Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

NIVERVILLE-Is it a decorative cupola or a 6,000-square-foot house plopped on top of a supermarket?
       Is the supermarket in one building or two?
       Which looks better, a flat roof or a hipped roof? Which best protects shoppers from falling icicles?
       These questions and many more kept the Zoning Board of Appeals and a dozen residents out late Thursday night for another round of the public hearing on the variance requested by the Widewaters Group for its shopping center.
       Attorneys and architects argued about whether Widewaters should receive a variance for a flat roof on the structures that will house a Hannaford Brothers grocery store and other stores at its shopping center.
       A flat roof isn't allowed under Kinderhook's town code.
       The Planning Board, which recently approved the Widewaters site plan provided it wins the variance and meets a list of conditions, agreed in a split vote to recommend the ZBA approve the variance.
       But plaza opponents from Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth have their own roof design, the hipped roof with a 4:12 pitch designed by Alvin Knoll, a local architect who found the Widewaters plan unattractive.
       "I submit that the [code] compliant building [I designed] doesn't have the visual impact," Mr. Knoll told the ZBA. "As an architect, I find it more appealing."
       His Hannaford building is topped with what he calls a cupola, an element he said was needed to accommodate the building's size and rooftop utilities while meeting the town code's requirement for a sloped roof.
       The building is 40 feet high, but the cupola rises to 60 feet.
       "To me this is like taking a 6,000-square-foot house from the village of Kinderhook on Route 9 and putting it on top of Hannaford," said ZBA member Kelly Nicoletta.
       But it complies with the town code, said KNGG Attorney Jeffrey Baker, because it's no more than 10% of the total size of the 60,000-plus-square-foot structure it sits on.
       "It is a large cupola," he said. "Why? It is a large building."
       But it's really two buildings, said Widewaters' Marco Marzocchi, because Hannaford's will build and own its store on its own schedule.
       The façade makes it look like the flat-roofed Buildings 4/4A section of the plaza is one building, a construction style allowed by code.
       Regardless of the architectural definitions, said Widewaters Attorney John Hoggan, the Knoll roof won't work.
       "There is no [code] compliant alternative roof design for this building," he said. "This is a sleight of hand... Follow the ball."
       Mr. Hoggan urged the ZBA to defer to the expertise of the Planning Board when it comes to design standards.
       The Planning Board initially opposed the flat roof variance, but planners decided later in the summer that the plaza's main building would look best with a flat roof and façade of varying heights.
       "They came to a point with the applicant to mitigate all these issues to give us the product we can live with," said Planning Board member Bob Kramer, who did not participate in the Widewaters review.
       But Deirdre Leland of KNGG urged the ZBA to hire an architectural consultant before it makes a decision.
       She said Mr. Knoll's design has shown a reasonable doubt about the developer's roof, but Mr. Hoggan said it contradicts the town's wishes.
       "What Mr. Knoll has done is taken a 60-foot building, put a row of windows in, and called it a cupola," said Mr. Hoggan, who read from the town code. "In this case, you design the building to protect the viewshed [of the Catskills]. You don't do it by building a 60-foot building."
       But Mr. Knoll said his design wouldn't be any different than Widewaters' in terms of the view because both buildings are tall.
       He also said the developer never gave any alternatives a chance.
       "They never tried to design a building that complied with code," said Mr. Knoll. "They said it can't be done."
       Mike O'Shea of QPK Design in Syracuse said Mr. Knoll "manipulated" the buildings by moving doors, for example, to arrive at his roofline.
       Furthermore, he said, the Knoll design would need snow-melting equipment that would not work and unattractive roofing surfaces.
       "There is no other option, and that's been our contention from the beginning, unless you build a 6,000-square-foot 'cupola,'" said Mr. O'Shea.
       But KNGG's attorney, Mr. Baker, went on the attack, "congratulating" Mr. O'Shea for becoming a licensed architect this year.
       Mr. O'Shea said he was indeed recently licensed, but he doesn't work as an architect and he's been with QPK since 1991.
       But the ZBA directed everyone to get back on track.
       Engineer Jim Green, who works for the town on Widewaters matters, had an architect from his firm testify Mr. Knoll's design could work safely.
       But his firm doesn't have the construction-ready drawings it needs to have a final word on either design.
       KNGG, however, believes Mr. Knoll's work proves Widewaters hasn't shown it needs a variance.
       "What we have presented here is that this project can be built under the town code," said Mr. Baker.
       "If you're going to make other developers that come into town comply, you have to make this, the largest developer, comply," he continued. "You are not constrained from making the decision [to deny the variance]."
       But the ZBA members who spoke about the look of the plaza design weren't too fond of Mr. Knoll's roof.
       "This cupola is a monstrosity," said Jim Waterhouse. "I don't find it appealing looking at a bunch of asphalt."
       His board, however, declined to make a decision on the variance Thursday.