City of Auburn Planning Board
Tuesday, February 1, 2005 7:30 PM, MEMORIAL City Hall
Present: Laurie Michelman, Sam Giangreco, John Rogalski, Mark DiVietro, John Breanick, Sandra Craner. Absent: Nicki Wright (excused)
Staff: Steve Lynch, OPED Director; Nancy Hussey, Assistant Corporation Counsel; Brian Hicks, Sr. 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 of January 4, 2005.
Chair asks for a motion to approve the minutes of January 4, 2005. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval with Laurie Michelman abstaining. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 2: Public Hearing for Site Plan Review at 162 York St. for storage building.
Chair invites owner or agent to speak.
Charles LaDouce, South St., engineer for Upstate Paving – the proposal is for a 4000 sq. ft. storage building for cold storage and working on equipment. The company formed two years ago as part of a subsidiary of Rizzo Construction (located on the premises also). The company has expanded and is projected to continue to do so. The company does use local employment. Equipment volume has also expanded necessitating this project. (Passes out photos of the area).
Chair asks the public for comments. There being none closed this portion of the Public Hearing and asks the Board for comments.
John Breanick – asks how many vehicles are on the lot.
Charles LaDouce – during winter up to 30 to 40 vehicles or equipment.
John Breanick – is there adequate room left for snow removal and staff parking?
Charles LaDouce – yes, we looked at different options on the parcel & this is the most ideal place to put the building. It does not impede with traffic, plows, etc. There are overhead doors on the north & south sides therefore not impeding on employees.
Laurie Michelman – describe access to the building. It looks like it’s through a right-of-way.
Charles LaDouce – not that we’re aware of. We did speak with the City Engineer questioning the paper street but according to all records we own the property.
Steve Lynch – we thought the access was coming down the paper street but now we realize that is not so.
Laurie Michelman – will the area be paved?
Charles LaDouce – no, gravel
Laurie Michelman – is this within Code?
Nancy Hussey – it’s private property and is allowed.
Chair – asks for staff comments
Steve Lynch – this is a straightforward project for the reasons already mentioned. SEQR is required as the building is 4000 SF. DRC recommends a negative declaration on SEQR, as they believe there are no significant impacts and recommend approval of the site plan as submitted. The applicant did receive all required variances last night from the Zoning Board of Appeals for required area variances.
Mark DiVietro – referring to pictures, the other building belong to the paving company?
Charles LaDouce – no, they belong to Rizzo Construction.
Mark DiVietro – access will be maintained for both companies?
Charles LaDouce – yes
Laurie Michelman – asks if Board has had an opportunity to review the draft SEQRA materials (yes)) and if there is a need for staff to review the draft SEQR findings included in the packets in detail (no). Asks for a motion for a negative declaration on SEQR. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by John Breanick. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Steve Lynch – staff recommendation is for approval of the site plan as presented.
Laurie Michelman – asks for a motion to accept the site plan as presented. Motion made by John Rogalski, seconded by Sandra Craner. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 3: Public Hearing – Preliminary Site Plan Review for 276 R Grant Ave office building
Chair invites owner or agent to speak.
Peter Crissey, Architect for project from Syracuse, retained by Auburn Rte 5 Development LLC, owners of the property. Points out area on map. Has the required buffers and setbacks. Apologizes to neighbors for removing trees adjacent to the KFC project when working on Advance Auto; notes that much of the removed foliage will be restored with this development. Building plan is basic, 4 walls, front and side doors. It is being given as much residential character as possible, using a good deal of colonial detailing. Will be vinyl sided and shingle roof. Adequate parking provided. Landscaping plan provided. Existing screening of trees will remain (especially along the northern border with a single-family residential use) and be added to. There will be no access
from/to Prospect St., where curbs and sidewalks will be installed per City code. There are some grading issues that will be addressed. There is a small retention area and adequate snow storage. With regard to final tenant, it is speculative office use at this time; there are no tenants in mind. Reviews landscape plan. Signage will be unobtrusive.
Chair asks the public for comments.
Charles Aguello, Brookside Dr., - owns property across from proposed development. Area is single family residential. Since development of the area only access to KFC is Brookside Dr. (this is not so – there is also access from Grant Avenue) Advance Auto has a large driveway to Brookside that has tractor-trailers blocking the way. This will be just another access to an already small, congested area. Very concerned about the traffic patterns.
Chair asks if there are any additional public comments (none) and then closed the Public Hearing and asks the Board for comments.
John Breanick – asks Steve Lynch if parcel is zoned R?
Laurie Michelman – there is a memo in your packets addressing this issue.
Steve Lynch – the property had been zoned commercial prior to the comprehensive zoning changes made in ’91. At that time, it was divided into 2 distinct zoning districts: with approximately half of the parcel approximately 300 feet back from Grant Ave being designated as C-3 Highway Commercial and the remainder of the parcel between that line and Prospect designated as R-1 Single Family residential. A single owner owned the entire parcel when the zoning was changed to be both residential and commercial. The zoning ordinance also included a section that addressed such “split-zoned” parcels. It stated that any portion of a property split zoned could be used for any purpose permitted under the least restrictive of the zoning designations. Adding this language to the ordinance may have been
used to avoid taking issues relative to commercial revenues from owners of this and other split zoned parcels resulting from the 1991 rezoning. While the applicant is aware that the parcel is legally split zoned and may be used for the least restrictive (C-3) uses, we explained to the developer the sensitivity of the parcel to the neighborhood and the importance that the impact be addressed as much as possible if it were to be used commercially.
John Breanick – have provisions been made for run off from paving.
Peter Crissey – there are detention areas (point out on map), stabilization and underground piping. There will be no more water leaving the site post construction then there was prior. The underground detention has a settling area to clarify water to address water pollution quality standards.
John Breanick – there has been previous problems with flooding from the creek here (Hunter Brook system).
Peter Crissey – we will not affect that. The way the system works, any water falling on the undeveloped site, all water will go in the detention areas to the underground storage.
John Breanick – what is the anticipated traffic flow?
Peter Crissey – we have parking for 30 cars.
John Breanick – any traffic studies done?
Peter Crissey – no. To comment on the issue of tractor-trailers backing onto Brookside Drive when pulling into the recently completed Advance Auto, it is not the intent for the tractor-trailers to back onto Brookside Drive while accesses the auto store from Brookside. The access was designed for this turning movement to take place within the site – I will talk to the owner about this. There are also access drives to the KFC and Advance Auto area from Grant Ave. Part of the problem was that the previous KFC owner never completed the required roadwork. This has now been done and all of the access roads are now open.
Mark DiVietro – any considerations to have access from Prospect?
Peter Crissey – Prospect is strictly residential & we thought access there would be undesirable.
Steve Lynch – Tom Weed has reviewed this. There are some concerns that the proposed drive is so close to the auto part’s drive. After discussion it was decided the least impact would be on Brookside. If the access were placed up onto Prospect Street, cars would be drawn further up Brookside from Grant Avenue and then onto Brookside. Tom Weed and the DRC felt it was preferable to have access closer to the Grant Ave commercial area. Since the parcel is allowed to be commercial this use is the least impact of the range of uses allowed.
Sam Giangreco – asks Officer Augello is the house next to the bank is a hairdresser.
Charles Augello – yes, it is directly across from the KFC. All lots on that side are residential. This proposal would be an intrusion on the residential area.
Sam Giangreco – there is an 8 foot grade from Prospect? The neighbors would be looking down at the roof?
Peter Crissey – it was designed as a hip roof as neighbors complain of being able to see Wal-Mart or Lowe’s. It is designed to provide a buffer for that site line and has been broken up into a number of roof planes to keep it from appearing as one large commercial roof.
Laurie Michelman – if this does not go through do you plan to restore the trees?
Peter Crissey – we will decide at that time. The hope is that this is approved.
Staff comments.
Steve Lynch – recommendation is to take no substantive action tonight. Drainage plans were received too late to review (plans received and forward to Board members last week and drainage calculations were received the night of this meeting). Recommendation is to take role as lead agency for SEQR. No other agencies are involved at this point. The purpose of appearing tonight was to have the public hearing and introduce the project to the neighbors for comments and concerns. The plan will be considered at the March 1, 2005 meeting.
John Breanick – asks if applicant can be required to do a traffic study.
Mark DiVietro – would like to have access on Prospect looked at.
Peter Crissey – then there would be traffic on Brookside AND Prospect.
Steve Lynch – we had received calls from neighbors before plans were even available. Prospect is very concerned about access there and it will not fully reduce impacts on Brookside Drive. There are also safety and buffer issues associated with a driveway off of Prospect. This project will also bring in curbs & sidewalks along Prospect and Brookside Drive and restore buffers in these areas.
Laurie Michelman – thinks access at Brookside is the best place, especially coming off Prospect to the site. Concerned also about traffic as it is unknown what the tenancy will be. Asks the Board if traffic study thought to be needed.
Sandra Craner – wasn’t work just done at Brookside?
Steve Lynch – yes, a third (turning) lane was added.
Sam Giangreco – aggress that a traffic study should be done. Caution to look at use on Prospect St. Talk of tree removal, noise, etc. Also the creek and environmental issues concerning run off. So many things are there that much needs to be looked at.
Mark DiVietro – is it possible for the engineers from each project (proposed subdivisions) to work together on the drainage issues?
Steve Lynch – any project is required that no more drainage leave the site after construction as before construction. If this direction is followed in the review of design of each project in succession, then there is no cumulative impact on the watershed and storm water impacts. Water is held at the site and released slowly.
Laurie Michelman – asks Peter Crissey about his feeling for a traffic count or study.
Peter Crissey – seems extreme based on the size of the project. Not sure what it will prove but will do it if required.
Laurie Michelman – asks if it is feasible.
Steve Lynch – it is feasible. Also want to look at any previous counts done. With KFC & the auto store we may need to rely on new traffic counts to take into consideration these uses.
Laurie Michelman – we will explore this possibility for the next meeting.
Steve Lynch – if the Board feels the info is needed to move the project along, we will expedite a traffic review.
Laurie Michelman – if we see what we already have we can determine what we need.
John Breanick – not just dealing with this one business. There is significant traffic flow there all day.
Laurie Michelman – need to look at the property’s maximum usage.
John Breanick – how many suites will there be?
Peter Crissey – unknown at this time.
Charles Augello - Brookside and Prospect are also a school bus route with a stop at the corner.
Steve Lynch – there are codes for parking. Doctor’s office use requires 40 spaces, and we are reviewing a site plan with 30 spaces, so this could not be approved for a doctor’s office, it would be business offices. A Doctors Office would also be considered a more intensive use and therefore this is now being reviewed and considered as an office use.
Chair asks for a motion to declare the Board as lead agency for SEQR. Motion made by John Breanick, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Decision of the Board is to have staff talk with Peter Crissey about a traffic study.
John Breanick – each time a development comes up we talk about the lack of sidewalks there (Prospect Street).
Steve Lynch – any new development proposed is required to provide sidewalks. To connect them with new sidewalks the City would have to put then in and that is to be determined by Council.
Other Matters
None.
Chair – asks for a motion to adjourn. Motion made by John Breanick, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
| 
