Board of zoning appeals meeting for December 18, 2025 is now in session.

The first order of business is to approve the minutes from the September 25th, 2025 meeting.

Is there a motion to approve the minutes?

Motion.

Is there a second to the motion?

I second.

Any modifications or discussion.

Hearing none, all in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposition?

No.

Abstentions?

No.

The minutes are officially adopted.

The board will now conduct the public hearing on today's agenda.

First, the applicant or the applicant's representative will state the reasons for the requested variants and present any material or documentation which is to be considered regarding the proposal.

Next, persons wishing to speak in favor of the proposal will be given the opportunity to address the board.

Then persons who wish to speak in opposition will be allowed to address the board.

Following the public hearings this afternoon, the board may make a decision on each application heard.

The board may also decide to hold its decision until the next public hearing.

Staff will now introduce the first application.

This is an R1 zone district.

Uh we have provided um color photographs of the uh apartment site, the streetscape, as well as the completed apartment.

Um we've also provided um site plans and floor plans as well as exterior building elevations.

I think that the unique part of this application was that it was my understanding is that it had already been presented and approved, um, and my client completed construction of the apartment.

However, the permits had since expired, um, and she was then informed that the apartment was not in compliance.

So we are seeking um final approval now and essentially uh sanctioning of this apartment that had been completed in reliance on the prior approvals.

Any questions from the uh do you know why the obviously you got the approval back in 2020?

Yeah, what took so long for renovations and yes.

Um and I my client is here too, they can probably speak um with more knowledge on the delays.

I believe that it was just construction delays, um, COVID, obviously.

Uh, and then um my client owns a number of properties in the uh Syracuse area, and those had uh took kind of more uh precedence over this project.

Okay.

Uh question to staff is the intent here is previously approved for 15 units.

This is just for the additional 14th unit that's been constructed.

They would have to come back if they were looking for the 15th apartment.

Um just to back up, like can you clarify?

Because um, based on our records, it seems permit was applied for but never picked up, but you mentioned construction was completed without a permit, without a building permit.

I believe a building permit was granted.

Yes.

I um well, uh our record show it was never picked up, therefore never obtained if you'd give me a minute.

I actually think I have a building permit in my file.

And I will say the original application was for one unit at 99 and one unit at 98, and only one unit was completed, which is why we're coming to you today asking for just that one completed unit to be approved.

You'll note also on page 31 of the staff report that there was a uh 12-month uh requirement that construction be completed within 12 months, and I believe the applicant got an extension in 2000.

What year was it, mate?

They were granted their last extension in 2013, but nothing's been sought since that time.

Um and I I do have this 2000 thirteen building permit.

That's for 98 McDougall.

That was the one that was completed.

When was it?

So the I mean, this is just a placard, right?

It doesn't uh Nate, was this just the issuance of a placard, so like it looks like you got it for 98, but this is this is for uh a different building.

98 McDougal.

Correct.

Um so my understanding is that there's three buildings that make up the apartment complex.

And 98 McDougal is the building that we are seeking approval for the completed basement apartment.

The application was originally submitted under 998 McDougal because we were going to do one apartment in 99 and one apartment in 98.

Well, you're the according to my record here, it says we are talking today about number 99.

And you say 99.

The lot is 99.

Yes, 789.

Yes, yeah.

Right.

So the address is 99 McDougall.

For today, the one you're asking for the approval of, correct?

Um, so maybe the it's easier to say the mailing address, but the building on that address is 98.

So the lot itself is known as I understand it as 99 McDougal.

99 McDougall has three buildings on it, 97, 98, and 99.

Okay.

And so today this request is for building 98 at 99 McDougall Street.

Does that make sense?

I know what you're saying, but according to our documents that we received from the uh headquarters.

It's 99 is the is the building in question.

Okay.

Um, so that might have been um their request is for 98 in what they've submitted uh to staff, but obviously, as she's mentioned, the property address is 99.

So it's it's clear in what they've submitted.

I see where the the issue needs to be confirmed by staff.

Uh we're because when I drove down there looking, I and putting it in the GPS 99, you know, sure it didn't come up, even it was so you you've arrived and there's three buildings, you know.

So I figured one was 97, 89, but 99 I didn't even see a 99 number, you know.

Yeah.

No, I um and we so we acknowledge that the apartment at 99, the building 99 McDougall was never started, never commenced.

We're not here to talk about any apartment in the building of 99 McDougal.

Just the building of 98 McDonald's.

In number 98, all right.

Yep.

I would hope that when if there if there would be an emergency and you'd call 911, they could actually find the building.

If they're not clearly labeled, you know, 98.99.

Because the one building wasn't labeled at all.

I'm from driving in the street.

I I didn't see any address on it.

I I understand your concern if that's something you'd like addressed as part of this application.

I'm sure we'd be happy to do that.

Um are you aware of the other conditions if we were to seek approval today on the application in terms of the screening uh and the striping for the parking lot?

Yes, so I had uh an opportunity to talk to my client about that.

Um the weather this December has been unusually Syracusean.

But yes, they are aware of the screening requirement and we'll comply with that.

Absolutely.

Was the intent upon the initial application back in 2010 to do that as well, and that was part of it, just took time and things happened, COVID, etc.

that you didn't get to those additional conditions.

Um so I'm being told that they did stripe the parking lot, but yes, as to the screening of the dumpster itself, yes.

And as of right now, trash is adequately controlled and everything else, and there hasn't been issues, but you understand the request to install screening and everything and that about being compliance.

In our understanding of it, yes.

Okay.

Um I don't see any evidence that without this unit they can't rec realize a reasonable return on investment.

Technically, they should have a pro forma attached showing the $90,000 in expenses and a full detail of how they're not making a reasonable return.

Was that provided in 2010?

Well, it doesn't, it's not provided here.

Gotcha.

Um, I don't believe it was provided in 2010 because the apartment hadn't been completed at that time.

So what we're um the basis of our argument is essentially that the money has been expended um to complete the apartment in uh in 2010 when the application was made.

I don't think that those you know the the money hadn't been expended at that time.

So are you saying that without the rent from this unit, this apartment complex will operate in the negative?

I am saying that without the rent from this unit, it would be unduly burdensome on my client um to operate the the unit.

I I think in my um papers, I set out the time frame that it would take to recover to recoup on the investment.

Obviously, we would recoup on the investment um at a better rate if we could actually rent the apartment that was built out.

Um even as it is, with the amount spent on the apartment, this is the 14th unit.

Um even as it is with the amount spent on the apartment, this is the 14th unit, um, it will still take eight years to recoup on that investment.

Obviously, if the apartment is never rented out, it will take more than eight years to recover that cost.

Any more questions?

I would just like to state for the record that generally when we're looking at this question of reasonable return, it's not are you getting a return on some investment that you made without prior authorization?

It's does this change to the property, uh, is it necessary in order for the property to sustain itself?

Absolutely, and we understand that I mean I'm standing here hat in hand.

Yeah.

Um there had been a prior prior approval, obviously took a very long time to get the apartment done, and we're not trying to sugarcoat that.

Understood.

Yeah.

Okay.

Any any more questions or comments?

No.

Hearing none, we will uh close this portion of the thank you.

Yes.

We will uh close this portion of the hearing and have a discussion to see how we want to proceed.

Can we back up?

Because I I just want to clear something up with the uh owner and can you just verify so the 13th unit, you got it, there was a variance in 86, so the 13th unit was approved at that point.

Uh and it was determined it was constructed without permits in 61.

Then in 2010, second use variance was approved for two additional units, which would bring it to 15.

Are there a 14th and 15th unit physically in these buildings today?

Fourteen is right.

I don't think yes, the four the fourteenth unit is completed.

And that is what this application is for.

What about the 15th?

That is not completed.

We're not applying for it.

It was never begun.

Okay.

So the building permit you got and the variance was for two, but you're saying you only want four order with one.

Is that do I have that under understood correctly?

Correct.

Okay.

Everybody's got that.

Yeah.

That's my understanding.

Uh are you going to seek the 15th unit to be completed at any given point in time?

We're trying to take the path of least resistance.

So uh I guess it depends on how today goes, but um, our meetings with the city have indicated that was going to be a very uphill battle.

Oh, gotcha.

That's why we're here just on the one completed.

Gotcha.

Should we I think um it would be prudent to uh adjourn momentarily to have a discussion with legal counsel.

That's wise.

Uh my call motion, Michael.

May I have a motion to adjourn for a few moments so we may discuss with our legal person motion?

Second.

Okay.

So moved to the