Skip Navigation
Click to return to website
This table is used for column layout.
 
07 - June 11, 2008
City of Auburn Planning Board
Tuesday, June 11, 2008, 6:30 PM, MEMORIAL City Hall

Present: Anthony Bartolotta, John Breanick, Brian Halladay, Allen Zentner, Mark DiVietro, Sam Giangreco, Christopher DeProspero

Staff:  Stephen Selvek, Planner; Andy Fusco, Corporation Counsel; Brian Hicks, Sr. Code Enforcement Officer

Absent: Tom Week, APD

The Chair called the meeting to order.  The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.  

Agenda Item 1:  Application for Minor Subdivision for the purpose of subdividing a vacant 6.654-acre residential lot from an existing parcel located at 102 N. Lewis Street. The remaining 0.698-acre portion
would consist of an existing residential home. Applicant: Lewis E. Springer II

Chair invites the owner or agent to speak to include new material for the Boards consideration.

Lou Springer – accompanied by attorney Bob Barry.  In the April meeting there were 2 negative comments from the Board members which I will address: one pertained to a concern with the P&C application from about 10 years ago. I was not involved in that but it apparently stirred up some emotions. As far as I know that application involved turning the entire 16 acres into a commercial development. I emphasize that I have no intentions for trying to change the zoning or for any development at this time. The second one mentioned the traffic. I retained a consulting firm for a traffic study. (Reads letter into record).  The following items have been covered. Neighborhood concerns – concern of singe family residences and access to Lewis St.  It was the City’s requirement that I have an access from the parcel of 60’ wide and therefore it was done.  Also a concern for the neighborhood.  It is a nice residential area and I don’t have intentions of changing the character.  I know that anyone wanting to do something other than an R1 project would have to come back to this Board.  I have an association with John Flummerfelt who owns commercial property on Grant Ave. He will also come into about 6 acres of residential property behind it that I would like to put together with the property I am buying.  If we are successful in selling Mr. Flummerfelt’s property on Grant Ave that property will need to be graded to be able to develop it.  The residential property would be required to aid in the landscaping – it would be easier for the owner of the C3 property to develop it properly if they have control of the adjacent residential property so it can be properly & harmoniously landscaped.  Buffers between commercial & residential areas also benefit the commercial enterprise.  Also, the effect to Mrs. Potter may be the cost of her home due to the taxes on the land.  

Chair invites new comments from the public.

David Smith, Catlin St. – Concerning the P & C project, it was turned down by Council based on the issues. These same issues were a concern in 2003 when Hart, Meath & Primo made a similar presentation.  From what’s said this evening there’s nothing to worry about but we don’t know what is going to be done in the future.  Concerned about the road and the habitat that will be destroyed if developed. Wonders what an Environmental study would turn up.

Charles Flannigan, N. Lewis St. – (distributes pics of uncut grass on Grant Ave property owned by applicant). Does not want this to happen on property next to him especially since there are no plans for the property. Grass is about 1 foot high.  Is against the project.

Nicole Moon, N. Lewis St. – not a personal issue. Everyone is concerned over what may happen there. Feels the land and animals should be honored.  States that now there is only authorization for a single family home but who’s to say in the future something more intensive won’t be built there?   What would be destroyed there by any development?

Deb Smith, Catlin St. – concerning Mrs. Potter, she should be treated fairly and the land should be given a good price.  The neighbors would have gladly bought that property at the price she is being offered now and we didn’t know it was for sale.

Chris Steinbecker, N. Lewis St. – new to the area but liked the quietness of it.  Wonders what the future impact will be if the property is developed.  Any increased intensity is unneeded.

Dennis Zack, N. Lewis St. – concerned with the access. It’s another street with traffic on it. Has spoken with Mrs. Potter and she doesn’t seem to know about the access. Thinks there should be a plan showing what is going on.  Opposed to having another street access.

Helen Brown – wants to know if anyone from the Board has actually been to the property. Wishes someone would actually look at it in its entirety before making any decisions.

Diana Flannigan, N. Lewis St. – has lived in the neighborhood all her life.  There are already many streets between Lansing St. and Standart Ave coming off Lewis St. – another is not needed.

Caroline , owns 7 & 9 Catlin St. – bought the property for the woods and wildlife and would hate to see the area disturbed.

Ted Wasilenkow, N. Lewis St. – wants to know if an actual road will be put in or if the city is just making him buy it for a right-of-way?

Andy Fusco – the City made him buy it for access.

Stephen Selvek – a land locked parcel is not allowed under City Code so Mr. Springer was directed to buy an access.

Ted Wasilenkow – does the road way have to be constructed or just has to have a r-o-w?

Stephen Selvek – he needs to have a r-o-w.  There are no proposals at this time to construct an access.

Ted Wasilenkow – the commercial property of Flummerfelt's & the 6-acre residential portion – what are the intents for those properties?

Stephen Selvek – there is nothing zone residential along Grant Ave. The 6-acre residential area is north of the Potter property and behind the Grant Ave property which is also owned by the Flummerfelts. That property is not under the Board’s purview at this time.

Dennis Zack – doesn’t think there are any reservations on a residential development. The concern is the access to N. Lewis St.  Seems if there is to be a combining with the other 6 acres a different access could be made through McGarr St.

Stephen Selvek – McGarr St. is owned by the Flummerfelt’s and does not have access to Mrs. Potter’s property.

Chair – will allow Mr. Springer to explain a few things at this time. This is for reconsideration and is treated as a new case as new information has been brought forth.

Lou Springer – is embarrassed by pics shown by Mr. Flannigan. I had hired someone who was supposed to take care of that and it wasn’t done and I will have it corrected.

McGarr St. was at one point thought to have houses there before Grant Ave became commercial.  The street never actually existed, it was just a proposal that shows up on maps.

The only reason for the 60’ r-o-w was to conform with City Code.  There are no plans for further subdivision at this time and at this point it only allows for a single family residential unit with a drive-way access.  I can’t react to future use by future owners. Appreciates the neighbors’ concerns but anything more intense than this would have to come back before this Board.

Barbara Garr, N. Lewis St. – concerned that a fair price was not given to Mrs. Potter for her property and am totally against another road coming onto N. Lewis St.  If the neighbors had known the property had been for sale some of the neighbors would’ve been interested in buying and should be given that opportunity.  

Bob Hunter, Gaylord St. – glad to have more explanation on the process.  Questions ownerships of properties.

Lou Springer – one of the commercial properties and the residential acreage is still actually in probate and under the parents’ names. At some point each brother will have ½ interest in the properties.

Bob Hunter – questions why property can’t be bought on Grant Ave for access.

Andy Fusco – is it contiguous to Mrs. Potter’s?

Bob Hunter – no, it is associated with Flummerfelt’s, would give easement of r-o-w to the property. Would probably develop from Grant Ave in.

Lou Springer – the Flummerfelt’s property is still in bankruptcy and is not free to do anything with at this time.  I am doing this separately on my own account so I need to meet City requirements.

Chair – wants every to understand that since there is new info brought in then it is like a new application. In contention is the subdivision, we are not saying anything else is going forward or that a road will be built.

Asks for Board comments.

John Breanick – thinks it would be appropriate to say that access to the property from N. Lewis St. be properly maintained.

Stephen Selvek – lawn must be kept in accordance with Code.

John Breanick – appropriate to have a 60’ x 60’ strip maintained in character to the rest of the neighborhood.

Lou Springer – understands the requirement.

Christopher DeProspero – were actual traffic counts done or was an average taken per a reference book?

Stephen Selvek – it was based on the uses in the neighborhood and derived from National Standards used. Existing homes and traffic generated were looked at.

Subdivision and SEQR resolutions are prepared. Potential development is a concern to Board and staff. This is a minor subdivision that will only allow a single-family residential unit at this time.  The traffic study done is based on this. Section C Pt II, adverse effects, none at this time as this is a change on paper only at this time. When/if development is proposed then the answers will be different.  The Board should keep in mind that the subdivision allows for single-family residential development. Staff recommendation remains for a negative declaration on SEQR and approval of the subdivision as presented.

Chair asks for a motion on SEQR. Motion for a negative declaration made by John Breanick, seconded by Mark DiVietro.  Four members vote approval, one abstains, two vote denial.  Motion carried.

Motion for approval of the subdivision made by Mark DiVietro, seconded by John Breanick.  Four members vote approval, one abstains, two vote denial.  Motion carried.

Chair – thanks everyone for coming out. Apologizes for any previous problems.

Next meeting is July 1, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. Motion to adjourn by Anthony Bartolotta, seconded by Allen Zentner. All members vote approval. Motion carried.

Recorded by Alicia McKeen