City of Auburn Planning Board
Tuesday, June 3, 2003, 7:30 p.m. Memorial City Hall
Present: Laurie Michelman, Sam Giangreco, John Rogalski, Mark DiVietro, John Breanick. Absent: Donna Bruno, Nicki Wright
Staff: Nancy Hussey, Corporation Counsel; Steve Lynch, Director, OPED; Tom Weed, APD; Jim Galvin, CD Program Manager, OPED; Brian Hicks, Code Enforcement Officer
The Chair called the meeting to order, the Pledge of Allegiance was recited and roll was called.
Agenda Item 1: Approval of minutes from May 6, 2003
Chair asks if there are any questions or comments about the minutes. Points out that Nancy Hussey was not present at the previous meeting. Sam Giangreco makes a motion for approval, seconded by John Breanick. All members vote approval for acceptance of minutes. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 2: Site Plan Review for 17 Columbus St. roof sign
Chair invites the owner or representative to speak.
Tim Blackman of Steel St. – owner or property. Proposes block letter, neon sign on the north side of the building on the roof. Won’t affect neighbor. Reads letter from neighbor into record and provides copy for the files.
Chair asks the public for any comments. There being none closes the Public Hearing and asks the Board for any comments.
John Breanick – asks if there will be any identification on the south side of the building.
Tim B. – eventually at the front entrance will be nine-inch wood letters lit by existing soffit lights. This will be well under the allowed square footage.
Chair asks staff for any comments.
Steve Lynch – the site plan requires all new signs to be reviewed. Neon will be the only illumination, block letters, neon recessed with covers.
Mark DiVietro – is there a timer on the lights?
Tim B. – yes – they will turn on at dusk and off at 2:00 a.m. at closing.
Sam Giangreco – will there be any blinking?
Tim B. – no
John Rogalski – this will be only on one side?
Tim B. – yes
Chair asks Jim Galvin to review SEQR
Jim Galvin – reviews SEQR. Reminds the Board to ask questions as needed. No significant environmental impacts found.
Chair asks for a motion on SEQR. Sam Giangreco makes a motion for a negative declaration, seconded by John Breanick. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair asks for any comments on site plan.
Jim Galvin – can’t think of any conditions to include.
Chair asks for a motion on site plan. Motion for approval made by John Breanick, seconded by John Rogalski. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 3: Site Plan Review for 7 Seminary St. Tompkins Trust driveway
Chair invites the owner or representative to speak.
Andrew Ingram with BDA representing Tompkins Trust. There is an option to purchase 7 Seminary St. for secondary access conditional on ZBA and Planning Board approval. ZBA approved an area variance on June 2, 2003. 7 Seminary St. is currently a residence paved with asphalt on the east, west and north sides. There is a small lawn on the south side. The site comprises of 1.8 acres. The proposed development is for a two-way 24-foot wide secondary access to the site on North St. from Seminary St. and 10 additional parking spaces. Secondary access sought for safety and ease of access to the site and additional parking. It will be easier for people coming from the east and for people uncomfortable coming in from North St. There will be a gain in parking, a total of 15 spaces
are required, 25 will be provided. Current projection is 15 staff member at peak and 15 to 20 customers. With peak times use, 10 additional spaces are desired to accommodate customers and staff. Design is asphalt pavement lined with granite curbing. North side will be used for snow storage. Sidewalks and curbing will be replaced. Landscaping will be provided. There is a light pole on the site as shown on new plan brought tonight – it is the same as on the bank property. Lighting will be contained on site in the parking lot and driveway.
Chair asks the public for any comments. There being none, closes the Public Hearing and asks the Board for any comments.
John Breanick – why wasn’t this included in the original plans.
Andrew I. – the opportunity for purchase of the Seminary St. property was not available or considered at that time.
John Breanick – I would be in favor of this as it’s additional parking for you but I think that if you had originally put it on where you had the drive thru it would’ve tremendously have helped the exiting for people as opposed to everything going on at North St. A good portion could have gone out through this way here. Is it too late at this point in time to change that part of the plan? The drive thru area?
Andrew I. – there is not enough room for parking in this area here and because of the conflict of pulling out and the conflict of those going thru the drive thru it makes it very difficult – there isn’t enough space there.
Chair – and this new area is meant to be for exit and entry?
Andrew I. – yes it will be two way 24 feet wide commercial driveway
Chair – is it wide enough for backing out and pulling in
Andrew I. – absolutely
Chair asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – this went to ZBA for a variance on the 50 foot required buffer between the two uses. They will be utilizing the appropriate amount of plant material that will fit in the area.
Chair – asks if APD has any safety issues (there are none)
Jim Galvin – review SEQR. ZBA did not do SEQR as part of their review. There are no comments concerning SEQR and no significant environmental findings.
Nancy Hussey – as a correction – one individual did speak against the project at ZBA stating it was a change in the character of the neighborhood.
Chair asks for a motion on SEQR. Sam Giangreco makes the motion for a negative declaration, seconded by John Breanick. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair asks for a motion on site plan. Motion for approval made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 4: Site Plan Review for 78 – 80 Seymour St. car wash addition
Chair invites the owner or representative to speak.
Mark Kubarek – State St. Rd. – introduces attorney for a brief presentation
Charles Greico – environmental counsel – update on procedures and proposal. Site plan originally submitted in April 2003. DRC deemed that it required ZBA action, which was done June 3, 2003. A public hearing was held at that time. The ZBA tabled this item pending environmental review by the Planning Board as lead agency. SEQR materials are provided. A determination for SEQR by the Board is desired.
Mark Kubarek – (passes out additional drawings) Proposes to add 2 touch-free and 4 self-service car washing bays with entrance to the east. There is space for 30 cars stacking on the proposed addition and 22 cars stacking on the existing facility. A small island will separate the 2 facilities. An 8’ stockade fence will be used as a buffer on the east side. Landscaping will be done. Grass only will be at corner of Seymour and North St. In the new plan the lighting is depicted using down angles with no spill off the lot. Traffic patterns from each side of the facility will not meet. There is space for “escape” and emergency access. Hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. for the existing facility and 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. for the
self-serve bays.
Chair asks the public for any comments.
Gary Temple – S. Fulton St. – intends to speak against the project. Reads from a letter by neighbors – copy provided. Has spoken before the ZBA on 2 other occasions. Feels aggrieved by the process and has filed an Article 78, which is under consideration. Additional comments: the applicant needs to remain competitive – not shown – design does not take into account what can be done with the building. The plan exceeds what is needed. The Schlenkers are upset to find 2 trees on the condemned property removed with no explanation or details. The plan does not show that the applicant will own the condemned property although this has been assumed to be the case and used as a reason for putting in less of a buffer. Condemned or not – this is a
residential area. The future of the property is uncertain – who will own it or what will be done there. Asks the Board to find a positive declaration on SEQR.
Bill Jacobs – Cottage St. – born and raised on Nelson St. Has family on Liberty St. Has noticed run down housed in area. Notes work done on these plans. Looks at total plan. Points out the Dialysis Center and the Willard Chapel as being centerpieces. The whole block will be refurbished from Nelson St. to North St. Mark Kubarek is a local family and businessman in for the long haul. This plan will go toward the betterment of the City.
Chair closes the public hearing.
Nancy Hussey – the two trees on the condemned property that were removed were diseased and removed by the City.
Charles Greico – in regards to the issues raised by Mr. Temple thinks that these issues have been appropriately and adequately addressed by the applicant. Other neighbors in the area have spoken positively about the project at the ZBA meeting. The applicant has taken into account the character of the neighborhood. It will be an attractive building situated perpendicular to and facing the street and the bays do not face the street. 76 Seymour is a condemned building that cannot be used in its present condition. The applicant’s desire is to obtain this property to use as green space (buffer). There will be no other residential uses to the east. Schwartz Towers is over 100’ away with a wooded area between the properties – adequate buffer there. A
professional traffic study has been submitted. It is not expected to generate a significant amount of additional traffic – most currently gets pass by traffic. No changes are necessary – the streets are capable of handing the traffic. Air issues have been addressed in the supplemental statement of the SEQR. Data does not support additional emissions. Noise issue also provided – levels are within EPA and Highway Admin. guidelines. There will be no spill off of the lighting – the City lights provide greater spill off. The water run off has also been addressed – there is a small increase but it will flow into the City sewer system as it does so now. The project will be beneficial to the neighborhood and the tax base.
Mark Kubarek – concerning the salt and chemicals – there are no chemical used in the operation. Every bay has sediment bed hooked to the sanitary sewer. Private disposal company removes the sediment. Run off waste goes to the sanitary sewer. The operation is environmentally friendly.
Chairs asks Board for any comments.
Sam Giangreco – has seen Kubarek’s operations – commends him on his work – has beautiful area. Believes the general public generates more sound. This is a class operation by the look of the plans. Everything seems to be covered. Gives approval.
John Breanick – asks APD about part in letter concerning pedestrian traffic. If there have been any reported accidents.
Tom Weed – by closing and narrowing the access on Seymour St. it will be made safer.
Chair – asks APD is there are any issues with the flow into the site (no)
John Breanick – asks Corporation Counsel about the pending Article 78 and how the Board should proceed.
Nancy Hussey – the application is not final. The variance is conditional on SEQR. This precludes the applicant from commencing. It is proper to proceed.
John Breanick – is the condemned property being taken into consideration
Nancy Hussey – no
John Rogalski – thinks the neighbor (whose letter Mr. Temple read) has a vendetta against Mr. Kubarek. Reminded of the opposition to the Dialysis Center. Sam Chicello is a very thorough architect. Need to promote small businesses – not discourage.
Chair – asks applicant to review traffic flow.
Mark Kubarek – review traffic patterns on site map. Cones will be put in the Seymour St. eastern most access to separate entrance/exit when needed.
Chair – questions the right turn into the property for traffic traveling west on Seymour St.
Mark Kubarek – sees no problem – it was addressed in the traffic study.
Chair – thanks applicant on forethought in getting traffic study
Chair – asks for staff comments
Steve Lynch – reviews process of meetings. ZBA has acted contingent of Planning Board review of SEQR and being lead agency. Review SEQR and make a determination. ZBA asks for buffer input and will finalize the variance on 6/30/03. Submission for final review will be 7/1.
Chair – the only action for tonight will be SEQR.
John Breanick – asks why the Planning Board is lead agency.
Steve Lynch- We are recommending it. With most issues related to site plan it is appropriate to make Planning Board the lead agency.
Nancy Hussey – And the ZBA specified Planning Board to consider
John Rogalski – so next meeting we will review the site plan.
Steve Lynch – yes – there will be action on the site plan
Jim Galvin – have Planning Board declare themselves as lead agency. Coordinated review needed – ZBA and PB both have responsibility. Need resolution with Planning Board as lead agency. ZBA has requested.
Sam Giangreco- if Planning Board is lead agency then we have final say? (yes)
Sam Giangreco – there is not opposition from the ZBA?
Jim Galvin – the ZBA did what they had to but no comments were offered concerning the environmental issues.
Chair – asks for motion on resolution stating Planning Board is lead agency. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion passed.
Jim Galvin – 1st part of SEQR has been reviewed – need to do part 2. Passes out new resolution to go along with review. Reviews SEQR.
Chair – couple areas on SEQR application not answered. Pg 5 #17 A & B
Mark Kubarek – answers yes to both – there will be new catch basins on the property.
Chair – Pg 5 B2 – is this N/A? (yes)
Chair – Pg 6 #6 concerning generation of solid waste was answered previously
Mark Kubarek – we have a contract with a dumpster service
Jim Galvin – part 2 – assessment of potential impacts. Divided into several categories of interest. Continues review.
John Breanick – are sewer systems able to accommodate the additional flow?
Jim Galvin – what is the current flow?
Mark Kubarek – unknown – Mike O’Neill checked with Bill Lupien and he said it was o.k.
Charles Greico – supplemental statement to the EAF specifically addresses this point. The City system is capable of handling it.
Jim Galvin – continues review
John Breanick – if accepted – can a sign be posted to close windows & turn off radios to reduce sound when waiting in line?
Mark Kubarek – yes – but again most noise is from the every day traffic
John Rogalski – compares to problems of kids in cars on Genesee St.
Jim Galvin – will discuss noise quality later.
Chair – want Mr. Greico to confirm there are no issues with air quality.
Charles Greico – it doesn’t come close to maximum accepted levels. There are no significant levels.
Jim Galvin – continues review
John Breanick – asks for statement from APD.
Tom Weed – no impact.
Chair – addresses pg 16 #12 – historic and archeological resources.
Jim Galvin – reviews this point
Charles Greico – for the record – has photos – circulates photos.
Mark Kubarek – describes photos – east boundary stockade fence being replaced, with the tree cap there Willard Chapel can’t be seen. Trees are on property line of 78 Seymour St. on the other side of the fence. On Willard Chapel’s property line, along the fence line of 76 Seymour St., the project is not visible from Willard Chapel.
Jim Galvin – continues review
Chair – wants to confirm no use of hazardous chemicals or materials?
Mark Kubarek – correct
Jim Galvin – continues
Steve Lynch – proceed to part 3 if part 2 is large. Summarized in negative declaration
Jim Galvin – has reviewed for any potential impacts. Board should consider determination potential of environmental impacts. Reviews resolution.
Chair – before a motion are there any comments or questions from the Board?
John Breanick – wants added to the resolution the sign concerning noise levels
Nancy Hussey – that would be more appropriate to address at the site plan review level.
Chair – any other concerns? Any from Corporation Counsel? (none) Asks for a motion on SEQR. Motion for negative declaration made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Charles Greico – clarifies that staff will prepare the negative declaration (yes). Requests a special meeting in advance to address final site plan review. Will also ask ZBA in order to move forward with project. Wants to complete this year.
Steve Lynch – has to also consider time of a Public Hearing notice. Cannot do until ZBA meets.
Nancy Hussey – suggests canvassing ZBA with limited dates suggested.
John Breanick – any info on the Article 78?
Nancy Hussey – there is a motion – we are waiting to hear a decision. We will proceed until we hear a court decision.
Meeting tentatively set for the week of June 23rd.
Chair – suggests preliminary discussion of Auburn Plaza road realignment.
Steve Lynch – The proposal is to realign McIntosh Dr. to make more traditional parking area for Auburn (Ames) Plaza. Squares off the west side more than adds parking. Plan lacks requirements. Also proposal to realign exit by Hess, which would involve review by the DOT. Staff has asked the applicant to provide more detailed plans. Council has final say even after Planning Board review. Also proposes rear parking. It has a fill in store proposed between Tile Town and the Rescue Mission Thrift Store. The plan is incomplete. Also phase II has a proposed bank out building. Staff has held the application and requested completed, proper plans. There is also a proposal to combine the AutoZone lot, Cassidy’s Ice Cream and the former car wash site
(Dilaj’s property) for an Eckerds drug store. Input is needed from DOT concerning Grant Ave access. The applicant engineer was surprised plans already turned in as he wasn’t quite done with them. Issues are being worked on. Plans have been sent to DOT as a “heads up”. Provides background information concerning PDD’s.
John Rogalski – asks for Connector Rd. update.
Steve Lynch – gives update of Connector Rd. The City is waiting for final property access.
Chair – next regular meeting is 7/1/03. Will hear later concerning the special meeting. Asks for motion to adjourn. Motion made by John Breanick, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval.
Meeting adjourned.
| 
