GUILDERLAND — While repeatedly acknowledging the matter was outside the scope of its responsibilities, the Guilderland Planning Board during its Aug. 14 meeting took issue with the look of a proposed Western Avenue self-storage facility. 

A-Metro Movers is seeking permission to demolish the M&M Motel at 2360 Western Ave. as well as a single-family home on the site and replace them with 27,000 square feet of self-storage. Earlier this year, the single-family home was torched by an occupant of the M&M Motel, which of late has come to house several men listed on the state’s sex-offender registry.

A-Metro is looking to build a two-story, 10,000-square-foot climate-controlled building and three smaller so-called cold-storage structures varying in size between 5,100 and 6,800 square feet.

The project has been before the board once already, in April, when discussion was dominated by the facility’s proposed aesthetics. 

The board in April felt the proposed flat-roof design and industrial-style materials were inconsistent with the desired character of the area and suggested the applicant explore alternative materials and designs. Board members also expressed a desire for the project to have an architectural style and quality similar to nearby buildings, like the neighboring 2390 Western Ave., which undertook renovations somewhat recently.

The town’s zoning board is the lead agency for the project, which was before the planning board on Aug. 14 for a site-plan review. 

The only real change from April, the planning board was told, was that the corrugated metal wall paneling was changed to a cementitious panel.

Board member Dominic Rigosu, an architect, had the most to say about the facility’s proposed look. “There’s just nothing there,” he said of the aesthetics, reiterating, “To be honest, there’s nothing there.”

Rigosu said the proposal “still looks like a big rectangle box,” and added there’s “no architectural character there.” He said, “You have a blank canvas, and there’s a lot you can do. And you haven’t done it yet.”

Rigosu was told by an A-Metro representative that the storage company was looking to follow the general theme of other self-storage facilities, with windows on the corners of the building.

Rigosu said he had understood from the planning board’s chairman, Stephen Feeney, at the last board meeting, that self-storage facilities were originally allowed only in industrial areas, “and then it changed the zoning to bring them out into other zoning area districts, but at the same time requiring some architectural details.”

Rigosu said A-Metro’s proposal was fine for an industrial area, but it didn’t belong on Western Avenue. 

But the aesthetics of the project, as Feeney, who took issue with the proposed signage of the project, reiterated throughout the discussion of the facility’s looks, were outside the purview of the planning board, as it’s not the lead agency for the proposal. 

“I don’t know how to handle it, Dominic, because we’re not the lead agency, other than we can make a general recommendation that the applicant make more of an attempt to comply with our design guidelines for the architecture of the facade,” said Feeney.

Rigosu responded, “Take out the word ‘more,’ just make an attempt, because I don’t see any — to be honest — any attempt.

Ultimately, the board had two recommendations on the project for the zoning board:

— That strong consideration be given to modifying the building design to be in compliance with the town’s design guidelines; and 

— That A-Metro considers reducing the size and height of the proposed monument sign as well as the signage on the building’s facade. 

Feeney said the proposed monument sign looked more like a pole sign, which isn’t allowed in the Local Business district. He also pointed out that the area of the proposed sign was greater than what is allowed by code. 

Feeney asked Town Planner Kenneth Kovalchik if A-Metro would need a variance for the sign. 

“The zoning board will have to consider any [overages] of the sign,” Kovalchik told him.