Everyone and welcome to this meeting of the Syracuse Planning Commission.

We will begin our applications and public hearings momentarily.

First, we'll take action on the minutes from our last meeting, which was August 18th.

Draft minutes have been circulated to the commission members and be appropriate now to entertain a motion for action on the minutes.

I have a couple of uh corrections to the minutes.

Um page seven uh in the the discussion of the parking lot related to the municipal parking lot project.

Uh there's reference to my comment about bike parking and the uh requirement of the one to six ratio, and then a little bit further down the last sentence on the page says 100 parking spots are proposed.

Commissioner Lance found that the ratio of one to six does apply to this project and would be necessary as a special condition.

There was some question about that, and I think that statement should actually read Commissioner Lynch was informed by corporate counsel that uh the one to six ratio does indeed apply.

Thank you for that.

Any other uh yeah, the second item is on page nine in the uh comments of people who spoke in opposition to the project.

Uh there's reference to Kathleen at Monticello Drive.

That's Kathleen Stibley Stribly.

Stribly, right?

Uh so that occurs on page nine.

There's also a reference to her on page 14 that just has her first name.

Uh so if we could add her second name uh to that.

And then uh the other item is on page 10 in uh uh discussion of the Lafayette project.

There's a reference at the end to uh the approval of the uh major site plan review that should read master plan review, not a major site plan review.

Because I think that is the appropriate language they're using for that kind of project.

Uh so those are my corrections.

If that's acceptable to everybody, I move approval of minutes with those three corrections.

Four corrections.

Sorry, second.

That's a second uh discussion on the motion before us for the minutes.

If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye, those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions are approved as revised.

Uh we move now on to uh first old business, then new business.

Just a moment, uh, just a word for anyone unfamiliar with our process as each application is announced by a member of the staff.

We ask that the applicant or the representative come to the podium in the center of the room, provide their name and address uh for the record, and then a brief summary of the application.

Following questions from the commission members, we will invite members of the public who wish to speak in favor of the application to do so.

And similarly, we will invite members of the public who wish to speak in opposition to the application to do that as well.

We ask that everyone keep their comments brief to three minutes, and where comments are offered in opposition, we will uh encourage the applicant to return and address the comments offered in opposition.

With that, uh are there any changes to the agenda that we need to know about or uh just one, and that is for uh under new business, the Syracuse Developmental Center SDC project.

Uh that is just being postponed.

Uh we expect it to be on um possibly the next agenda.

Okay, so if you're here for that item, we won't be dealing with it.

There will be no presentation tonight, um, but it will be advertised again when it comes back around, right?

Yes, and that's uh strictly for the street dedication uh and the re-subdivision modification.

So that we can focus first on our old business.

Yes, uh, I'm just going to tee this one up because um it's back before uh all of you.

So this is the South Av apartment project.

Uh there are two applications, uh companion pieces, one uh being a major site plan review, the other being a re-subdivision.

If you recall back on August 18th, uh you conducted the seeker review uh and declared uh had a negative declaration for this.

Um we held this pending a uh BZA review for an area variance for to seek relief for maximum building length.

Uh BZA reviewed that and approved that on September 4th.

Um and all city reviewing departments are finished, and there are no significant concerns or um comments to be addressed moving forward.

So now we're able to take uh and finish public uh comment and you may deliberate deliberate and make a decision on the two pieces without seeker, because we already did that.

Joe we had the presentation last time.

I don't think there's a need to repeat that unless there's anything new with the project.

Um so with that, in terms of public comment for this evening.

Uh well, first let me ask my colleagues on the commission any uh questions that may have arisen since our meeting in August.

No, thank you.

Um the only question I had is uh a reference to the uh the bike uh rack storage.

I'm not finding anything on the plans about exactly where that is, and so if you could just address that.

Sure.

There will be a bike room on the downstairs of the architectural great.

Thank you.

Since you're speaking again, could you just Christian Freeman 121 Ruskin of Keplinger Freeman Associates?

You got it, Walter.

Thank you very much.

Okay, if there are no further questions from the commission members, is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this application?

If so, come forward, use the podium, provide your name, address, and comments.

Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application?

Please come forward.

No, we have no speakers in either category.

We'll close public comment and turn our attention to the two actions we need to take, one on the resubdivision and the other on the major site plan review.

So looking first at the resubdivision, is there a motion for action on R2540?

Make a motion motion to approve R-25-40 as presented with one condition, that condition being to file uh the re-subdivision with the county clerk within 62 days, and also yes, right, the file is re-subdivision of the county clerk.

Period within 62 days.

Thank you.

Sir Second.

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion on the motion for the resubdivision.

If not, all in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Subdivision for R2540 is approved.

And we turn our attention now to the major site plan review, which is MASPR 15-16.

Is there a motion for action on this?

I make a motion to approve MA SPR-25-16 with uh three conditions beyond the uh general conditions.

The three conditions are discussed in a staff uh report on the project.

The three conditions are uh the landscaping buffer along uh the northern, western, and southern property shall be maintained in good condition.

Two is the applicant shall collaborate with the business and neighborhood and business development uh department regarding the six uh affordable housing units, and three the applicant shall keep collaborating with all individual city departments to address any concerns they have.

Thank you.

Is there a second second discussion on the motion before us now for the site plan review?

If not, then all in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions that is approved.

Thank you.

Our next uh application, please.

Next up is a resubdivision, R-25-35 at 621 Seymour, 619 Seymour, and 114-16 Amy Street, uh owner of 621 is uh Greater Syracuse Property Development Corporation or the land bank.

Um and uh owner of 619 Seymour and 114-16 Amy Street and applicant is uh New Linda Garcia.

Um, all of these are in the R2 zone district.

Thank you.

Terry Luckett with the Syracuse Land Bank, 1941 South Solana Street.

Um 621 Seymour Street is the vacant lot.

It's measures 45 by 147, making it technically buildable.

But um 801 South Wilbur Street is um a house that sits right next to it, and um it's it's essentially right on the property property line because of that, and because also because Harbor Brook flows underneath that site, it's not a likely candidate for new construction.

Excuse me.

Uh New Linda Garcia owns 114 Amy Street that's up behind this property.

Uh she it's a two-family, she lives upstairs and runs a daycare center out of her apartment.

Her mother lives downstairs.

Um she also owns the vacant lot at 619 Seymour Street, which is in the floodplain.

She'd like to fence all three properties in for the use of the daycare center.

Thank you.

Questions for the applicant?

Yeah, I've been looking at the maps, and it's kind of hard to tell looking at Google and also the other maps, but it does look like uh the property line between 801 Wilbur and uh 621 Seymour.

It it looks like there's some like it's over.

Yeah.

It was over, and there was um they started building a garage or something.

It it fell down.

It's not there anymore.

Okay.

So it's not there anymore, so there's nothing that needs to be demolished.

Not there anymore.

Yeah, okay.

Thank you.

Further questions?

No, that okay, thank you.

Are there individuals who would like to speak in favor of this application?

If so, please come to the podium.

Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application, please come forward?

Well, we have no speakers.

We'll close public comment and turn our attention to the seeker review for this.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF part one prepared it by the applicant and contained in your packet?

Yes.

Yes.

Has everyone reviewed the EAF part two prepared?

Uh also contained in your packet?

Yes.

Does anyone believe the proposed action will have a moderate to large impact under seeker?

Having determined there are no moderate to large impacts.

I recommend that the commission make a negative declaration and complete the EAF part three accordingly.

Thank you.

Is there a seeker motion to that effect?

Make a motion to uh issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Discussion on the seeker motion.

If not, all in favor of the motion before us, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions.

The secret motion carries, and we can move now to action on the resubdivision for R2535.

Is there a motion for action on this?

Make a motion to approve R-25-35 as presented with one condition beyond the general conditions, that being to uh uh to make sure that the resubdivision map is filed with the county clerk within 62 days of approval.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Thank you.

Discussion on the resubdivision motion before us.

If there's no discussion, all in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

R 2535 is approved.

We move to another new application.

Next up is uh major site plan review.

This is the Mispa Tower Renovation, MASPR-24-40 at 350 Montgomery Street and Jefferson Street.

Owner Tom Sirio and applicant uh with him uh architect Michael Frasino.

This is in the MX5 zone district.

Afternoon.

Evening this morning.

Michael Forsena, 4531, Holly Shireway.

So the project as proposed is obviously existing six-story structure, Mitzma Towers.

Third floor, fourth floor, fifth floor, and then the upper floor is one apartment.

Which is going to be leased to a tenant.

That is a how do I describe it?

It's a um restaurant bar um event space.

Um making it accessible, adding accessible toilets, uh prep kitchen off the side there, and then there's also uh law office on the second floor.

So turning the building from nothing to mixed use apartments, event space office.

Thank you.

Are there questions for the applicant concerning this project?

I think which is being renovated.

So you're planning to have performances, entertainment there.

So the current first floor is uh sloped, non-conforming slope to um ADA requirements.

It's like an inch and a half, plus or minus because it was cast in place.

Um so the plan is to infill that sloped floor to make it completely level with the entry point, which actually makes it level with where the stage area is.

Um at this point, I'm not sh aware of any performances that he's planning on having in there as far as I'm my understanding is it's going to be a restaurant slash bar area.

Right, more of a self-serve wine place.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

Um also wondering, I was just a little bit surprised on the upper floors with the residential units, the number of units.

I haven't been in the building, so they're large.

They're not covering the whole floor plan, or are they covering the whole floor?

Because I understand that uh once you get up to the third floor, the uh footprint is smaller than on the first and second floor.

So I was just curious about that.

Yeah, the um there's there's kind of two sides of the building on the Montgomery Street side, the upper floors wrap around the uh sanctuary.

Right.

Um so those apartments on that side of the building wrap around it, which is why it looks like it doesn't cover the whole floor plate.

There is no floor plate in the center.

You can see it down to the roof of the sanctuary.

On the far side, which would be the north side of the building, um, it does cover the whole floor plate.

So it goes third floor, fourth floor, fifth floor, sixth floor, but the sixth floor portion is only part of the one larger apartment on the top floor.

The other three are independent apartments.

Right.

Right.

Okay, great.

Thanks.

Uh the other question I have is there's a requirement for uh eight uh bike storage places.

I'm not I wasn't able to tell exactly where they are.

Is it gonna be a locker on the first floor or no?

We have we have um we have storage on the first floor, and then we have storage on each floor uh outside of the apartments.

Yeah, thank you.

First floor lobby area, and then at outside each apartment.

I sent that, I think I sent that over prior to this meeting.

A week ago, week and a half ago.

Further questions?

Well okay.

Um so you've had visits with us and with the landmark preservation board.

Um so commending you for going back and forth and keeping up with the wishes and and goals here.

Um I see in the plans, there's work to do restoration on a back wall.

Say that again.

Right restoration on a back wall of the building.

Brick restoration restoration.

Uh I don't have anything called for for brick restoration on the back of the building.

One of the illustrations, unless it's been done already.

Hmm.

Yeah between the Y and uh oh on the so the the alley side, you're talking about the exterior, right?

Yeah, we we have uh this was a few years ago.

We got approval to put in a um uh fire escape.

Okay, and I guess I see that they're yeah, that's already done, right?

Yeah, that's that's that was done 22 2022.

The picture and references on page 122.

Okay, and I guess I see that there's yeah that's already done right plans the for fire escapes on each side yeah that's that's that was done 22 2022 the the picture and references on page 122 that's that's from the structural conditions report that we did in 2020 prior to the um the work being done so that's been taken care of that's all done okay and then the agreements on two different replacement doors and windows have all been worked out yeah we have LPV approval on that okay just bringing you forward from 2022 to 2025 I understand it takes all it's a process yeah takes us all a minute to remember that yes no we we received LPB approval on the rest of the exterior a couple weeks ago okay thank you yep additional questions uh yeah so I guess following up on the brick restoration project which has already been done because there's a reference in the staff analysis under the conditions to sidewalks and brick band branding uh areas that must be brought into compliance I assume the brick branding areas is that referring to the restoration work or is that lower work on the that was a question that I actually had um so Amber reached out to DPW that was a question directly from them a comment directly from them they just wanted us to put a note on our site plan stating that if we did damage any of the exterior sidewalks or brick banding that we would replace it during construction okay but there isn't anything there that needs to be replaced currently they just wanted to cover us just in case yeah okay so that's that's during construction during construction yep great thank you any other questions no okay thank you are there individuals wishing to speak in favor of this application if so please come forward to offer your comments at the podium anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application please come forward I don't see anyone rising to speak so we will close public comment for this application and first turn our attention to our seeker review has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF part one prepared by the applicant and contained in your packet yes has everyone reviewed the EAF part two also contained in your packet yes does anyone believe the proposed action will have a moderate to large impact under seeker no having determined there are no moderate to large impacts I recommend that the commission make a negative declaration and complete the EAF part three accordingly thank you is there such a motion make a motion to issue a negative secret declaration second oath discussion on the seeker motion before us if not all in favor please indicate by saying aye aye those opposed please say nay any abstentions seeker motion is approved and we may now proceed to act upon the major site plan review for this application MASPR 2440 is there a motion make a motion approve MASPR dash 24-40 with seven special conditions beyond the general conditions uh the seven special conditions are as follows the first is any uh future exterior modifications to the building facade etc shall be reviewed and approved by the landmark preservation board as you're well aware of the process and you've been through multiple times now thank you uh two should the property owner uh propose any changes to uh commercial tenancy or the addition of dwelling units as part of future development such modifications will be subject to the zoning review process and require approval in accordance with uh application requirements the three as we have discussed uh the recommendation that if during construction there's any damage to these sidewalks and the brick branding areas that they must be repaired uh four is any future phase of the project shall not disturb the city of Syracuse right away uh and specifically specifically with respect to the marker located in the sidewalk which the city is very uh interested in maintaining that five application applicant shall incorporate interior bike storage accommodation one space per eight dwelling units as we discussed um and six application applicant shall obtain all required licenses and permits prior to commencement of any alcohol sales or premises prior to uh provision for live entertainment that's so it's life live entertainment license as well as a liquor license if there is to be any live entertainment and seven applicant shall adhere to the conditions of approval for the certificate of compliance appropriateness appropriateness thank you thank you is there a second second discussion on this motion for major site plan review if there's no discussion all in favor of this motion please indicate by saying aye aye those opposed please say nay any abstentions the major site plan review for MASPR 2440 is approved thank you

Second discussion on this motion for major site plan review.

If there's no discussion, all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

The major site plan review for MASPR 2440 is approved.

Thank you.

Yes, uh, this is the last new business item on the agenda.

This is titled the East Brighton Ave Battery Energy Storage System Project.

It includes three applications, a resubdivision, R-25-4-1, special use permit, SP-25-2-4.

That's to um put this under a um a major utility land use and last a major site plan review.

Uh, all this is located at 426 East Brighton Ave, owned uh by Joseph Tessor Tesario of Cranesville Block Co.

LLC.

Uh applicant and representative Terrence Nolan of New Leaf Energy and Adam Fischell of Marathon Engineering.

This is in the CM Zone District.

Thank you.

Is the applicant here?

Good evening.

Hello.

Uh my name is Terrence Nolan.

I'm with New Leaf Energy.

Our offices are at 433 River Street in Troy.

Um, as noted, the application is for 426 East Brighton.

Um with me is Adam Fischel, our civil engineer, uh Caitlin Enger, who is uh also an engineer, and then Adam uh Jakobowski, who works for a firm called ESRG, which is an um fire safety and battery safety uh group uh that has developed a uh a safety plan for the project.

Um so we were just going to begin with a brief um summary of the project and then um after the civil um kind of uh piece I can also talk about the interconnection piece and why it's important for grid reliability and for um offsetting the need for peaker plants which are also during peak demand.

But I'll introduce Adam uh at this moment if that's okay.

That's good.

Thank you, Terrence.

Uh Adam Fischel, Marathon Engineering, we're the civil engineer for the project.

Um we are looking at the resubdivision map currently.

Are you driving?

Can you go to the site planes, Ethan?

Please um.

So currently the the while the site plan is being brought up.

We're looking to separate the current 0.9 acre lot into two lots.

The front lot will be about a half acre, and the back lot will be uh close to 0.7 and change, and that'll house and allow the two the two five megawatt battery energy storage sites to be located on the current parcel.

Do you do while they're doing that?

Just the the need for the resubdivision is dictated by the regulations.

Is that right?

In terms of accessing sensors.

Uh the battery storage, uh, we have to have two separate interconnection systems for each site, uh, two separate tax ID numbers for each facility, and sometimes in other municipalities, we can go through a process called a courtesy subdivision, where not actually creating a physical deeded lot, but uh essentially a lease parcel, if you will.

But here, understanding the city of Syracuse's regulations, we would have to physically split the lot into two separate lots.

So that's what we're doing here.

So here you can see on the site plan uh the front.

Oh, my pointer's not working.

We got the front site, which is um on the lot one, and then the rear site, which is on site two, that essentially creates an L around uh the front lot, and we have a paved access road coming off of Brighton Avenue with a new curb cut uh just due north of the existing rather wide curb cut.

And going through some initial review with the city staff.

Our first, our first in middle uh was a graveled uh gravel driveway, and you folks came back and said we have to have a paved.

So we're we're proposing it to be paved here in this situation.

We have a eight eight-foot tall security fence around both uh facilities with a gated lockable access, and two separate rows of interconnection poles that consist of one, two, three, four, five, six, seven poles each.

I'll let Terrence go into some detail there in a minute.

Um, as part of the site plan, we're also doing some right-of-way improvements, primarily because um on the you know, deuce page south of the new driveway.

We have the larger shaded area there that was the old driveway.

We are proposing to remove that, restore the curbing and the roadway, restore the sidewalk and so on in front of the project site.

We are not proposing any drainage improvements.

I know we got some comments from city engineering speaking to that, so we'll follow up with city engineering on those items specifically.

There are also some requests from City Parks uh department about as adding a couple of trees along the front edge.

We'll go back and review what the electrical team as to whether or not we can add those two trees along the front edge just due to separation concerns we might have with combustible material near near the facility.

So that might be something we go back to the parks department and ask.

Hey, we'll we'll purchase the two trees, but could we put them in a different spot on the road front edge or something like that?

Um right now we're not proposing any water improvements.

There is a fire hydrant due south at the southeast corner of the project site there.

So we understand that we have to coordinate with the local fire department to you know confirm fire department access.

They had a couple of questions on water uh fire protection facilities, hydrant location, and that kind of thing.

So we'll certainly be circling back with the fire department on those those items.

As far as um touched on stormwater, we're not adding any new stormwater improvements, but to uh balance the little bit of tree clearing and brush clearing that we have along the south side, right there where the cursor is.

We are proposing to convert a portion of the surface within the parcel to be lawn.

Um I'm not sure if anybody here is driven by the parcel, but most of it is um either broken up concrete or impervious cover or a gravel surface.

So here we're looking to restore some of that and convert it to a lawn, a lawn uh surface cover to help offset that slight increase in impervious cover.

Uh so in essence, you'll add you'll have no net change in uh the ground cover types here.

So again, no change in stormwater runoff, really no need in my opinion for any stormwater infrastructure.

But again, we'll go back through and coordinate that with uh city engineering.

Um short of the site plan, Terrence.

You want to touch on the interconnection and some of the facility features?

Yeah, I think I just might be useful just for one minute to talk about the the reason for the batteries in terms of how they fit within the NICERTA incentivized programs and how it may benefit the city, how it will benefit the city.

So, as you know, there's an adjacent um, well, you may not know, but there is an adjacent substation um just to the south, uh, which is managed by National Grid.

That we believe is a sub-transmission substation, and then further south there's a distribution substation.

And what these batteries are doing is during the the hottest months of the year when there's peak demand in um in the city for uh energy.

What's typically happening now is that these large fossil fuel plants, one I believe is located to the south of the lake, and then there's another one just further east, they turn on during those time periods to account and cover for that demand.

They're generally older, less efficient power plants that are set aside for that purpose.

These batteries have the capacity each to power approximately three to 3,500 homes each.

So they have a lot of power, they're five megawatts.

They have the power to they have the ability to do that for a four-hour period.

They can be turned on and turned off, kind of dispatchable at um through software controls.

They will charge at night uh essentially during the night, whatever the energy mix is in the grid, which is gonna be a mixture of hydro and wind and natural gas, so that during the day when they're most needed, that's when they're they're able to be turned on.

So NICERTA has announced an incentive uh as part of the governor's um clean energy initiative to incentivize about 750 megawatts of batteries like these in upstate New York and another 750 megawatts in down in New York City, all for this grid resiliency purpose that it is a local source of grid resilience, so that it reduces the likelihood of brownouts and blackouts and other issues that happen with the electrical grid as demand increases.

Um city like the size of Syracuse, you know, from a from a planning perspective, um appropriate to have um some of these batteries in strategically located places near substations.

This particular substation has capacity.

We've received a study from uh from National Grid, which indicates that we can connect.

Um so, in addition to essentially, and we will be doing some upgrades to the substation uh as part of the project.

So we we will be making a financial contribution to national grid.

They're gonna be upgrading their safety equipment at the substation.

Another important point, um, these batteries are going to include um the recommendations that have been uh proposed to the uniform fire code, but not yet fully adopted.

These batteries will include those recommendations, which my colleague Adam can talk about if questions arise regarding that.

But that will include a 24-7 off-site monitoring through a battery battery monitoring system.

Um we've um come up with an emergency response plan, which the fire department has had a chance to well receive, not given their fully comments yet, but we're gonna be working with them.

Um there are a number of other recommendations in terms of how to keep these safe.

Um, and the technology is actually significantly improved in that regard.

Um so looking at it from the point of view of location and uh how it may serve customers, location, it's not adjacent to res a residential area.

Um it's near existing electrical infrastructure.

Um the last piece is that it will offer the actual energy that is generated off of the batteries will be batched with other local generation by national grid and offered at a discount to low and middle income subscribers of between six and ten percent.

So that the battery, so that the actual energy that's being produced is gonna be cheaper than what would otherwise be charged for that certain that energy during the that time of day.

So again, um, in terms of the citywide, New Leaf is interested in and we've had a um very helpful relationship with the codes department in terms of figuring out how to shape this application.

We've been permitting batteries in New York City for the last five years and have developed the standards with the fire department of New York and Adam's firm from a safety perspective.

And so we're looking to just be as proactive and transparent with the city of Syracuse as we can be about where it's appropriate for this type of infrastructure.

And when we look at this site, which is currently being leased as a container space, um, we think it's a good site, it's not adjacent to residential area, fits within the adjacent kind of electrical infrastructure.

Um it'll we will work to improve the visible, you know, the visual uh and visibility of the of the of the project as as Adam indicated.

Um and um I've also uh reached out to the neighbor uh to the north.

Uh and he and I are gonna hopefully meet uh tomorrow if if possible to talk about um sort of uh that that's he's the only neighbor that has um expressed some you know concern about questions about the project when our ward went up as required.

So we he and I are in conversation and uh I believe we'll have an opportunity to work with with him as well.

So that's a that's a summary, but the that if there are questions, um we have our experts here uh who can answer them.

The regulations that you said hadn't been fully adopted yet.

Are those state regulations, federal regulations, or someone else's regulations?

Adam to address that question.

Council members, Adam Jacobowski, Energy Safety Response Group.

Those are state regulations.

So fire code or New York State.

They are scheduled to go in place on January 1st.

And they they sort of put together a working group with a lot of fire safety experts, and they are the ones who proposed these new codes, and they were all adopted, and starting January 1 of next year, they're all going to then be regulation.

So they're the same regulations that would have governed the project if you had say a six-month, if you were here six months later than today.

Correct.

Okay.

But you're every project going forward from those regulations for this project now in advance of when they would normally take effect.

Yes.

And um, I guess they haven't been finalized, have they been approved to take effect?

They have great.

So the answer is yes.

Makes sense.

Thank you.

Just to um to clarify it though, that it's I'm glad to hear that they're they're gonna do that.

Um technically, an application that comes in before January 1st is under the 2020 version of the New York State Uniform Code.

From what I'm hearing, they're electing to uh adhere to the the new standards that will be official January 1.

But technically any building permit application received prior to January 1 is under the stupid version.

Um we had an update um, I think it was in 2015, uh, the last code cycle, um, where they kind of had an open window where you could go either or and then they had a hard cutoff.

So it's unusual, but um New York State and the Code Council, they're trying to uh have more updated code to keep up with changes and innovations and building materials and and different design concepts.

So it's a big change, but uh I know this is one of them, and it's it's good to hear that you're you're you're doing that, and I know our fire department and our deputy chief of fire prevention and his staff uh are gonna work closely with them on all these details um you know before any building permits are are issued, and among those details would be what I just saw was the um uh turnaround provide provision for a turnaround at the end of your access road, right?

So those specifics will be worked out.

Yep, that will be part of the site work okay uh permit application and making sure that um our our fire department has you know proper um access from the firehouse to respond to this and um proper provisions to pull in and fight a fire and and then also get the equipment out too.

Those trucks are expensive, yeah.

Should we do anything specific to acknowledge the uh adherence to the January 2026 codes rather than the existing codes or um if you want to, you can I don't know that we need to well if we don't need to, then we shouldn't.

We don't need to waste any words, yeah.

Um but the the comments from fire prevention, this they're working with them currently that will be understood in the conditions of the continued collaboration is conditioned for um yeah, so I guess I think I have two other questions.

First of all, I'm just curious about the ownership.

So is is lot two going to be leased by new leaf lease or owned by new leaf?

We uh we have a 25-year lease release for for each of yes, right.

Um and I I was curious, is the uh delivering electricity back to the grid.

Is that going to be turned on automatically, or is there somebody sitting in a monitor somewhere who does that?

That's an interesting question.

Um the um so that the NISO, which is the wholesaler that delivers electricity throughout the region forecasts when peak load is likely to happen.

And so when we look typically it'll be in the afternoon sometime in the middle of August or something like that, and we will uh we will almost certainly be dispatching the energy during that time frame.

Um interconnection agreement with National Grid permits us to charge between 10 p.m.

and 2 p.m.

and discharge between 2 p.m.

and 10 p.m.

And the discharge, and typically it comes in the afternoon.

So the end that that's a long answer to your question.

The the short answer is that they will continue, they will be continually um dispatched during the the hotter months of the year, likely during air at times of peak demand remotely by virtue of software from those nice NISO.

So when we see that there's gonna be a lot of demand, we can dispatch the battery.

Great.

Thank you.

Yeah.

I guess the only other question I have is just probative before we do the seeker.

Uh there are some trees that you're removing, but there's not a lot, right?

Right.

Okay.

I was just kind of curious because we have our friend the Indiana uh bat and northern long ear back that are in that area, but there's not enough trees that you have to worry about that.

Is that been mentioned at all?

Well, yeah, I'll let you answer that.

We provided some documentation in the packet that spoke to that.

Oh, that um it either is a closed out issue or our consultant is coordinating with the respective agency DEC and U.S.

Fish Wildlife to evaluate whether there actually would any it be any impacts there or not.

We are we are doing our due diligence on that front.

Okay, thank you.

I mean, generally the issue with the the bats is you can't remove trees from November to March.

Thank you.

Can I ask a quick I just want to ask a quick question on the potential screening on Brighton Avenue?

So the current curb cut is gonna go back to curbing.

Uh conforming curbing and walkway.

Yep, right.

And the new curb cut is now how wide?

I can't remember.

The driveway here is 20 feet wide itself.

Okay, okay.

So it'll be you know, this radiated area that's that was the old one?

That's that's the extent of the old curbs.

It's the reduction of it.

All right.

So my question on the screening for Brighton is I like the idea that you're gonna put some green along the front there and the side, so that visually when I'm driving by or walking by, it's less.

What is that?

Um and I do appreciate the response in terms of combustible material, but in working with the fire chiefs, I guess I would ask if they are in agreement that there is something that can be planted where that curb is being removed to again just break up the uh what is that factor?

Um I hope that you would be open to that conversation.

I the fire is gonna go way ahead of my visual concerns, obviously.

Yeah, I think as it should.

Sure.

I think there's a few different ways we could consider screening it.

I would prefer to go the vegetative row if we can.

Yeah.

Um, you know, we've done a fair amount of solar across New York State and you know now we're starting to get into battery.

You want the any kind of combustible a certain distance typically is 10 feet from a fence line, be it the the perimeter fence for the facilities.

So we could look at you know how much space does that leave.

Could we push the tree between that no-go zone and the back of sidewalk, if you will, on Brighton Ap to maybe put in a couple of trees, and if it's not enough room for a trees, could we put um a hedgerow of some taller, taller, you know uh seasonal color shrubs or something like that or that are kind of fast growing to kind of break up that visual to get to your point there?

Yeah, I think there's a few different ways we could look at that.

Okay, I'll just confirm that we would do that.

That's great.

Thank you.

I have one last question.

What's the nature of the business for your neighbor immediately to the north that you're gonna have a conversation with in the near future?

What type of business is that?

I believe it's ST foreign auto sell automobiles.

So we've already talked.

I can't remember the order of businesses up there.

Yes, yes.

So I think that um based on the conversation that I had this afternoon, where there was an initial concern that I sense that there's an ability to work something out with him.

That's my sense.

Okay, thank you.

Any further questions?

So I guess the question I have a question for Jake.

Um, we just got a request by the fourth district common counselor, who is the representative for your area, that we hold action on this tonight as she would like to ensure or lead.

I'm not quite sure which, Jake.

Um, some community discussion or community engagement around the site, the project, etc.

I mean, I'm not opposed to that.

I'm assuming that from your perspective time-wise, that's not a fatal uh uh flaw.

Yep.

Sure.

Yeah, thank you.

I am I'm familiar with that request, and um, in fact, I've reached out to both um council uh member Petrona Jones and Council Member Williams, because it's the adjacent district.

That's right.

And I've submitted a request uh to TNT for a um presentation for uh Valley and Eastwood.

Um so in so we're very because the the there's the there's the science and the engineering, then there's the perception, and so it's important that the community understand what these are and what they serve.

And the reason I'm wanted to just let you know that my understanding is that in the event that the planning commission takes action that there would then be a subsequent referral to the uh common council.

And so we're certainly not approved.

Um, and then obviously there's the building permit and all the rather requirements are which are conditions.

So the request I made with to the um common council member would be could we take the time frame between this body and the common council to do a uh sort of a formal outreach?

And I I guess I had reached out to her as much as maybe two months ago about all this.

So I haven't heard back from her on that.

Um I think uh having the commission rule on the site plan and and on Seeker, um, but then subject to the final approval that would be necessary would then create the space for us to now have the car serious conversations with the community about this, and if there are additional improvements that happen as a result of that, then you know we're very open to them.

So that's that's sort of the hope here.

So the the resubdivision and the master plan review, we would approve, but the special use permit is a recommendation to the common council.

So they have final decision on the special use permit.

Correct.

And I sense that I'll have to make sure we satisfy her concerns before then and as well as the um Corey uh Corey Williams, the other council member.

That would be um my recommendation to the board is um and I think we can even put it in as a condition that you know they make a good faith effort to um continue to coordinate with uh counselor Jones Rouser and and do this outreach.

Um but you know, to to his point, she can also hold the special use permit item before council until that's satisfied.

So uh I think we've met um the the requirements of of the zoning code.

I think we've appropriately um, you know, we've we public notice this.

Um I don't believe anybody is in attendance uh to comment uh on it.

Um this is the only written correspondence we've received.

Um so uh you know I think moving forward we can put that in as potentially as a condition if if you choose, um move it forward knowing that uh we can make this happen and uh ultimately the council um can hold it as long as they wish not to put it on them.

I'm not saying that that's what we need to do.

I I think they're gonna make that happen and address the concerns of the community.

Um when that's done, I think councillor Jones Rouser will allow the item to go forward.

So for the uh the recommendation for the resub or the application for the resub, then we would make as a condition that resubit is contingent upon approval of the special use permit uh by the city.

Because normally we don't do that for a resub.

I'm thinking in terms of the 62-day clock, that would start if it's contingent upon special use permit, then that 60-day clock would start after special use permit is approved by common council, correct?

Yeah, I I think we could do that because ultimately let's say it didn't go through.

I don't think they'd want to do the resubdivision, right?

Um I'm not saying that's gonna happen, but um all interested parties may want to wait till that point anyway to move things forward on the right.

We can bring the resub back.

I don't know, and I also don't know that we need to do that because the resubdivision can really be something that's outside of you know land use approval, like they have a right to do a resubdivision regardless if they were gonna do this project or not.

I think we can act on it, but uh you know um if you want to put that condition in, I don't I don't see an issue with that.

Okay, so question on the 62 62 day clock.

Is there a way to take that out of there or is that a city statute that it has two?

Yeah, 62 years.

That's the counting.

So that's the actual filing of your resub map.

Right.

If you don't file it within 62 days there, they don't consider it.

Believe it or not, people do forget to do that.

Right.

Yeah, that's what I'm getting at.

In the middle of trying to do a project.

So do a project, or is other other things outside our our control that may delay us from actually being able to pull that trigger?

Um is there a way to come back and have that clock re-established or reset?

Well, that's what uh commissioner Lentz was saying is that have the condition go in that um once common council formally approves the special use permit, which would be at least uh a few weeks from now, sure.

Um, that that's when the clock would start, giving you the maximum time.

Not not tonight.

Yeah, it wouldn't start tonight.

Okay.

And we all just hope it'll get on common council agenda quickly.

Yeah, I think I've asked for the presentation opportunity from TNT as soon as possible, and hopefully that'll be in the next few weeks.

I'll bring the same team okay.

Further questions for the team of applicants.

From the commission members.

No, nothing else.

In that case, uh are there any individuals who would like to speak in favor of this application, please come forward to do so.

Providing your name, address, and comments.

Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application, please come forward to do that.

See no one rising to speak uh in either category.

So we'll close public comment and we can address our seeker review uh before proceeding to the three components of this application.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EAF part one prepared by the applicant and contained in your packet?

Yes.

Has everyone reviewed the EAF part two also contained in your packet?

Yes.

Does anyone believe the proposed action will have a moderate to large impact under seeker?

No.

No.

Okay.

Having determined there are no moderate to large impacts.

I recommend that the commission make a negative declaration and complete the EAF part three accordingly.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to that effect?

Make a motion to uh issue a negative secret declaration.

Thank you.

Second.

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion on the seeker motion before us.

Excuse me.

If there's no discussion, and if I don't choke, uh all those in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Our seeker motion carries.

And we can now proceed, I think first to the resubdivision R 2541.

Is there a motion for action on this?

Make a motion to approve R 25-41 with one special condition beyond the general conditions.

That special condition being the applicant shall successfully file the resubdivision map and the proposed easement uh agreement uh with the on dog county clerk's office within 62 days after the common council approves the special use permit.

Thank you.

And a second second discussion on the resubdivision motion.

Just a note for the record.

The conditions set forth by the planning commission, as well as on the discussion on the record that the applicant is speaking with a neighbor and will be speaking to the uh neighborhood groups and the uh district common counselors that are all uh stakeholders in this action.

So those things will happen before the common council meeting.

I think our motion encompasses all the all the plans that are gonna have to fall together for this to work out.

Any further discussion?

If not, all in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

So this resubdivision is approved for the conditions noted.

We move to the special use permit, which is SP 2524.

Is there a motion here?

Make a motion to approve SP-25-24 as presented with a recommendation to the common council to uh affirm our approval of the uh application.

And beyond the uh general conditions, there's one special condition which is to continue collaborate with the city departments, uh the fire department, the county, and all other relevant parties with respect to safety concerns, etc.

Second.

Second.

Thanks.

Discussion on this motion for the special use permit.

If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

So this will move on to the common council for their final action.

And we consider now the major site plan review, MASPR 2518.

Is there a motion for action on this?

Motion to approve MASPR-25-18 as presented with uh one special condition beyond a general conditions, that being as before with the special use permit, continue collaboration with the uh city departments, the fire department, and all relevant agencies with respect to safety concerns and other issues related to the site.

Thank you.

A second second.

Thank you.

Discussion on the motion for the major site plan review.

There's no discussion.

All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

So that too is approved with the conditions noted.

So we've done as much as we can do on this application for tonight, but you're not to the finish line quite yet.

Signing project.

Okay, thank you.

Uh that's all our application, but we have some other items to consider tonight.

Yes, two uh under other business, they're both three mile limits.

First up is uh in the town of Clay, 3S 25 11, 5004 and 5008 West HAF Road.

Nathan Hunter of Northern Credit Union is the owner applicant.

Uh we have city engineers approval.

Great.

Uh that's what we'd like to hear.

Is there a motion for action on this?

No objections from city departments.

I uh recommend approval of 3s 25 11 as presented.

Thank you.

A second.

Thank you.

Discussion on this motion for the three mile limit case in clay.

If not, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

3S2511 is approved.

And we have one more in a different town.

Yes, last one uh in the town of Camillas, 3S 25-12.

This is at Airport Road, uh, and 3652 Armstrong Road and 3758 Armstrong Road.

Uh owner applicant is Honeywell International and uh represented by Barclay Damon.

Uh we also have the city engineers approval.

Excellent.

Any questions or discussion on this?

If not, is there a motion for action on 3S 2512?

With no no concerns raised by city departments.

I uh move approval of 3S-25-12 as presented.

Thank you.

Second.

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion on this motion for the three mile limit in Camillas.

If there's no discussion, all in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

3S2512 is approved.

Anything else to come before us tonight?

Okay, a motion to adjourn would be in order.

So discussion.

We didn't quite meet our 55 minute record uh two meetings again.

We're close, though.

Opposed.

We are adjourned until the 20.