Syracuse Planning Commission Meeting – October 20, 2025: Multiple Project Approvals and Deferrals
Syracuse Planning Commission Meeting – October 20, 2025
The Syracuse Planning Commission met on October 20, 2025, to consider a full agenda of planning applications, including amendments to prior approvals, special use permits, resubdivisions, and major site plan reviews. The meeting featured extensive public comment and several items were held to allow for further community engagement and resolution of outstanding issues.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes: Approval of minutes from the September 8, 2025 meeting (unanimous).
- Three-Mile Limit Cases: Seven three-mile limit cases were approved on consent: 3S-25-13 (Town of DeWitt), 3S-25-14 and 3S-25-15 (Town of Onondaga), 3S-25-16 (Town of Onondaga), 3S-25-17 (Town of Geddes), 3S-25-18 (Town of DeWitt), and 3S-25-19 (Town of Geddes). All had city engineer approval and passed unanimously.
Syracuse Developmental Center (SDC) Project – Amendments to Previous Approval
- Applicant: Brody Smith of Bond, Schoeneck & King, representing Albany's Group, for the former Syracuse Developmental Center at 800 and 802 South Wilbur Avenue.
- Issues Addressed:
- Crossing of Approvals: Clarified that defaults on one portion (townhomes vs. apartments) would not affect the other.
- Construction Deadline: Extended from 12 months to 42 months from the May 5, 2025 approval date.
- Permanent Affordability: The commission agreed to defer the affordability duration issue to the Common Council, with applicant allowed to return if not resolved. The redline proposed matching the 30-year HFA agreement.
- Public Comment: None.
- Motion: To accept the redline changes and incorporate them into a revised resolution.
- Vote: Approved unanimously (ayes all).
Special Use Permit SP-24-27 – Automobile Repair Light (2564-70 Erie Boulevard East)
- Applicant: Ray Bartolai, representing Biggie Tyron Automotive Service Centers and ETK Junior Realty. Request to change from automotive heavy to light repair.
- Public Comment: None.
- SEQR: Negative declaration adopted unanimously.
- Motion: To approve with seven special conditions (including sheet flow control, asphalt restoration to grass, fixed vertical objects, no outside storage, etc.).
- Vote: Approved unanimously as a recommendation to the Common Council.
SDC Project – Resubdivision and Street Dedication
- Applicant: Same as above. Proposed 32 new lots from two existing lots, plus two new public streets. One street renamed to Helen D. Hudson Boulevard.
- Public Comment: None.
- Resubdivision (R-25-05-M1): Approved with one special condition (refiling after street dedication approval). Unanimous.
- Street Dedication (SD-2025-01): Approved with no conditions and recommended to Common Council. Unanimous.
Smart Greenhouse Manufacturing Plant – Special Use Permit and Resubdivision (2956-2960-2964 East Genesee Street)
- Applicant: Ashok Bose, CEO of Sustainable Energy and Agriculture Technology (ACAT). Proposed a 50x50 foot two-story greenhouse manufacturing facility on three vacant lots in an MX-2 zone.
- Public Comment: Several neighbors and a representative of an adjacent apartment complex spoke in opposition, citing concerns about manufacturing in a residential area, traffic, school safety, noise, truck deliveries, retaining walls, and aesthetics. The Greater Syracuse Land Bank spoke in favor.
- Applicant Response: Addressed concerns about storage (just-in-time), truck traffic (one unit per day), and school loading times. Had not previously met with neighbors.
- Commission Action: Held the applications, directing the applicant to engage in dialogue with neighbors on traffic, landscaping, retaining walls, and foliage, and to check with staff on SEQR issues. No vote taken; item to return after further discussion.
Cathedral Candle Company PDD Expansion (Master Plan Review, Zoning Map Amendment, District Plan Amendment)
- Applicant: Brad Hunt of McKenzie Hughes, representing Cathedral Candle Company. Proposal to add four parcels to the existing PDD to enable a larger warehouse and manufacturing area, consolidating operations and reducing truck traffic.
- Public Comment: Councilor Martin Ave spoke in favor, citing support for local business and reduced noise on neighborhood streets. No opposition.
- SEQR: Staff presented a detailed review of 18 impact categories, recommending a negative declaration. The commission unanimously agreed with the staff recommendations and issued a negative declaration.
- Master Plan Review (MASPR-25-22): Approved with three special conditions (obtain zoning map amendment and district plan amendment approvals, obtain necessary city approvals before construction, continue working with city departments). Unanimous.
- Zoning Map Amendment (Z-2911): Approved as a recommendation to the Common Council with two special conditions. Unanimous.
- District Plan Amendment (Z-2910): Approved as a recommendation to the Common Council with two special conditions. Unanimous.
Onondaga Hotel and Convention Center – Major Site Plan Review and Resubdivision (South Warren Street and East Fayette Street)
- Applicant: Brian Bouchard of CHA Consulting and Dave Newman of Syracuse Lodging Associates. Proposed a new 10-story, 248-room hotel with 321 parking spaces, 26,000 square feet of convention/banquet/restaurant space, and retail on the corner.
- Public Comment:
- In Favor: Kevin Schwab of CenterState CEO highlighted the need for hotel rooms, economic impact ($87M investment, 330 construction jobs, 50 permanent jobs). The YMCA expressed support after productive discussions with the developer.
- Opposition: William Pitcher of St. Paul's Church raised concerns about a data cable running through the existing garage that provides all church communications, and easement issues. Frederick Davies, owner of the Lafayette building, opposed citing loss of light/air, traffic congestion from garage exit, noise, and lack of prior communication from the developer. The church's attorney requested time to resolve issues.
- Applicant Response: Addressed outreach efforts, noted traffic study and SEQR completion, and argued many concerns are private property matters outside the commission’s purview.
- Commission Action: Held both the resubdivision and major site plan review for three weeks, directing the applicant to engage in good-faith discussions with St. Paul's Church, the Lafayette building owner, and other neighbors. No vote taken.
Parkside Commons Apartment Project – Major Site Plan Review (East Fayette Street and Westmoreland Avenue)
- Applicant: Andrew Burns of Pastor Associates, representing SAA EVI and BFC. Proposed 193 new apartments in two buildings (5-story and 3-story) with parking. The project aims to relocate tenants from an existing 193-unit property on the east side of the intersection, which would later be demolished.
- Public Comment: One speaker opposed, stating that tenants had no information about relocation, raised concerns about code violations and management practices, and argued a 5-story building does not fit the neighborhood. The applicant noted tenant events had occurred.
- SEQR: Staff presented a detailed review, recommending a negative declaration after addressing species impacts and traffic. The commission agreed and issued a negative declaration.
- Commission Action: Held the major site plan review, citing the need for a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) for building height (5 stories) and desire for additional community engagement. The commission directed the applicant to return after BZA action and further neighborhood outreach.
Special Use Permit SP-25-26 – Food and Beverage Retail (401 Pond Street)
- Applicant: Idris Ibrahim, owner of T&B Properties. Request to operate a food and beverage retail store (All American Market) with tobacco sales.
- Public Comment: None.
- Commission Discussion: Concerns raised about responses to SEPTED (police) and DPW recommendations. The applicant’s responses were seen as equivocal. Re: tobacco license, the applicant acknowledged he cannot obtain a city tobacco license due to proximity to other vendors. The commission requested a clear, itemized list of which recommendations the applicant agrees to.
- Commission Action: Held the application, directing the applicant to provide a clear yes/no response to each SEPTED and DPW recommendation, with photographic evidence of completed improvements within 90 days of any approval. Applicant to work with staff.
Key Outcomes
- SDC Amendments: Approved unanimously (crossing of approvals, 42-month deadline, affordability deferred).
- SP-24-27 (Auto Repair): Approved unanimously as recommendation to Common Council.
- SDC Resubdivision and Street Dedication: Both approved unanimously.
- Greenhouse Project: Held for applicant-neighbor dialogue.
- Cathedral Candle PDD Expansion: Master plan approved; zoning map and district plan amendments recommended to Common Council; all unanimous.
- Onondaga Hotel: Held for three weeks to allow developer to resolve private concerns.
- Parkside Commons: Held pending BZA variance and additional community outreach.
- SP-25-26 (401 Pond Street): Held for applicant to provide clear responses to recommendations.
- Three-Mile Limit Cases: All seven approved unanimously.
- Next Meeting: Scheduled for November 10, 2025.
Meeting Transcript
This meeting of the Syracuse Planning Commission. We will begin our public hearing schedule in just a moment after we've taken care of our minutes from the previous meeting. And those minutes have been distributed in advance to the commission members. Is there a motion for action on those minutes of our last meeting? Move approval on the minutes of September 8th, 2025. Thank you. Is there a second? Thank you. Discussion on the motion before us. If not, all in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? The minutes of the September eighth meeting are approved. We will begin the public hearing schedule of our meeting next, just by way of introduction for anyone unfamiliar with our process. As each application is announced, we ask that the applicant or the representative come to the podium in the center of the room, provide their name and address for the record, and then a summary of the application involved. Following any questions from the commission members, we will then open up the opportunity for members of the public to speak in favor of the application, and then similarly an opportunity for those who wish to speak in opposition to the application. We want to get through it all so no projects are held up and ask if you could confine your comments either way to about three minutes. That would be really helpful. We do.gov. Thank you. May I uh approach and share a document. Certainly. I'm an attorney at Bonshinick and King, and I represent the applicant, Albany's. The property at issue has two addresses, 800 South Wilbur and 802 South Wilbur. As was mentioned before, the project concerns the former Syracuse Developmental Center, which closed in 1998. That property has been vacant for some time and was rezoned PDD by the city recently in connection with this project. What we're here to discuss is the project plan review approval, which was granted this past May 5. That approval included as part of phase one three different components to the project. First, 27 townhomes. Secondly, two multi-dwelling buildings, apartment buildings that add up to 261 units. And then finally, associated uh commercial park space and parking. The request we're making here today is for amendments to that previous approval, which occurred on May 5th, in order to clarify certain provisions of the approval, which would be necessary for the project to go forward. So what I've handed to you is my letter. It's a summary. I want you to have the same thing in front of you that I have in front of me. It's a summary of the issues, and I won't read it at you, but I'll I'm gonna summarize the three issues, and um please interrupt me if you have any questions. First, the crossing of approvals. So this project can essentially be summarized. You've got the townhome portion of it, the 27 townhomes, and secondly, the 261 apartments and two buildings. These uh are all part of one approval, but they're really two separate construction schedules, two separate projects, there'll be two different um entities will finance each part of that, and there'll be different equity um members owning it. So a lot of capital in terms of uh both private money loans and then um uh public money too that go that is going into those into those projects. So um, in order we're coming very close to the beginning point for the construction of the apartment buildings, and we have to close on the financing imminently, and that'll be a different lender and equity member than for the townhome portion. So it's come up that uh some of the conditions, it's not clear from the wording that they may apply like a default um on one portion of the project would render um the other portion uh unfinanciable, right? They can't lend money if there's something they don't have control over that could cause a default or a removal of the project sign approval. So we have proposed behind my letter. I have a proposed red line of the resolution that clarifies that yes, all the conditions apply to every to all parts of the project, but any default on one would only affect that part, not the other, so that the uh the lenders can have that have that clarification. The second issue is the um construction. I'm gonna skip to the construction deadlines. The initial approval had a 12-month deadline.
openpublica.com