief Planning Official and a copy of such signed subdivision plat shall be filed in the City Clerk's office.
(6) Conditional use permit.
(a) Applicability. This section applies to any change of use application where the proposed use is identified as a conditional use in Table 375.302.1 (Permitted Use Table) in the district where it is proposed to be located, or as otherwise required by this USDO.
(b) Procedure. A conditional use permit shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review standards. An application for a conditional use permit shall be approved only if it is determined that it:
(i) Is consistent with any provisions of this USDO and the Albany City Code;
(ii) Would not result in a random pattern of development with little relationship to existing or planned development;
(iii) Would not cause negative fiscal or environmental impacts on adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood;
(iv) Is consistent with the purposes and objective of the zoning district and character of the neighborhood in which it is located and the specific use standards applicable to the use;
(v) Would not result in harmful cumulative effects or impacts of aggregate similar conditional uses;
(vi) Would not place excessive burden on public improvements, facilities, services, or utilities; and
(vii) Will provide a necessary and desirable service that is in the interest of the public convenience and will contribute to the general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or community.
(7) Demolition review.
(a) Applicability.
(i) No person shall demolish any building, structure or any portion of a building or structure without a valid demolition review, unless exempted by §
375-505(7)(a)(ii).
(ii) Exemptions.
A. Any principal structure located within the I-2 Zoning District containing less than 20,000 square feet of gross floor area;
B. Partial demolitions involving less than 25% of the non-street-facing portions of the principal structure;
C. Accessory structures containing less than 1,000 square feet of gross floor area that are not visible from the public right-of-way.
(iii) This subsection shall not reduce any emergency powers or any other powers of the Chief Building Official as to public safety, health and welfare.
(b) Procedure. A demolition review shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review criteria. The following criteria shall be evaluated in the making of a determination to approve or deny an application for a demolition review:
(i) Whether the demolition and/or proposed redevelopment plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood or district plans, this USDO, and/or City or regional planning objectives.
(ii) Whether the structure has significant historical, architectural, aesthetic or cultural value in its present or restored condition and whether the loss of the building would be detrimental to the historical or architectural heritage of the City.
(iii) The relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area, the streetscape and its environs, or any adjacent or attached buildings.
(iv) The architectural merits of the proposed new construction, as compared to the building or structure proposed to be demolished.
(v) The timeframe within which the applicant intends to commence the proposed redevelopment of the site.
(vi) Whether realistic alternatives, including adaptive uses, are likely based upon the nature or cost of work necessary to preserve the structure.
(vii) The condition of the structure(s), the economic viability of rehabilitation, and whether the building or structure can be rehabilitated or reused.
(viii) Whether the hardship is self-created or whether the building or structure proposed for demolition is structurally unsound despite efforts by the owner to properly maintain it.
(ix) Whether some portion of the building, such as a facade or distinctive architectural details, can or should be retained or reused in the new construction.
(d) Post-decision actions and limitations.
(i) The applicant shall provide a plan to ensure a minimum of 35% of construction and demolition debris generated from the demolition project is diverted from disposal in landfills through recycling, reuse, and diversion programs.
(ii) Where a portion of the building, such as a facade or distinctive architectural details, is to be retained or reused as a part of a redevelopment, the applicant shall submit a stabilization plan by a licensed professional engineer to be endorsed by the Chief Building Official.
(8) District plan approval.
(a) Applicability.
(i) Civic and institutional campuses owned or operated by a single or related entity or institution and occupying 10 or more acres of contiguous land area may elect to obtain approval of a comprehensive district plan.
(ii) The district plan shall include all the contiguous areas and properties under the ownership and control of the institution.
(b) (i) Community meeting.
A. The applicant shall hold at least one community meeting to discuss the proposed district plan before submitting the application for review and approval by the City.
B. Mailed notice of the community meeting shall be provided as described in §
375-504(6)(c)(ii).
C. The applicant shall submit with the application documentation that the community meeting has taken place, the date and time of the meeting, a list of attendees, a summary of issues raised regarding the district plan, and any responses to those concerns incorporated in the district plan.
(ii) Review and decision. A district plan shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(iii) Post-decision actions and limitations. After a district plan is approved, all subsequent development proposed by the institution that substantially complies with the density, location and uses of the approved district plan shall be administratively approved by the Chief Planning Official without the need for additional public hearings.
(c) Review criteria. An application for a district plan shall be approved only if it is determined that the proposed plan meets the following criteria:
(i) It complies with all applicable standards for district plans as set forth in the Administrative Manual, or offers sound reasons for variations from those standards;
(ii) The organization and layout of lots, structures, parking areas, loading areas, and automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation routes shall not result in greater adverse impacts on adjacent residential districts than if the project were designed under the standards applicable to the property if a district plan were not approved, unless those adverse impacts have been mitigated to the maximum extent practicable;
(iii) The organization and layout of lots, structures, parking areas, loading areas, and automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation routes shall not result in greater adverse impacts on the City's street, utility, and infrastructure systems than if the project were designed under the standards applicable to the property if a district plan were not approved; and
(iv) Sufficient public safety, transportation and utility facilities and services are available to serve the planning area at the proposed level of development, while maintaining sufficient levels of service to existing and anticipated development in surrounding areas.
(9) Design review of tall buildings.
(a) Applicability. This section applies to development involving construction of a building that exceeds 100 feet in height.
(b) Procedure. An application for design review of a tall building shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review criteria. An application for design review of a tall building shall be approved if it is determined that:
(i) The design complies with the standards in §
375-407 (Building and streetscape design), except as necessary to comply with the standards in Subsections (9)(c)(ii) through (vii) below;
(ii) The design reflects architectural excellence in terms of orientation to adjacent streets and open spaces, variety and durability of building materials, facade articulation, and emphasis on pedestrian entrances and sitting gathering spaces.
(iii) The design allows for adequate light and air for nearby public streets, sidewalks, trails, parks, and open spaces;
(iv) The design, including but not limited to the streetscape and vehicular and pedestrian access points, contributes to the walkability of adjacent streets;
(v) The design does not cast significant shadows on nearby public parks or open spaces between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on October 31, or if significant shadows are cast on that date, the shadows have been mitigated to the maximum extent practicable through building shaping and design;
(vi) The ground level design contributes to encouraging street activity on adjacent streets; and
(vii) The design is consistent with the intended character of the downtown area, as described in the adopted Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the MU-DT Zoning District.
(10) Area or use variance.
(a) Applicability. If an application does not comply with the provisions of this USDO, the Chief Building Official or Chief Zoning Official shall issue a letter of denial. The applicant may then apply for a variance from the dimensional or development standards or the permitted use regulations of this USDO pursuant to this §
375-505(10).
(b) Procedure. A use or area variance shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review criteria.
(i) Area variance. In making its determination regarding a request for an area variance, the BZA shall take into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In making such determination, the BZA shall also consider:
A. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance.
B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
C. Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
E. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the BZA but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.
(ii) Use variance. No use variance shall be granted by a BZA without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. In order to prove such unnecessary hardship, the applicant shall demonstrate to the BZA that for each and every permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located:
A. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence;
B. The alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood;
C. The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and
D. The alleged hardship has not been self-created.
(iii) Minimum necessary variance. The BZA, in the granting of variances, shall grant the minimum variance that it shall deem necessary and adequate to address the hardship while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and health, safety and welfare of the community.
(11) Floodplain variance.
(a) Applicability.
(i) An applicant may apply for a variance from any floodplain development standard in §
375-206(3) (FP-O Floodplain Overlay).
(ii) Generally, variances may be issued for new construction and substantial improvements to be erected on a lot of 1/2 acre or less in size contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level, provided that the items in §
375-505(11)(c) have been fully considered. As the lot size increases beyond 1/2 acre, the technical justification required for issuing the variance increases.
(iii) Variances may be issued for the repair or rehabilitation of historic structures upon determination that:
A. The proposed repair or rehabilitation will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a historic structure; and
B. The variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the structure.
(iv) Variances may be issued for new construction and substantial improvements and for other development necessary for the conduct of a functionally dependent use, provided that:
A. The criteria of Subsection (11)(a)(ii), (v), (vi) and (vii) of this subsection are met; and
B. The structure or other development is protected by methods that minimize flood damages during the base flood and create no additional threat to public safety.
(v) Variances shall not be issued within any designated floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result.
(vi) Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief.
(vii) Variances shall only be issued upon receiving written justification of:
A. A showing of good and sufficient cause;
B. A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant; and
C. A determination that the granting of the variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety or extraordinary public expense; create nuisances; cause fraud on or victimization of the public; or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances.
(b) Procedure. A floodplain variance shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review criteria.
(i) In reviewing floodplain variance applications, the BZA shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this chapter and:
A. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others;
B. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage;
C. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner;
D. The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community;
E. The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable;
F. The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage;
G. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development;
H. The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan and floodplain management program of that area;
I. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles;
J. The costs to local governments and the dangers associated with conducting search and rescue operations during periods of flooding;
K. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the floodwaters and the effects of wave action, if applicable, expected at the site; and
L. The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including search and rescue operations, maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems and streets and bridges.
(d) Post-action decisions and limitations.
(i) Any applicant to whom a variance is granted for a building with the lowest floor below the base flood elevation shall be given written notice that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate with the increased risk resulting from lowest floor elevation.
(ii) The Chief Planning Official shall maintain the records of all applications for floodplain variances, including technical information, and shall report any variances to the Federal Emergency Management Agency upon request.
(12) Historic property hardship modification.
(a) Applicability. This subsection applies to:
(i) All applications for a modification or waiver of some or all of those historic preservation standards and guidelines in §
375-206(1) (HR-O Historic Resources Overlay), which can only occur after a denial of a major certificate of appropriateness by the Historic Resources Commission pursuant to §
375-505(4); and
(ii) All applications to demolish, remove, or relocate a designated landmark or a contributing structure in a historic district, unless the Department of Buildings and Regulatory Compliance has made a written decision that the building presents an imminent threat to the public health, safety, or welfare.
(b) (i) An applicant may request, in writing, a waiver or modification of any of the standards or guidelines in §
375-206(1) (HR-O Historic Resources Overlay) or may request in writing permission to demolish, remove, or relocate a designated landmark or a contributing structure in a historic district.
(ii) The Chief Planning Official may require additional information to be appended to the application, which will verify the practical difficulties or economic hardship claimed by the applicant.
(iii) The Historic Resources Commission reserves the right to waive or otherwise modify such standards or guidelines, or to permit the demolition, removal, or relocation of a structure, upon a finding that such action is necessary to eliminate practical difficulties or economic hardship associated with strict interpretation of these provisions. The applicant shall have the burden of proving any practical difficulty or economic hardship that is claimed.
(iv) The Commission shall limit any waiver or modification of the standards or guidelines, or the approval of any demolition, removal, or relocation of a structure, to the minimum required to alleviate the economic hardship or practical difficulty, and may prescribe conditions that it deems necessary or appropriate.
(v) The Commission shall hold a public meeting on the historic property hardship application at which the applicant and public will have an opportunity to present their views on the application.
(vi) If the Commission finds that the applicant's burden of proof has been met, the Commission shall issue a decision to approve the application with or without conditions. Its decision shall clarify which of the standards or guidelines in §
375-206(1) have been waived or modified, and the nature and extent of the waivers or modifications, or shall clarify its permission to demolish, remove, or relocate a structure.
(vii) In the case of an application to demolish, remove, or relocate a landmark structure or a contributing structure in a historic district, the Commission may also decide to approve the application subject to a waiting period of up to 120 days to allow the Commission to document the structure, to consider options to relocate the structure, and/or to consider options to modify the building for future uses that preserves the architectural and historical integrity of the building.
(viii) The decision of the Commission shall be in writing and shall state the reasons for its decision. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by first class mail or personal service with proof of delivery, and a copy filed with the City Clerk's office for public inspection.
(c) Review criteria.
(i) Applications that do not involve a demolition, removal, or relocation. The Historic Resources Commission may approve the application, with or without conditions, if it determines that:
A. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return if compliance with the Commission's decision is required; provided, however, that the lack of reasonable return is proven by the applicant to be substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence;
B. The alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood;
C. The requested relief, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and
D. The alleged hardship has not been self-created.
(ii) Applications for demolition, removal, or relocation. The Historic Resources Commission may approve the demolition, with or without conditions, if it determines that:
A. The applicant has proposed an imminent plan for the redevelopment or reuse of the affected property;
B. The denial of demolition, removal, or relocation will prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable return on investment, regardless of whether that return represents the most profitable return possible;
C. The property cannot be adapted for any other use, whether by the current owner or by a purchaser, which would result in a reasonable return;
D. Efforts to find a purchaser interested in acquiring the property and preserving it have failed; and
E. The owner has not created his own hardship through waste and neglect that allowed the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair.
(13) Building permit.
(a) Applicability. A building permit shall be required to construct, alter, add to, or convert any structure or part of a structure.
(b) Procedure and zoning clearance.
(i) An application for a building permit shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(ii) The Chief Building Official may require that an application receive a zoning clearance from the Chief Planning Official. A zoning clearance is a determination made by the Chief Planning Official that the proposed development is consistent with the provisions of this USDO and the Albany City Code. When such a request has been made, no person shall construct, alter, add to, or convert any structure or part of a structure or change the use of any land or property without a valid zoning clearance issued by the Chief Planning Official.
(c) Review criteria. An application for a building permit shall be approved only if the person or entity responsible for making a decision determines that it is consistent with:
(i) The adopted Building Code;
(ii) The Uniform Fire Code; and
(iii) The Albany City Code, including this USDO.
(14) Floodplain development permit.
(a) Applicability.
(i) A floodplain development permit is required for all construction and other development to be undertaken in areas of special flood hazard as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map.
(b) Procedure. An application for a floodplain development permit shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review criteria. An application for a floodplain development permit shall be approved only if it is determined that:
(i) The proposed building sites will be reasonably safe from flooding.
(ii) If a proposed building site is located in an area of special flood hazard, all new construction and substantial improvements meet the City adopted standards, as amended.
(iii) Any proposed development in an area of special flood hazard does not result in physical damage to any other property (e.g., stream bank erosion and increased flood velocities). The Chief Building Official may require the applicant to submit additional technical analyses and data necessary to complete the determination.
(iv) All necessary permits have been received from those governmental agencies from which approval is required by state or federal law.
(15) Sign permit.
(a) Applicability.
(i) An application for a sign permit shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(ii) A sign permit is not required for those signs listed in §
375-409(7)(a)(iv) (Signs that may be erected without a permit).
(b) (i) The Chief Building Official may require that an application receive a zoning clearance from the Chief Planning Official. When such a request has been made, no person shall construct, alter, add to, or convert any structure or part of a structure or change the use of any land or property without a valid zoning clearance issued by the Chief Planning Official.
(ii) The Chief Building Official shall review the application and make a decision on the sign permit.
(c) Review criteria. An application for a sign permit shall be approved only if it is determined that it is consistent with any provisions of the Albany City Code, including this USDO.
(16) Grading permit.
(a) Applicability.
(i) No person shall commence or perform any grading and no person shall import or export any earth materials to or from any grading site without first having obtained a permit from the City Engineer. See also, Chapter
211 (Grading and Mining).
(ii) Exemptions. In the following instances, a grading permit is not required:
A. The excavation or fill does not exceed two feet in vertical depth at its deepest point measured from the original ground surface and does not exceed 50 cubic yards of material on any one lot; however, no fill shall be placed on a surface having a slope steeper than one vertical to 10 horizontal, and no fill shall be placed that will alter the existing drainage pattern.
B. An excavation below finished grade for basements, footings, swimming pools or any underground structure that does not exceed 50 cubic yards of material and is authorized by a valid building permit issued by the Chief Building Official.
C. Work within the public right-of-way, dams and drainage structures constructed by or under contract with the City Engineer, Department of General Services, or the Department of Water and Water Supply of the City of Albany.
D. Work accomplished under the auspices of and owned and controlled by the federal government or the State of New York.
E. The depositing of rubbish or debris at any landfill owned or operated by the City of Albany.
(b) Procedure. An application for a grading permit shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(i) Post-decision actions and limitations. The post-decision actions and limitations in §
375-504(12) shall apply to the application, except as follows:
A. Every grading permit issued shall be valid for a period of one year from the approval date, provided that any permit shall expire on the 180th day from date of issuance if the permitted work has not been commenced by that date.
B. After expiration, a new permit shall be obtained before any work is done, and the applicant shall pay an application fee in the amount required for the original permit, determined by the total valuation of the uncompleted portion of the work.
C. If the holder of a grading permit presents satisfactory reasons for his failure to complete the work during the period of validity of the permit, the City Engineer, upon application by the permittee, may grant extensions of time reasonably necessary by reason of such difficulties. No request for such extensions shall be considered after the date on which the permit would have otherwise expired.
D. If a permit has not been secured within six months after plans have been submitted for review, no permit shall be issued until the plans have been rechecked and approved, and an additional fee for such rechecking has been submitted. The City Engineer may waive this provision if satisfied that the nature of the work involved makes it impractical to secure a permit within six months after filing the plans.
(c) Review criteria. An application for a grading permit shall be approved only if it is determined that the proposed development:
(i) Will not create a hazard, slides, or be located on unstable soil. If the City Engineer determines that the proposed grading is not likely to be of such extent as to cause an immediate hazard on the proposed site, a permit may be issued upon receipt of a sworn affidavit that has been recorded in the office of the County Clerk, stating that the applicant is fully aware that the site is in an area subject to slides or unstable soil;
(ii) Will not be located in an area subject to inundation without appropriate mitigation. If it can be shown by authentic past records that any possible inundation is not likely to be of such extent as to be an immediate hazard to the site, the City Engineer may issue a permit upon receipt of a sworn affidavit which has been recorded in the office of the County Clerk stating that the applicant is fully aware that the grading is in an area subject to inundation;
(iii) Will comply with applicable district, use, and development standards in this USDO and in Chapter
211 (Grading and Mining); and
(iv) Will comply with all requirements and conditions of any prior development permits or approvals related to the property.
(17) Right-of-way access permit.
(a) Applicability. This section applies to all development projects or activities that require the creation of a new right-of-way access location or the relocation of an existing right-of-way access location on a public right-of-way. See also, Chapter
323 (Streets and Sidewalks).
(b) Procedure. An application for a right-of-way access permit shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures). In addition to those procedures, the Chief Planning Official and Commissioner of General Services shall consult with the Chief of Police or their designee.
(c) Review criteria. An application for a right-of-way access permit may be approved if it is determined that:
(i) The review authorities have no objection to the issuance of the permit;
(ii) The issuance of the permit will not compromise public health and safety, including but not limited to automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian safety;
(iii) The issuance of the permit is consistent with the intent and character of the district in which the property is located;
(iv) The proposed activity is consistent with any provisions of the Albany City Code, including this USDO; and
(v) The right-of-way access authorized is the minimum necessary to accomplish the purpose of the right-of-way access permit.
(d) Post-decision actions. A right-of-way access permit may be revoked by the City for violation of any provision of this USDO or any condition attached to the permit, or if the City requires other use of the public right-of-way.
(18) Revocable right-of-way privilege. All applicable provisions of §
375-504 (General procedures) apply unless specifically modified by the provisions of this subsection.
(a) Applicability. This section applies to all development projects or activities that will occur on public rights-of-way, including but not limited to sidewalks.
(b) Procedure. An application for a revocable right-of-way privilege shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(c) Review criteria. An application for a revocable right-of-way privilege may be approved if it is determined that:
(i) The review authorities have no objection to the issuance of the permit;
(ii) The issuance of the permit will not compromise public health and safety, including but not limited to automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian safety;
(iii) The proposed activity is consistent with any provisions of the Albany City Code, including this USDO.
(iv) The applicant has agreed to provide and maintain liability insurance protecting the City from liability for damage or injury related to the proposed activities on the public right-of-way, if the City determines that insurance be provided based on its evaluation of potential risks to the City; and
(v) The issuance of the permit is consistent with the intent and character of the district in which the property is located.
(d) Post-decision actions. A revocable right-of-way privilege may be revoked by the City for violation of any provision of this USDO or any condition attached to the privilege, or if the City requires other use of the sidewalk or public property.
(19) Interpretation.
(a) Applicability. The procedures and standards in this §
375-505(19) shall apply to all interpretations of the USDO made by the Chief Planning Official when:
(i) An ambiguity exists in the meaning or application of words, phrases or requirements in the USDO that could affect proposed or existing developments, uses, adjacent property owners, or the character of one or more neighborhoods; or
(ii) There is a conflict between the words, terms, allowable uses, or requirements and standards contained within this USDO; or
(iii) There is a conflict between the words, terms, allowable uses, or requirements and standards contained in this USDO and other municipal, state or federal laws, codes, rules and regulations; or
(iv) A property owner, developer, resident or Common Council member requests an interpretation or clarification of the provisions of this USDO to their property or residence or to other nearby properties and developments, and upon review, the Chief Planning Official determines the question raised is one that is likely to apply to other circumstances and the resulting determination will establish a precedent that should be followed in other similar circumstances.
(b) Procedure.
(i) Interpretations can be initiated by the Chief Planning Official or through formal requests by individuals or entities authorized to submit applications pursuant to §
375-504(4)(a)(Authority to submit applications).
(ii) The Chief Planning Official shall review the relevant provisions of the USDO, any background information relative to legislative intent, the plain meaning of the words, and other relevant information and consult with Corporation Counsel prior to issuing a proposed decision on the interpretation.
(iii) Within five business days of making a proposed decision on an interpretation, a copy of the interpretation shall be posted on the department’s webpage, sent to the Common Council and interested parties..
(iv) The proposed interpretation shall be presented by the Chief Planning Official to the Planning Board within 60 days of the issuance of the proposed interpretation or at the next scheduled and noticed Planning Board meeting or hearing, whichever is sooner. Notice of the nature of the proposed interpretation shall be included on the Planning Board agenda with a link to the proposed interpretation.
(v) Members of the public shall be allowed to submit written comment up to 10 days after the Planning Board meeting and will have the opportunity to provide public comment at all Planning Board meetings or hearings for the interpretation.
(vi) Any parties aggrieved or adversely affected by any decision of the Chief Planning Official may seek administrative appeal review with the Board of Zoning Appeals through the procedures identified in §
375-505(12)(b)(i) of the USDO
(vii) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Chief Planning Official may consider their proposed interpretation final 14 days after posting the proposed interpretation on the department’s webpage and sending it to the Common Council if no member of the Common Council objects to the proposed interpretation and if the Chief Planning Official determines, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that:
A. Any delay in finalizing the proposed interpretation will result in significant harm to the quality of life or financial or property interests of any resident, property owner, or developer;
B. The proposed interpretation meets the review criteria set forth in Subsection (19)(c) below; and
C. There are no significant viable alternatives to the proposed interpretation.
(c) Review criteria.
(i) An interpretation request shall be reviewed by the Chief Planning Official and the proposed interpretation shall not be issued unless it meets the following criteria:
A. Is consistent with all provisions of this USDO, the Albany City Code, the legislative intent, and the plain meaning of the language used in the USDO;
B. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
C. Will not create risks to public health or safety;
D. Has identified and determined that the interpretation would not result in any significant negative land use impacts; and
E. Would avoid an arbitrary and capricious delay in the review of a pending application that could otherwise be reviewed through the procedures of §
375-505(20) of the USDO (Amendment to Zoning Map or USDO text).
(d) The Chief Planning Official’s decision shall be one of the following:
(i) Issue the interpretation with no recommended text changes.
(ii) Issue the interpretation with recommended text changes for the next annual USDO review as identified in §
375-505(20) of the USDO.
(iii) Issue the interpretation and recommend immediate amendment to the text of the USDO through the general procedures of §
375-505(20) of the USDO.
(iv) Refer the issue to the Planning Board and Common Council through the submission of an amendment to the USDO text application through the general procedures of §
375-505(20) of the USDO.
(e) The final decision will be posted on the City’s website and sent to the Common Council within five days of it becoming final.
(20) Amendments to Zoning Map or USDO text. All applicable provisions of §
375-504 (General procedures) apply unless specifically modified by the provisions of this subsection.
(a) Applicability.
(i) The procedures and standards in this subsection apply to the review of any proposal to amend the Zoning Map or the text of this USDO.
(ii) An applicant may apply to the Common Council for a Zoning Map and/or USDO text amendment by submitting an application to the Chief Planning Official, who shall initiate an application in accordance with §
375-505(20)(b)(i).
(iii) A member of the Common Council may initiate an amendment to the Zoning Map or the USDO text by the introduction of an ordinance that shall be shared with the Chief Planning Official for review and comment, and may request Planning Board input, but shall not require official Planning Board action prior to adoption.
(b) (i) Application submittal and acceptance.
A. The application shall be submitted and accepted, and may be withdrawn, in accordance with §
375-504(4).
B. Any proposed rezoning of land shall require submission of a plan addressing how traffic, parking, and view impacts will be minimized and shall demonstrate how the rezoned properties will manage parking, circulation, noise, and visual impacts, and will meet other applicable development standards.
(ii) Planning Board review and action. The Planning Board shall review the application and make a recommendation in accordance with §
375-504(7).
(iii) Common Council review and decision.
A. General. The Common Council shall review the application, hold a public hearing and decide the application in accordance with §
375-504(10).
B. Zoning Map amendment additional requirement. For amendment of the Zoning Map, the affirmative vote of a majority of the Common Council is required. However, an affirmative vote of 3/4 of the Council shall be required whenever a petition protesting an amendment is signed by the owners of 20% or more of the area of:
1. The owners of the property included in the proposed change; or
2. The owners of the property immediately adjacent to and within 100 feet of the subject area.
(iv) Post-decision actions and limitations. The post-decision actions and limitations in §
375-504(12) shall apply to the application except as follows:
A. Zoning Map and USDO text amendments do not expire, but shall remain valid unless and until the revised Zoning Map or text of this USDO is subsequently amended in accordance with this subsection.
(c) Review standards.
(i) General standards. Amending the Zoning Map and the text of this USDO is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the Common Council. In deciding the application, the Common Council shall consider and weigh the relevance of, and consider whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment:
A. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
B. Conflicts with any other provisions of this USDO and the Code of the City of Albany;
C. Is required by changed conditions;
D. Addresses a demonstrated community need;
E. Would improve compatibility among uses and would ensure efficient development within the City;
F. Would result in a logical and orderly development pattern; and
G. Would avoid significant adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands, and the natural functioning of the environment.
(ii) Zoning Map amendment additional standards.
A. Is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zoning district for the land; and
B. Would result in development that is adequately served by public facilities (e.g., streets, potable water, sewerage, stormwater management, solid waste collection and disposal, schools, parks, police, and fire and emergency medical facilities).
(d) Annual review. On April 1 of each year, beginning in 2022, the Chief Planning Official shall deliver to the Common Council at least once each calendar year a report that shall include, at a minimum:
(i) A list of all area variance applications and their status;
(ii) A list of all use variances and associated decisions (i.e., approved, approved with conditions, denied);
(iii) A list of all conditional use permits and their status;
(iv) A list of all projects reviewed under development plan review and their status;
(v) A list and totals of any approved accessory dwelling units;
(vi) A list and totals of any units produced under the affordable housing incentives in §
375-401(5);
(vii) The status of any inclusionary housing or other housing market studies as well as any recommendations for modifications of the affordable housing provisions in this USDO based on such studies; and
(viii) A memorandum identifying any text or map amendments that the Chief Planning Official intends to submit to the Planning Board under this §
375-505(20) (Amendments to Zoning Map or USDO text). These recommended text amendments or map changes may be based on feedback from applicants, new technology, advanced zoning tools, or to further advance the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, as that Plan may be amended from time to time. Annual review.
(21) Designation of a historic landmark, historic district, or archaeological district.
(a) Applicability. This §
375-505(21) applies to all applications to designate a City of Albany landmark, historic district, or archaeological district.
(b) Procedure.
(i) An application to designate a historic landmark, historic district or archaeological district shall be reviewed and decided pursuant to the procedures outlined in Table 375.502.1 (Summary of Development Review Procedures).
(ii) Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent by registered mail to the owner of each property proposed for designation or located adjacent to a property proposed for designation, describing the property and announcing a public hearing by the Historic Resources Commission (HRC) to consider the designation. Where the proposed designation involves so many properties that individual notice to affected owners is impractical, notice may instead be published at least twice in a newspaper of general circulation a minimum of 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Once the HRC has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building permit for work in the affected area shall be issued by the Commissioner of Buildings and Regulatory Compliance until the Common Council has approved or disapproved the designation, unless the HRC has reviewed the permit request according to the procedures and criteria for a certificate of appropriateness.
(iii) The HRC shall hold a public hearing before recommending designation of any landmark or historic district. The HRC, owners of the affected property and any other interested parties may present testimony or documentary evidence at the hearing regarding the historic, architectural or cultural importance of the proposed landmark or historic district. Such testimony or evidence shall be included in the record of the hearing. The record may also contain staff reports, public comments or other evidence offered outside of the hearing.
(iv) The HRC shall supply the City Clerk's office with a notice and explanation of its recommendation of designation of a landmark or historic district. Such notice shall include a description of each property proposed for landmark designation or the boundaries of each proposed historic district.
(v) The City Clerk shall cause the HRC's recommendation to be presented to the Common Council at its next scheduled meeting.
(vi) After the HRC's recommendation is presented, the Common Council may approve or disapprove the proposed designation of a landmark or historic district.
(vii) Upon Common Council approval of a designation, a list of the landmarks or historic districts designated shall be filed with the City Clerk, the Chief Planning Official, the Chief Building Official, the City Engineer and the Albany County Hall of Records.
(viii) Notice of a designation shall be sent to the owner of each property that is designated or located adjacent to a designated property. Where the designation involves so many properties that individual notice to affected owners is impractical, notice may instead be published at least twice in a newspaper of general circulation.
(c) Review criteria.
(i) Individual landmarks. and archaeological districts. The Historic Resources Commission may recommend designation of a landmark or archaeological district if it is determined that the landmark or district:
A. Possesses special character or historic, aesthetic or archaeological interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic or social history of the locality, region, state or nation;
B. Is identified with historic personages or events significant in local, state, or national history;
C. Embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a cultural period, an architectural style, a period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship;
D. Is the work of a designer, architect or builder whose work has significantly influenced an age; or
E. Represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood due to a unique location or singular physical characteristic.
(ii) Historic districts. The Historic Resources Commission may recommend designation of a group of properties as a historic district if it determines that the area:
A. Contains a majority of the properties that meet one or more of the criteria for designation of a landmark and may have within its boundaries other properties or structures that, while not of such historic or architectural significance to be designated as landmarks, contribute to the overall visual characteristics of the historic resources within the district;
B. Constitutes a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction;
D. Portrays the environment of a group of people in an era of history characterized by a distinctive architectural type;
E. Has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory;
F. Possesses high artistic value; or
G. Has a relationship to designated landmarks or a historic district which makes the area's preservation critical.
(d) Post-decision actions.
(i) Upon approval of a designation, a list of the landmarks or districts designated shall be filed with the City Clerk, the Chief Planning Official, the Chief Building Official, the City Engineer and the Albany County Hall of Records.
(ii) Notice of a designation shall be sent to the owner of each property that is designated or located adjacent to a designated property. Where the designation involves so many properties that individual notice to affected owners is impractical, notice may instead be published at least twice in a newspaper of general circulation.
