City of Auburn Planning Board
Tuesday, April 3, 2006 6:30 PM, MEMORIAL City Hall
Present: John Breanick, Jill Fudo, Anthony Bartolotta, Sam Giangreco
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.
Chair asks for a moment of silence for John Rogalski.
Agenda Item 1: Approval of minutes for February 7, 2006 and March 7, 2006
Chair asks for a motion to accept the minutes of February 7, 2006. Motion made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Anthony Bartolotta. All members present vote approval. Due to lack of a quorum motion will not be carried until voted on by remaining members, when available.
Chair asks for a motion to accept the minutes of March 7, 2006. Motion made by Anthony Bartolotta, seconded by Jill Fudo. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 2: Public Hearing for 39A Arterial West, Head West Salon. Site Plan review for building addition and parking lot expansion.
Chair invites the owner or agent to speak.
Jennifer and Greg Slywka – proposal is for a 1,400 SF building addition plus additional off-street parking spaces. The parking will be where there is currently grass and shrubs. There is a 10 – 11 foot set back around the parking area. We will be adding massage and facial services thereby increasing the number of tenants. Tenants are independent contractors who rent space. There is one upstairs apartment with 2 tenants and parking is supplied for them also.
Chair asks for comments from the public. There are none so closes this portion of the Public Hearing. Asks for comments from the Board.
Jill Fudo – asks if neighbors have been notified.
Steve Lynch – as a rule all adjacent property owners within a 400-foot radius of the center of the subject property are notified.
Sam Giangreco – the 10-foot buffers are ok?
Steve Lynch – yes
Jill Fudo – has concerns about the 16-inch set back from the property line especially in regards to fire safety and the proximity of the neighboring buildings.
Steve Lynch – buildings in a C1 district are actually allowed to touch. The houses in question are actually off set from each other, the neighboring house is set back further from the subject building.
Brian Hicks – the site plan is deceiving in the placement of the properties. The architect took into consideration all the aspects of the code. The neighboring house is 13 – 15 feet from the property line.
Jill Fudo – questions that no site improvements are listed along the roadway.
Steve Lynch – the Board does not have jurisdiction at this time as no changes are being made to that area.
Jill Fudo – what about in front of the new addition?
Steve Lynch – there are no requirements for landscaping around the addition; only requirement is for the set back that has been met.
John Breanick – questions if there will be an increase in traffic.
Greg Slywka – there is a maximum of 5 operators and their customers
John Breanick – questions the current traffic
Greg Slywka – 6 operators plus customers.
John Breanick – questions the hours
Jennifer Slywka – the operators set their own hours.
John Breanick – so there will be no significant increase in traffic?
Greg Slywka – traffic would stay much the same.
John Breanick – asks Tom Weed for input on traffic
Tom Weed – does not foresee any problems.
John Breanick – asks Brian Hicks for input.
Brian Hicks – has worked with Mike Palmieri on the site and he has fulfilled the requirements.
Chair asks for staff comments.
Steve Lynch – staff recommends a negative declaration for the short EAF. Have done an analysis of potential impacts and do not anticipate any adverse water or air quality matters. Noise levels will be maintained, not increased. Although the impervious area will be increased with the parking lot addition, the buffers will be able to maintain the run off and allow storm water recharge into the ground on site. There is an annotated plan done by staff included for further direction to the site paving company, which indicates the appropriate high points needed to facilitate drainage.
John Breanick – there is adequate snow storage?
Steve Lynch – yes, in the storm water recharge areas.
Chair asks for a motion for a negative declaration on SEQR. Motion made by Anthony Bartolotta, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Steve Lynch – Staff recommends acceptance of Revision 1 of the submitted Site Plan.
Motion to accept the Site Plan made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Jill Fudo. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Agenda Item 3: Public Hearing for 150-160 Grant Ave. Implementation of Phase II of redevelopment; 14,000 SF multi-purpose building and 3,080 SF coffee shop.
No representatives are present.
Steve Lynch – The Board gave preliminary approval to the entire development in May 2005 with final approval in June 2005 for the Walgreen’s site only (referred to as Phase I). At that time they were to post a bond to guarantee all improvements done to the site in case the 2nd phase was not implemented within 36 months. However, they have decided to move forward with Phase II of the development now. A new site plan for the remaining area has been submitted. There is a reduction in the number of freestanding buildings with accompanying changes to the layout and circulation patterns. In scope and density, it is essentially the same but we have requested storm water calculations for the revisions and comments from DOT on the access and egress to Grant Avenue. A full set of final
plans including site plan, landscaping, utilities, etc. will be required to allow the staff and Board to review the Phase II proposal in detail. The purpose for tonight was appraisal of the overall layout by the Board and the identification of any concerns or comments for the developer.
John Breanick - there were initially 4 buildings – it this is approved can they still add more buildings in what is now the snow storage area?
Steve Lynch – thinks it’s highly unlikely that they will apply for additional buildings after development of Phase II, but I won’t preclude it. If so, they would have to show a sensible plan for snow storage and run off with the site plan review materials for any additional buildings.
John Breanick – any opening date for Walgreen’s?
Steve Lynch – We have all heard that opening will be scheduled sometime in April.
Brian Hicks – they have a Temp CO to continue work but are not in a situation to open yet.
John Breanick – asks Tom Weed for any traffic concerns.
Ton Weed – only concern is the drive thru areas & that has been discussed with the DRC.
Steve Selvek – some DRC concerns are separating Phases I & II on the plans to more clearly show what is proposed after Walgreen’s site is done; current traffic within the development & possible conflicts with the drive-thru and the common center; the northern parking lot needs 24 foot travel lanes around cars; the gas meter at the rear of the common centre needs protective bollards; the loading zone at the rear of the coffee house must be clarified; clarify proposed curbing.
Jennifer Hogan (The Citizen) – questions the prospects of tenants.
Steve Lynch – you would have to speak with the developers
Jennifer Hogan – will the common center be like a strip mall?
Steve Lynch – it looks like it is set up for a small group of retailers but we can’t speculate on it from the submitted plans.
Other matters
Steve Lynch – provides background memo sent to Council concerning small parking areas and the landscape requirements.
- After a phone conversation with John Rogalski, John has expressed his desire to retire from the Board due to health concerns.
- Auburn Diner is now looking for a permanent CO. Their finished site is not exactly in accordance with the approved site plan but staff feels the have met the overall intent. This was an empty lot and an old diner that was improved and rehabilitated. Board is asked for its overall approval.
John Breanick – this was a good project and a good use of the land. Would like to see more similar projects.
Jill Fudo – did they come back to ask for amendments?
Steve Lynch – whenever site plan is done any minor changes during construction can be reviewed by staff and approved by the appropriate department (Codes, Engineering, etc). This is done for minor field adjustments and documented for the record, so the developers do not have to formerly re-present to the Board during construction development. Minor changes are handled by staff administratively. Staff did work with the developers on this plan.
Motion to approve final site improvements made by Sam Giangreco, seconded by Anthony Bartolotta. All members vote approval. Motion carried.
Chair – Next meeting May 2, 2006 at 6:30 p.m. Asks for a motion to adjourn. Motion made by Anthony Bartolotta, seconded by Sam Giangreco. All members vote approval. Meeting adjourned.
| 
