City of Auburn Planning Board
Tuesday, September 6, 2005 6:30 PM, MEMORIAL City Hall
Present: John Rogalski, John Breanick, Sam Giangreco, Mark DiVietro, Laurie Michelman, Sandra Craner Absent: Nicki Wright
Staff: Steve Lynch, OPED Director; Stephen Selvek, Planner; Brian Hicks, Sr. Code Enforcement Officer; Tom Weed, APD.
The Chair called the meeting to order. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited and roll was called.
Agenda Item 1: Approval of minutes of July 5, 2005 and August 2, 2005
Chair asks for a motion to approve the minutes of July 5, 2005. Motion made by Mark DiVietro, seconded by John Rogalski. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair asks for a motion to approve the minutes of August 2, 2005. Motion made by Sandra Craner, seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval with Sam Giangreco abstaining. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 2: Public Hearing for Site Plan Review 43 Perrine St. health club/gym facility.
Chair invites owner or agent to speak.
Anthony Tardibone, Turnpike Rd. – gives updates on the pricing of car stops. It will be about $40.00 each to make and $50.00 to install with the total being about $2,500 - $3,000. Would like his original plan approved. Does not see the need for additional buffers.
Chair asks the public for comments. There are none, Chair closes the Public Hearing and asks the Board for comments. There are none, Chair asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – there is not much to update, staff has prepared some cost estimates for the required work, including the hardscape and landscape work, the total for site development is approximately $12,000. It would be acceptable if curb stops were not required in the front of the applicant’s building. Reason for curb stops next to Swifty’s is to protect that building; on the east side the purpose is to protect the R-O-W and the building. The required buffers are still strongly recommended along with curbing, tree lawn, etc. Staff understands that the Board is looking to remove the requirement for landscape buffers on the east side by Teddy’s but the Board does not have discretion over the required landscapers on the west side adjacent to the residential uses.
Anthony Tardibone – The R-O-W at Teddy’s already has curb stops.
Laurie Michelman – are they the entire length of the R-O-W?
Anthony Tardibone – they are spaced so that no one can get in. No one has ever run into Swifty’s since it’s been there, I don’t see the need.
Sam Giangreco – to clarify, the way the future is leaning, if another business is sold they will have to comply to these standards also?
Steve Lynch – not necessarily. This site was vacant for a long time & the use is now being changed. This is about trying to improve and strengthen the neighborhood so we would like to see strong consideration given to the Code.
Anthony Tardibone – define what curbs
Laurie Michelman – the street curbs
Anthony Tardibone – I already agreed to do those.
John Breanick arrives to the meeting & is updated by Laurie Michelman.
Laurie Michelman – recommends the curb stops in front of the applicant’s building be optional. Remove the landscaping requirement on the east side between the site & Teddy’s. Asks what other options besides curb stops there would be.
Steve Lynch – it would have to be something that acts like a curb stop to protect the building and ROW, such as a railing or similar barrier
John Rogalski – this building has been for sale a long time – it’s lucky someone is going in there.
Sandra Craner – are curb stops per code or recommendation?
Steve Lynch- it is part of the code related to parking lot design, as something to protect adjacent properties.
Laurie Michelman – inclined to recommend curb stops to protect the building (Swifty’s) but not on the other (east) side.
John Breanick – has the owner of either of the adjacent properties made any statements?
Laurie Michelman – no
Steve Lynch – they only voiced concern at the ZBA meeting concerning the proposed bar.
John Breanick – referring to an earlier picture, can a cable be used across in place of curb stops?
Steve Lynch – a curb stop is to eliminate someone driving over the area.
John Breanick – if the other owner’s were concerned they would’ve voiced it.
Laurie Michelman – asks the Board for opinion on curb stops.
Mark DiVietro – the lot hasn’t been opened in years so there should be something between Swifty’s.
Sandra Craner – agrees with Mark DiVietro & Laurie Michelman, as far as the night crowd, it isn’t this applicant’s responsibility. This can also be done in phases.
Laurie Michelman – that was discussed.
John Rogalski – if other owners aren’t concerned then they shouldn’t be needed.
John Breanick – was unaware that this was open 24/7. Looking at the drawing, if it’s closed off at night there wouldn’t be any worries.
Anthony Tardibone – members will have parking stickers.
John Breanick – again, if the neighbors were concerned they would’ve sent something. Recommendations of the Chair are appropriate.
Sam Giangreco – has mixed emotions, don’t want to penalize Mr. Tardibone’s option. Require landscaping on the west and front but not the east and allow additional time to complete.
Laurie Michelman – all in agreement to allow 1 year to complete.
Steve Lynch – this may require a performance bond then.
Laurie Michelman – that would be a good idea & it’s been done before
Steve Lynch – the applicant will work with Engineering and Corporation Counsel concerning the type and amount and administration fees.
Nancy Hussey – they would be cost plus 10%.
John Breanick – what items will it be?
Laurie Michelman – what is the normal timing?
Steve Lynch – prior to occupancy.
John Breanick – it is too late in the season to plant now.
Anthony Tardibone - so this all has to be done in 1 year?
Laurie Michelman – yes, but we are also asking you to provide a performance bond as a guarantee & this will be an additional cost.
Anthony Tardibone – so if it’s not done the bond goes in effect?
Laurie Michelman – yes. Moves on to SEQR.
Steve Lynch – SEQR has been reviewed. Staff recommends a negative declaration.
Laurie Michelman – asks for a motion on a negative declaration for SEQR. Motion made by Mark DiVietro, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Laurie Michelman – asks for a motion to approve the site plan as amended by staff and with the contingencies as discussed, including the performance bond. Motion made by Sandra Craner, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 3: Public Hearing for Site Plan Review 180 North St. parking lot expansion.
Chair invites the owner or agent to speak.
Paul Smith - at the rear of the parking lot on the south east corner, an additional area of 150’ x 42’ to be added which will add 15 spaces and a drive around. We’ve been losing spaces in winter and the staff has increased.
Chair asks the public for comments.
Tina Smith, Cameron St. – wants to know if it will back up to her property.
Paul Smith – it is near the cemetery. Some tress will be cut down but none in the buffer zone near 7 Cameron.
Chair closes the Public Hearing and asks the Board for comments. There are none. Asks for Staff comments.
Steve Lynch – to the east is the cemetery which provides a substantial buffer. The applicant will use 40’ of the rear 80’ existing buffer for the expanded parking area. Homes in back of this area are down a slope & can’t be seen from the site of the proposed expansion. In winter there may be less of a buffer. The applicant received necessary Area Variances for buffers (20’). There are no other significant issues. Sheet drainage will be to the catch basins on site. Snow storage is available. Staff recommends a negative declaration on SEQR and approval of the site plan as presented.
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.
Chair asks for a motion for approval of the site plan. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Sandra Craner. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 4: Public Hearing for Subdivision Review 78 Thornton Ave for parcel on Garrow St. Ext.
Chair invites the owner or agent to speak.
Dan Sincebaugh, Letchworth St. – would like to build a single family residential home at the property purchased from the Auburn School District.
Chair asks the public for comments. There are none. Closes the Public Hearing and asks the Board for comments.
John Breanick – what is the plan for the other parcels?
Dan Sincebaugh – I bought 2 lots, 83’ x 180’ each, for a single family home mostly centered on the 2 lots.
Sam Giangreco – what side of Thornton is it?
Dan Sincebaugh – it’s actually on Garrow St. Ext.
John Breanick – how much space between the bus area at the school and the back of the site?
Steve Lynch – over 100 feet.
Chair asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – the subdivision is straightforward. This will be the 1st of approximately eight (8) lots that the School district is selling. Everything is in order per requirements. There are already streets, curbs, trees, etc. Staff recommends a negative declaration on SEQR and approval of the minor subdivision as presented.
Chair asks for a motion for negative declaration on SEQR. Motion made by John Breanick. Seconded by Mark DiVietro. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair asks for a motion for approval of the subdivision. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by John Rogalski. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Other Matters
John Breanick – asks for connector rd. update
Steve Lynch - not all acquisitions are complete, the railroad hearing has not been scheduled and more studies are required to determine utilization of additional federal funds received.
John Breanick – due to the tracks?
Steve Lynch – a different environmental review is required when federal funds are used.
John Breanick – how long a hold up?
Steve Lynch – maybe a year.
John Breanick – but it’s moving along from the east?
Steve Lynch – yes, that will continue.
John Breanick – will there be any development in the area prior to completion.
Steve Lynch – the portion being completed now will have access to acreage behind Wal-Mart for development. Some parcels on the west side of the new roadway may be considered for redevelopment – it is zoned commercial.
John Rogalski – has Wal-Mart considered access to the connector rd.?
Steve Lynch – yes, they have determined the design for the connection and they will be paying for it themselves.
Steve Lynch – I will not be available for the October meeting, however, I will make sure that staff is here to cover the meeting.
Laurie Michelman – next meeting is October 4, 2005. Asks for a motion to adjourn. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by John Breanick. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
| 
