City of Auburn Planning Board
Tuesday, February 10, 2004 7:30 PM, MEMORIAL City Hall
Present: Laurie Michelman, Sam Giangreco, John Rogalski, Mark DiVietro, John Breanick, Sandra Craner. Absent: Nicki Wright
Staff: Nancy Hussey, Corporation Counsel; Steve Lynch, OPED Director; Brian Hicks, Codes; Tom Weed, APD
The Chair called the meeting to order. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited and roll was called.
Agenda Item 1: Minutes of September 8, 2003 and December 2, 2003
Chair – asks for a motion to approve the minutes of January 6, 2004. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 2: Public Hearing for special permit for 74 Genesee St. animated sign.
Chair – invites the owner or agent to speak.
Jon Robson – it will be a three color, yellow, red and green, animated sign facing north displaying many times such as community events, time and temperature and business promotion.
Chair – asks if any members of the public wish to be heard. There being none closes the public hearing and asks the Board for any questions.
John Breanick – asks Tom Weed if he believes the sign will cause any interference with traffic.
Tom Weed – does not believe sign will cause any problems.
Chair asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – staff does not really have any comments. This has come before the Board before. It’s an animated sign, which is why it’s before the Board now. He could put up the sign that was not animated. We have a completed part I and part II EAF which is in your packet and our recommendation is for a negative declaration. I will review the SEQR if desired.
Chair asks for a motion to declare a negative declaration on SEQR. Motion made by John Breanick, seconded by John Rogalski. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair asks for a motion to approve the special permit as presented. Motion made by Sandy Craner, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 3: 282 North St. preliminary site plan review
Chair invites owner or agent to speak.
John Wejko – Burtis Pt. Rd. – purchasing property to construct about 25,000 sq ft building for new business of mill work shop with proposal to rent remainder of space to light industrial/manufacturing. We have given a basic site plan and before proceeding would like any feedback and concerns.
Chair – asks Board if they have any questions.
Sam Giangreco – what type of building is it?
John Wejko – we are weighing the costs and advantages – it could be a pole barn but right now we are leaning toward a steel building. There are advantages and disadvantages to both but that would be addressed in regards to the plans and figure out which is the best and it will meet all codes.
John Breanick – questions the power lines going thru the property. Questions the r-o-w for G & E.
John Wejko – the power lines on the property are private. We have not found a r-o-w in the abstract as yet.
John Rogalski – questions curb cut.
John Wejko – we do have a revised plan. The North St. curb cut has been removed and we have decided to take access from the road that adjoins the north side of the property.
Laurie Michelman – so that removes DOT from the process?
John Wejko – yes – hands out revised plan showing removal of curb cut and addition of alternate access and parking.
Laurie Michelman – asks Mr. Wejko to describe phases of construction.
John Wejko – initial intent was to do phase I building and leave phase II until after the fact. Now we’re going to go ahead with the entire project.
Laurie Michelman – so it will be one or two buildings?
John Wejko – one building.
Laurie Michelman – questions parking?
John Wejko – parking needs will be based on tenant space and employee numbers. There is as presented an acre of paved area parking. This is a tentative plan that has not been done by a site engineer. The new plan shows a total of 52 spaces including handicapped, plus tractor-trailer loading and access.
Laurie Michelman – is there an opportunity for expansion of parking?
John Wejko – yes. I tried to keep the south side of the site totally green, there will not be any building openings on that side of the building, we are applying for a side lot variance. As far as increasing the size of the parking that’s pretty much all we have for parking without getting into that green space. The green space totals another 40,000 sq ft. There’s 25,000 sq ft of building, 40,000 sq ft of parking and 40,000 sq ft of green area. Until we see what type of tenant space we have we won’t be accessing the green space. I’ll leave it up to the engineers and architects.
John Rogalski – how much site work will you develop now?
John Wejko – that was one of the issues with developing phase I and II separately. It will be very difficult to do phase I and not do the entire parking area. Our plan is to complete it as shown, parking and all, including drainage, catch basins, etc.
John Rogalski – questions utilities.
John Wejko – there’s an 8 inch water line, gas available, plenty of power and currently sewer and water laterals.
Laurie Michelman – questions purpose of trailer dock access and how often used.
John Wejko – loading and unloading and it would depend on the business there. In the construction business we have something delivered 3 to 4 times a week with generally small packages. Depending on the business will determine how often deliveries are made. The plan is for a community loading dock – all facilities will use the same dock.
Laurie Michelman – while it’s not actually a public hearing the public is always welcome to speak. Asks if there are any members of the public who wish to be heard.
Mrs. Whiting – North St. on south side of proposed development – questions what type of building will be constructed.
John Wejko – intention is to do a millwork shop that would be cabinetry trim work.
Mrs. Whiting – which way will it face?
John Wejko – faces the access road away from you. Your side of the building will be blank, no parking…
Mrs. Whiting – how tall is building?
John Wejko – 12’ to ceiling level with an 8 – 10’ truss roof.
Mrs. Whiting – will it be closer to North St. or back towards the quarry.
Nancy Hussey – points out on map – building will be 25 feet away from property line.
John Wejko – and all parking will be on the other side of the building.
Mrs. Whiting – are you buying up to the r.r. tracks?
John Wejko – no the property doesn’t go back that far.
Nancy Hussey – points out the area on the map.
Mrs. Whiting – questions the noise level.
John Wejko – all noise is under some sort of decibel level, it won’t be anywhere near as noisy as the manufacturing business behind you. These will be small businesses. Chances are some of these businesses will be warehousing.
Mrs. Whiting – will it be kept up or like the business across the street that isn’t?
John Wejko – that is the intention of having the south side of the building all landscaped, there will be no debris, there are 2 dumpster locations, and a paved parking area away from your property.
Mrs. Whiting – will all the trees be left there?
John Wejko – the trees behind the building and whatever looks good on the south side will be left.
Mrs. Whiting – will there be any night work?
John Wejko – it’s difficult to say but generally it will not be a 3-shift operation. I am taking a portion of the building the rest will be rental. Any business that wants to come in and lease space I have no idea what they will do. We don’t have anyone specific going in at this time.
Chair – asks if there are any other questions.
John Rogalski – questions the traffic.
Tom Weed – no access from the main road (North St.) access is from Quarry Rd. – shouldn’t be any problems.
John Rogalski – happy to hear that more business will be moving into town.
John Wejko – being in the Empire Zone will promote employee and business growth. Anyone else coming in will be coming in as a new business.
Chair – asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – to clarify a few items. Tonight is not the final action, it is only a preliminary review to provide Mr. Wejko with some input in regards to the preliminary plan submitted tonight. One of the things he has to do to move forward is to go to the ZBA for an area variance. He is required to have a 60’ buffer on the south side and he is asking for 25’. This meeting is scheduled for 2/24/04 and neighbors will be notified. One way to mitigate the impact of 25’ is to have no openings on that side of the building to contain some of the noise and some of the impacts from that and is to provide that no construction will be there – it will remain green space on that side of the building between the building and Mrs. Whiting’s property. I would like to hear
from the Board members on how heavily they feel that area should be landscaped. The buffering requirements for that distance requires a certain number of plants per foot so that would still be in effect for the final plan. If the ZBA grants the variance it will still require some sort of vegetation in there. From inspecting the site there is some amount of vegetation there already on both sides of the property line some of which can be left and included in the count of required planting items. Input from this Board will be provided to the ZBA as they have requested in the past.
John Breanick – would like to see lower level evergreens vs. high growing trees to better deaden any sound and be more visually appealing. I know there is more credit for trees than bushes but try to have lower evergreen opposed to trees that are going to be higher up.
Steve Lynch – so you’re suggesting an 8 – 10’ high screen at it’s maturity and denser.
John Breanick – yes – thinks it would be nicer to look at also.
John Wejko – we have reviewed several different possibilities on how to place this building and this is the best we came up with. If we flipped it to a mirror image, Mrs. Whiting’s property would be exposed to everything.
Steve Lynch – many questions have been answered tonight. I note that the property line includes most of that access road at least up to your access/egress to your parking lot. I ask Corporation Counsel if he needs to provide any kind of…
John Wejko – we actually haven’t finalized the property lines yet. We are working on that and all will be in order for the purchase.
Steve Lynch – Mr. Wejko is looking for preliminary approval tonight and that will be in regard to the overall layout and subject to ZBA action and submission of a final plan that has all the requirements stated in the site plan application. We will be glad to work with you on that.
Laurie Michelman – a few other items to point out due to residences surrounding this area. In other situations we have put time limits or limits on deliveries, etc. I bring this up as something I would like to consider – like not having deliveries at 10 or 11 at night…
John Wejko – I don’t foresee this being a heavy duty manufacturing facility. This will be the small business, light manufacturing enterprise with no more than a 2-shift operation at the most. Loading/unloading would not be a 24-hour event.
Steve Lynch – staff did not prepare a resolution in advance, deciding to let the Board ask questions and get a feel for the project. Asks Mr. Wejko if action is desired on the preliminary review.
John Wejko – would like to get some sort of approval. It is one of the stipulations on my purchase offer.
Steve Lynch – would like to reiterate this is not a final action. You will need to come back for public hearing, SEQR and final approval. We can look for a motion on preliminary approval contingent on ZBA action and submission of all requirements required for final site plan.
Chair – asks for a motion to approve preliminary site plan review as submitted. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 4: Public Hearing site plan review 202-204, 206 Genesee St. Bel-Aire Apts.
Chair invites owner or agent to speak.
Sam Giacona – the plans are essentially the same with the exception being the footprint of the building which is now smaller – defers to the architect.
William Walton – architect – the plan has been changed to conform to zoning. There will be two separate buildings containing 6 units each with a common entrance. There will be 4 units on the 1st floors and 2 on the 2nd. No other changes have been made. We have kept to the same requests as previously asked.
Chair invites public to speak.
Kevin Ryan – representing Jos. Camardo – the project is presented as addition of 12 units and therefore no variances are needed and complies with the zoning regs. My initial review reveals that it doesn’t comply. The total acreage of 202 – 204 Genesee is 78,408 sq ft. The code requires 2500 sq feet per unit for additional units requiring a total of 80, 000 sq ft. In order to meet this requirement they are adding 206 Genesee St. which is a separate parcel. This is only mentioned on the neighborhood density calculations only to get over the minimum lot acreage requirements. I also know there are neighborhood density requirements also – there is a maximum number of units that can be in a particular neighborhood defined by a square going from the center point
of the lot of the proposed site. The drawing they have shows this but when figuring the lot size 206 Genesee St. isn’t included. If so they would be above the maximum number allowed. There have been many reasons for opposing the project. From a strictly legal standpoint, looking only at the zoning law, this application must fail. They don’t have enough area to add the units.
Darryl Mills – Ross Pl. – concerned about the 11-space parking lot on north side of property. How many spaces is one building allowed to have? The proposed parking is going to align with the sidewalk. This project is obviously too big for the area. The only buffer offered is an 8’ fence and trees on the rear of the property. Would like to see additional buffers along north side of his property.
Closes public hearing and asks Board for comments.
Sam Giacona – disappointed that Mr. Ryan stands now in opposition when he previously admitted that a 12 unit building would be admissible.
Mr. Ryan – does not recall that statement. Has not had adequate time to review this plan.
Sam Giacona – can provide documentation to statement. But client has acquired 206 Genesee St. and 108 Ross Pl. which is additional footage. In fact the application is 202-204 and 206 – these properties have been merged and are now under one tax map. 108 Ross Pl. will also be merged into this parcel. With those 3 properties the square footage issue is not an issue. In regards to Mr. Mill’s concerns I’m sure my client is willing to take any and all steps necessary to take care of that.
Laurie Michelman – I believe there are already plans for a stockade fence and trees.
Chair – asks the Board if there are any questions.
John Breanick – the 8-foot r-o-w there – is a fence going along there?
Sam Giacona – my client has acquired 108 Ross Pl front and rear and will be installing a fence along that line. The r-o-w will be merged and no longer exist.
Laurie Michelman – will the houses remain?
Sam Giacona – yes, they will be renovated and rented.
Chair – asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – the applicant has revised the plan to 12 units from 16 units and therefore does not require a use variance. It very clearly shows the inclusion of 206 Genesee St. in the plans. We have reviewed the neighborhood density calculations and believe they are correct. This project is permitted in the R2 district and therefore we must turn our attention to site details. The site plan includes a provision of 55 parking spaces on site including snow storage area. The proposed project including all existing apartments on site requires 49 spaces so sufficient parking is being provided. With regard to storm water management the site incorporates an extensive site drainage system with proposed connection to the system at Ross Pl. City Engineer has reviewed the plan in detail
and approves the plan. His memo is included in the packet. Reads memo into record. The Design Review Committee recommends a negative declaration on SEQR and site plan approval.
Chair asks to go thru SEQR and asks Corporation Counsel to address comments raised by Mr. Ryan.
Nancy Hussey – the neighborhood density review was conducted. The 2 properties (202-204 and 206) have been joined and are under one map number.
Steve Lynch – review SEQR. In the SEQRA review, each of the potential impact areas included in the standard Part 2 of the Short EAF were reviewed in detail. For each, the staff presented a rationale as to why there would likely be no impact related to the issue or concern. This was followed by asking for additional comments or concerns from members of the Board, noting that a “no comment” from the Board would indicate agreement with the staff recommendation that there would be no impact related to the particular issue being discussed. In each and every instance, the Board declined comment, providing consensus with the staff recommendation that there would not likely be any significant environmental impact associated with the proposed unlisted action.
John Breanick – asks Tom Weed if there are any traffic problems.
Tom Weed – doesn’t see any but does question the number of parking spaces.
Steve Lynch – 49 are required, 55 are provided.
Chair – asks for any other comments
Steve Lynch – reads SEQR resolution into record.
Chair – asks for a motion for a negative declaration on SEQR. Motion made by John Rogalski, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Steve Lynch - Reads site plan resolution into record.
Chairs asks for a motion to approve the site plan as presented. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Sandy Craner. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 5: Public Hearing for proposed zone change at 232R North St. from C to C3.
Chair invites owner or agent to speak.
Nancy Hussey – explains this is an extension of a C3 zone into a C district as set forth in the enclosed memo.
Laurie Michelman – asks if everyone is aware of the location (yes).
Nancy Hussey – the surrounding properties are industrial, commercial and higher density residential. The property directly below is undeveloped residential.
Chair – invites the public to speak. There being no public comment, the Chair closes the public hearing. Asks the Board for comments.
John Breanick – asks the advantage of the zone change.
Nancy Hussey – the proposed zoning change can be viewed as a furtherance of the Comprehensive Plan. Will subsequently be subdivided. Cocap is looking to market to big box retailers. 16 acres is required and 11 acres are currently available. There is the option to purchase if the land is bundled. With the connector road the area will be an extension of the Grant Ave C-3 zoning district. The general commercial areas area intended for re-doing what the old industrial uses were. This area is currently inappropriately zoned.
John Breanick – questions the difference in setbacks.
Steve Lynch – set backs for a C-3 zone are greater. The C zone is more forgiving. The C-3 Zone is good for big box retailers and shopping plazas.
Nancy Hussey – significantly this area will be separated from the adjacent R-4 district by the Connector Road.
Steve Lynch – in the comprehensive plan one reason for the connector road is to open the land locked area behind Wal-Mart.
John Rogalski – questions the status of property acquisition for the connector road.
Nancy Hussey – substantial progress has been made.
Chair – asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – the SEQR has been compiled by Corporation Counsel and signed by the City Manager. Staff recommends a negative declaration.
Chair – asks for a motion for a negative declaration on SEQR. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by John Rogalski. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair asks for a motion to recommend the zoning amendment to City Council. Motion made by John Breanick, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Other Matters
John Breanick – questions if the proposed hotel at FL Mall would be in the Empire Zone.
Steve Lynch – yes
John Breanick – they didn’t want to build in the City?
Steve Lynch – we made our best pitch but they wanted to be at the Mall. However, since the EZ is extended the City will get a portion of the taxes.
John Breanick – questions if any stipulations made.
Steve Lynch – we do get revenue for any new businesses locating in the EZ outside the City.
John Breanick – proposed location of hotel?
Steve Lynch – behind Aldi’s – about 100 acres of out-parcel areas are owned by the Mall.
Chair – Steve wants to bring a matter up for discussion.
Steve Lynch – staff and Corporation Counsel have been discussing some possible changes to the C1 district regulations and changes to an existing C2 area including the block of North St., Nelson St., Seminary St. and Seymour St. Points out area on map and businesses included. The issue is what should the proper zoning be for this area and what are the uses that should be permitted there. Points out the zones in the surrounding areas. Surrounding downtown are the neighborhood commercial (C1) areas, which are a transition buffer between residential and the commercial areas that serves the larger areas around them. Looking at this staff recommends the residential area in this block would be better suited to become C1 neighborhood commercial along with the rest of the block. Right now it is
C2 with no parking or set back requirements. Essentially could have all uses in C1 with the exception of auto related uses. C2 does not allow auto related uses with the reasoning being that service stations weren’t desirable in the middle of downtown. The C1 area does allow auto related uses subject to site plan review. However, C1 does not allow professional medical offices. Looking at other C1 areas around town you note that there are professional/medical offices in these areas. This is sort of back wards – you have these remnant neighborhoods that are C1 with old buildings that need to be re-used. By allowing professional/medical uses, subject to site plan review, active re-use of these areas may be encouraged. This particular site, if it is changed to C1 acknowledging that this section is not part of the core downtown district – it is situated and acts more like C1 – which would allow auto related businesses but
would not allow professional/medical buildings which it already does contain. The proposal is to change the area to C1 but also to change the C1 definition to allow professional/medical uses. This would impact all C1 areas.
Nancy Hussey – purpose of the central commercial district sets forth the lands that make up the City’s urban center. It follows up an important characteristic of uses in this district as an orientation of pedestrian activity. On the other hand the neighborhood commercial area (C1) in that area we want to change the purpose is intended to provide a choice of business locations for small scale commercial uses offering primarily convenience shopping for nearby residential areas. Commensurate with the scale of the neighborhood. All these (C1) commercial areas that are existing are surrounded by residential areas similar to this Seminary/Seymour/Nelson/North Street area.
John Breanick – questions why larger area can’t be squared off. Developers will be looking for highway access.
Steve Lynch – that can be looked at at a future date but right now we want to focus on this proposed area.
Nancy Hussey – we spoke with Dave Miller and historically there is no apparent reason why this was zoned in this matter – it was zoned inappropriately.
Steve Lynch – the impact on the immediate area, there are already medical uses, city owned open spaces and exiting commercial properties that will not change. It will change what will be done with the 3 vacant houses on Seymour Street. It makes more sense to change the zone.
Laurie Michelman – agrees with John Breanick to pull in areas to square off entire area along with addressing this proposal.
Steve Lynch – the areas that John Breanick speaks of are viable residential uses.
John Breanick – there are only 3 houses – it might be advantageous to change.
John Rogalski – the Arterial and Loop Roads eliminated a lot of commercial properties available for development downtown.
Nancy Hussey – C1 is more restrictive than C2.
Steve Lynch – asks Board to also consider gas/service stations not being what they used to be – now they are larger and open 24/7. Recommends these uses being permitted uses by special permit - adding another level of discretion and review above what is allowed by right. Nancy and I will continue to work on this and bring back for review. These matters are typically brought forth in April for review. In April we may have an opportunity to also look at the other areas requested.
John Breanick – places along Owasco St. need to be opened to development.
Steve Lynch – asks Tom Weed if it is worth looking into making Owasco and Fulton two-way traffic.
Tom Weed – has thought about it also and thinks it should be looked into.
Steve Lynch – thinks as long as the roadway system remains one-way that the properties along these streets will remain marginal.
John Rogalski – this (a Zoning Amendment for C1 changes) has to go to Council?
Steve Lynch – yes – there will be a public hearing and then recommendation to Council. Any change in the zoning ordinance is difficult and takes time to prepare for an appropriate review and analysis.
Chair – next meeting is March 9, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. Asks for motion to adjourn. Motion made by Sandy Craner, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
| 
