To this meeting of the Syracuse Planning Commission.

We will begin our public hearings in just a minute.

Uh first though we have minutes from our previous meeting in March to address those minutes have been distributed in draft form to the commission members in advance of tonight's meeting.

And we are in a position to um take action on these minutes if there is a motion to do that.

Is there such a motion?

Make a motion to approve the minutes as uh presented thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Discussion on the motion before us regarding the minutes.

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

Aye aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Minutes are approved as distributed.

Uh as we move into the public hearing section of our meeting, uh, just a few ground rules, if you will, for those who might be unfamiliar with our process.

As each application is announced, we ask that the applicant or the representative come forward to the podium in the center of the room, provide your name and address for the record, and then a brief summary of the application involved.

Following questions from the commission members to the applicant, we will then open up the floor to those who wish to speak in favor of the application, and likewise we will offer a similar opportunity for those who wish to speak in opposition to the application.

Where comments are offered in opposition, we will encourage the applicant to return and address the comments made in opposition.

We ask that all speakers address the commission members rather than other members in the um in the audience.

And we also ask that everyone keep their comments either for or against uh any given application to three minutes so that everyone has um an opportunity to speak and share their opinion.

With that, are there any last minute additions or changes to the agenda?

There are not.

Okay, perfect.

In that case, we can begin with our first public hearing.

Uh first up is a resubdivision R-2026-5 at 346-48 Elm Street.

Uh Seth Rutledge is the owner applicant.

This is in the R2 zone district.

Um, yeah, so I just want to uh combine the two lots um because the um the porch on the back is too close to the other lot.

So um code says that I just need to combine the two lots, and then um I can get the permit to repair the porch.

Sorry, well and that's the entire project.

Yeah, that's it.

Okay.

Questions for the applicant?

All said, thank you.

Yeah, I have a question or I guess a clarification.

Uh if anybody has any questions, at least in the material for the meeting tonight, uh, this particular application under the scope of work.

Uh this application is for a resubdivision, and we're uh creating one lot out of two to get rid of some problems with non-conformities, the porch, the driveway, you know, etc.

So you're creating one lot out of two under the scope of work for this particular application.

It it it asserts that uh that you eventually want to do two single family houses on the separate properties.

Is that correct?

Or is that a miss statement?

No, I I don't know where that came from.

Okay.

I understand because that's not relevant for tonight anyway.

We're doing the resub, so that statement is in air, it's not relevant for this application.

So we're just doing the resub two lines.

I don't know why that's on the application.

That's strange.

Sorry about that.

Yeah, that's okay.

No, thank you.

I just wanted to clarify that.

Other questions from the commission members for the applicant?

Okay, thank you.

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

If so, please come forward, provide your name, address, and your comments.

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

So we have no additional speakers, it appears.

We will close public comment on this application and turn our attention to our seeker review.

Jake, can you assist us with that?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Does anyone believe that the proposed action will have a moderate large impact under CECRA?

No.

Having determined that the proposed action will not have a moderate to large impact, I recommend that the commission make a negative declaration and prepare the EAF part three accordingly.

Thank you.

Is there a motion, seeker motion to that effect?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Second.

Discussion on this motion.

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

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

The seekers approved for R 2026-5.

And we may now proceed to act upon the resubdivision itself.

Is there a motion for action on this?

In due consideration of the application staff analysis and uh the discussion during this hearing, I make a motion to approve application R 25-34 as presented with two conditions.

One condition being that the applicant shall successfully file the resubdivision map within the county clerk's office within 62 days of approval at tonight's meeting.

And two is the applicant shall uh uh issue a retroactive building permit for the side porch reconstruction.

Thank you.

Is there a permit application?

Thank you.

Shall apply for what you got.

Is that what you mean by the shall apply for a permit?

Honestly, that's what triggered all this.

So in progress.

Okay.

And we will we'll correct the uh that error that you noted because that's that's not correct.

So uh AI did it.

It's not in stuck it in there.

Oh, I like that.

Thank you, Barry.

Is there a second?

Second.

Discussion on this 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?

So the resubdivision in the 300 block of Elm Street is approved.

Thank you.

Our next application, please.

Another resubdivision, R 2026 11 at 808 Velasco Road and 100 Ethel F.

Uh Richard Ryan and Karen Ryan owners of 808 and Surgeon's Land Bank of 100 Ethel.

This is in the R1 zone district.

Evening, I'm Terry Leckett with the land bank at 1941 South Salina Street.

Uh this one's even easier, I think, than the prior case.

Um the driveway for 808 Velasco Road comes off of Ethel Street, and there's some kind of a survey error that happened.

It's a two-foot wide by 43 foot wide of uh strip of land.

No idea how it got there.

Uh probably some kind of a survey error.

Um it's hanging out there, and they would like to resub it with their driveway.

So that that's uh the lot one the 100 address is the small lot that you guys ended up owning some two feet wide strip of land along their driveway.

And how did landback end up with that?

It became tax delinquent.

Uh-huh.

It's a bizarre map looking at it.

You know, it is.

There's a bunch of those all over the city.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Questions for the applicant?

Thank you.

If not all in favor anyone interested in speaking in favor of this application for the resubdivision on Valesco Road, please come forward, provide your name, address, and comments.

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

We'll close public comment as we apparently have no additional speakers and turn our attention to the seeker review for this resubdivision.

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

Yes.

Yes.

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

Yes.

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

No.

Having determined that the proposed action will not have a moderate to large impact.

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

Thank you, Jake.

Is there a motion to that effect for seeker?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

Discussion on this seeker motion for the Velasco Road resubdivision.

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

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Seeker motion carries.

And we can now turn our attention to the resubdivision R 2026-11.

Is there a motion for action?

And due consideration of the application staff analysis and discussion during this hearing and make a motion to approve application R 2026-11 as presented with two conditions.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Thank you.

Discussion on the motion regarding the resubdivision.

If there is no discussion on this, then all in favor of this motion, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

R 2026 11 is approved.

Thank you.

We move on to our next application.

Next is uh two companion pieces at 234 and 300 Marguerite Av.

Uh it's a resubdivision, but also zoning map amendment change to avoid uh split zone parcel.

Owner applicant is Reginald Ware.

Um project numbers are Z-2919 and R 2026-19.

Good evening.

Evening.

My name is Reginald Ware.

I own 300 Marguerite Avenue.

Um I purchased that in 2001.

And then in 2020, I opt into buy 234 Marguerite, which is was used to be uh was going to be the through away for Bishop Avenue.

Okay.

And after three years of going back and forth, our purchase 234 Marguerite.

So my application is to change 234 to 300, so it's all one.

That was from the advice of the assessment office and also my attorney as we were developing my trust.

And that's the basis of my application is to make it all one parcel.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Questions for the applicant?

I'm good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there 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?

We have no additional speakers that appears on these two, so we will close public comment.

Turn our attention to the 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 had an opportunity to review the EAF part two prepared by staff and containing your packet?

Yes.

Does anyone believe that the proposed action will have a moderate large impact under CECRA?

No.

No.

Having determined that the proposed action will not have a moderate large impact.

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

Thank you.

Is there a motion to that effect?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion on this seeker motion for the Marguerite Av project.

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

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

And now so the seeker motion carries, and we will turn our attention first to the resubdivision.

Um action and then the zoning change will be a recommendation from this body to the common council for final action.

So regarding the resubdivision, our 2026-19 is outlined by the applicant just a few minutes ago.

Is there a motion for action on this?

Sure.

I may make a motion uh to uh make a positive recommendation or make a motion to to approve the resubdivision application 2026-19 with one uh condition, that condition being the applicant shall successfully mount for resubdivision 2026-19, and also uh Z 2919, which we're gonna consider next with the on Dog County Clerk's office within 62 days of the common council's approval of the zoning map amendment, which we're now gonna consider.

Can I just ask Jake a quick just to be so to be clear, the zoning map amendment will have to be approved by the council prior to the resubdivision being able to be filed?

Correct.

Or am I wrong?

They can be filed at the same time as my understanding, but only after the common council approves uh the zoning map amendment.

Well, yeah, they could be, but it it has to go to an R2 in order to do the resub.

Not necessarily, but our condition of the timeline is not gonna the clock's not gonna start until council acts.

Okay.

But there technically speaking, you can create a split zone parcel.

It's just been our policy that that's not a good thing and that we don't want that.

It's not it's not that it's illegal.

We just as a policy as a city, it's hard to administer when you have split zone parcel, so it's much cleaner.

But uh someone has the right to resubdivide even if council didn't act, but we're putting a condition in after they decide on the parcel amendment change.

Um that's when the 62 days is gonna start.

Okay.

Hopefully that makes sense.

And I'll add we've been I don't know if uh just some message.

Mr.

Ware remembers, but we were on uh we were on a mayor's neighborhood walk a few years ago when we first when I first met you, um, and trying to you know figure this out since then.

So it's been a couple years, so I'm happy to finally hopefully resolve this for you.

Thank you.

Any further discussion or clarification points?

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

Aye aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

The resubdivision motion carries, and now we turn our attention to the zoning map amendment, which will go from this body in the form of a recommendation to the common council.

So motion for this.

Sure.

I make a motion to approve application Z-2919 as presented with the recommendation to the common council for affirmative action and one condition.

That one condition being as previously stated that the uh map for the uh zoning amendment be filed with the on dog county clerk's office within 62 days after the common council approves the zoning map amendment along with the resubdivision uh map as well.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion on this motion.

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

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Motion carries, and this recommendation will move to the common council for final decision.

Thank you.

Our next application.

Next is a major site plan review at 4141 South Salina Street, MASPR-2026-13.

Owner applicant is 2468 group Inc.

This is in the commercial zone district.

Good evening.

My name is Jeremy Mossel.

I'm with Elk Development Company.

We are the property owners of the Valley Plaza, which is located at 4141 South Salina Streets.

Uh we are here tonight seeing major site plan approval to renovate approximately 30,000 square feet in the plaza, which is the former top space for our new grocery store, which will be called Imperial Food Market.

Uh they have two locations currently in uh the Buffalo region.

Are looking to expand into Syracuse.

Uh we it the help of SETCO, we uh were granted a 1.7 million dollar grants from New York State's uh food access expansion grants as part of the project.

Uh we are hoping to get work started in the late spring, uh early summer and be done by late fall.

Questions for the applicant.

Uh I have a question about the parking lot.

Uh the application indicates that restriping the parking lot for a hundred uh parking spaces is part of the application proposal.

Uh the parking lot is in terrible shape.

There's lots of potholes, and there's a huge trench right in front of the supermarket, et cetera.

So is the proposal including repaving the parking lot?

Are you going to be fixing the holes?

Because it seems hard for me to even understand how it would be repaved in its current condition.

In the short term, we're going to be straight.

Uh we're going to be patching a little bit of it, but we met last week with the City Care Fuse officials about doing uh various uh other capital improvements, which would be including redoing the entire parking lot, grading, uh remilling, re and repaving the entire thing, adding more lights fixtures in there, uh adding a security systems, uh, a lot of more things along that nature, including adding uh landscape islands throughout the parking lot, but that's not going to be part of this project.

That's going to be something else we'll have to come forward before this board later this year, as we uh we're still talking with uh the metro uh about their uh bus new bus stop location that'll be located in front of our property.

So we're trying to work hand in hand on our uh new parking lot design and such with them so we they uh coordinate with each other and there's good pedestrian access to the post bus stop and such.

So the recommendation from staff is that the striping uh needs to be done before the supermarket opens.

Is that is that your plan?

Yes, yeah.

We're gonna be uh redoing the existing striping and patching all the holes in that for the time being to make it a safe uh place to walk across.

All right, okay.

So the holes will be patched before the supermarket opens as part of the restriping process, but the whole parking lot won't be repaved at this point.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Questions?

So I just have a I assume that you're working with Centro to put a stop closer to the South Salina or the plan, the intent would be to have a bus stop at the parking lot on South Salina Street.

Is that correct?

Yes, that's correct.

Uh Metro Side show there uh we're doing a metro rail expansion line down South Salina Streets, and we've been they've been coordinating with us about uh do they would like to get a stop in front of the pla the plaza?

Okay.

And so that is when you will come back with a plan for the whole parking lot?

Correct.

Okay.

The meantime the striping is planned for the spots closest to the entrance of Imperial.

It'll be do we'll be restriping the entire parking lot.

Right now, yeah, and then once we go back and we remill and repave the entire thing, uh, we'll restripe it again at that time.

And light it.

Yes.

Okay.

Lighting, there will be uh new parking islands throughout the parking lot at that time as well.

On a bus stop, are you talking about that in terms of the timeline for the because there's an existing bus group there?

In fact, when I was down there today looking at a lot, there was a bus park there.

But there also is going to be a BRT stop there.

That's probably gonna be another year and a half or two more years.

So I'm just wondering in terms of the timing.

Are you thinking about current bus?

Are you talking about BRT system?

BRT system.

So we're working hand in hand with the design of it, and we plan on uh if the as long as design moves along quickly, we plan on doing our portion of the work in that uh before that bus line gets installed.

Okay, thank you.

And for the actual grocery store piece of the project, which is the core of the project, you're renovating about 30,000 square feet of space, correct?

Correct.

What share of the old grocery store space does that represent?

Is it close to 100 percent or something less?

About 85 percent.

The old grocery store is about 36,000 square feet.

Okay, so there'll be a small space uh remaining uh since the announcement of the grants, we've had a lot of prospective tenants reach out to us uh about the entire plaza.

So we're talking to a lot of national and uh local uh tenants as well to look into occupy the plaza.

So we're hoping that in the near future uh we'll have a very high occupancy rate there.

Thank you.

Further questions for the applicants.

There was a discussion with the group that has done a lot of work to bring a store here.

There was a discussion about a pharmacy.

That will be separate from the grocery store?

Yeah, that is correct.

Okay, and you will not have a pharmacy within this grocery store.

That is correct.

Yeah, they will be taking a suite uh nearby the grocery store.

Uh we are finalizing a lease with them as well, and they will hoping to start work around the same time.

Uh question about the hours of operation.

So we have uh proposed hours of 9 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

Monday through Saturday and 9 a.m.

to 5 p.m.

on Sunday.

We also have a comment about how uh there's this ongoing discussion with community engagement with residents about what would be the ideal hours so that those hours may be changed.

So there's a recommendation here that uh as part of the conditions that you have to adhere to those hours, any change that would involve being open more than those hours, you'd have to come back to the planning commission for approval.

If you decide to have less than that number of hours open, then that would be fine.

Is it is that your understanding?

That is acceptable to us.

Right.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Yes.

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

This so please come to the podium, provide your name, address, and comments.

Kathy Stravely, 316 Monticello Drive North.

Um, I'm a member of Fon, the group that has been trying to get the grocery store there for a long time.

I think Ron is coming.

I texted her.

Um I had an illustration of the parking lot that I wanted to present to you, and I didn't bring it with me.

So I I'm very much in favor of the grocery store and all the improvements that are being made.

Um I like the layout, um, looked at that.

But for the parking lot, I don't know if you can switch to that illustration of the parking lot.

Um I'm glad to hear they're going to consider putting islands in because the parking lot as it is is very inhospitable, extremely hot.

Um, and even when you're going in and out of the store, there's wind and um the the exposure there is just really harsh.

So it would be to their benefit to put islands in.

The other thing that a lot of stormwater issues with a parking lot of that size, and they could use the islands to absorb some of the water.

So if they design it creatively, I think they can solve many problems, as well as the pedestrian access to the store.

Um there's another thing I would like to point out.

Can you pull that back a little bit?

Can I point can I walk over there?

Sure.

Um there's a tributary of on dog creek that goes up here and around the back.

And uh it's called City Line Brook.

When they plow the they have several places they plow to, but they plow a tremendous amount of snow right over toward the brook, and consequently they plow all the garbage into the brook.

So every year we clean it up during Earth Day this year.

We're gonna do it, I think a week later.

But the tremendous amount of garbage ends up there, and another thing is that blows on the parking lot in the end of the stream, and the islands would help with that too, because if you have the ions they'll help.

But another thing I would bring out is if we could have some um trash cans around the front, and also back here because people use this area to sit by the brook because it's cooler in the summertime, and they throw garbage into the creek.

And we've asked them.

I know the Mystical Dino's Bill's father.

Going back to the 80s, we've asked for that kind of thing in the site to make it a better place.

Um, and then I think we could talk, and I hope I'd like to see the redoing of the parking lot to maybe have some pedestrian circulation from the Bernadine to the front site, which is now vacant, which used to be a wall uh Walgreens and a right aid.

So that um those are my main comments.

Um, but I am very much in favor of this.

So I'm glad to hear the parking lot is being redesigned, and I I really encourage them to do a really hard look at that issue.

What's what's the name of the stream that you mentioned?

Yeah, that's a city line brook.

It was city line borough.

It was the city line before they annex the valley.

And then they annexed the valley, I think around 1926.

It comes out of the hill down below Loreto.

We've been having tremendous flooding down there this weekend.

Um all the different tributaries go into that uh into that, and some are some are siphoned off other places.

But it has a class B stream, which is a high level, it's a high quality stream until it gets to where the um the Bernadine dumps some of their storm water and then you get to salt and other things from other places.

But it's it's a extremely high quality stream back at its origin.

So we do have a proposed condition related to snow removal, and it would be easy to modify that to ensure that snow not be encroach upon uh the creek as a condition.

Yeah, I'm I mean they do try to store it other places.

I'm not saying they take all snow that way, but um, I have pictures of it mounded up toward the stream, so they do take a lot of snow over that way, and it's just like a yearly problem, the garbage and the snow and the whole thing.

So when they built it, I don't think they recognize it as a resource, it is a resource.

And actually, when um Bill Paladino's father wanted to build the right aid, he wanted to put the entire thing on the ground, and I got involved with DEC and we stopped that.

So it's I think it's an asset to the plaza, or it could be an asset.

We actually like to make it an asset to the plaza, put planting there and do other things.

But I if you go down there and you look at the right aid section, that turned out quite well.

Thank you after many negotiations, but in 1995.

Okay.

Thank you.

Are there other individuals who wish to speak in favor of the application?

Please come forward.

Uh Lisa Lambert, 194 Maple would have.

Syracuse in the Valley.

Um we love the idea.

I help with Fawn as well.

We love the idea of the market.

I think Paladino's kind of bull crappy because he let this um the pavement is so bad there, it's ridiculous.

That's why people won't go to the plaza, even for our farmers market.

We get a lot of flooding, we get a lot of animals because of that, the birds and stuff.

I think he's waiting for it to be paid for by people other people.

He has not maintained that plaza whatsoever, and that's why a lot of businesses have left.

It's because he does not want to put his own money into it.

He's waiting for the grant money.

We know about Central, it's been two years already that they announced that they were gonna put a thing there.

And oh, it's gonna look beautiful.

Central has some beautiful pictures of it, which is nice, and then we got the grocery store, and they're getting a lot of money.

He's not putting his share.

He's not doing anything, he's accepting all this stuff, and we're trying as a community to bring it back.

But I think he's been a crappy landlord for us in the community, and I'm really ashamed that he would be that way to us.

He has the same other plaza down in Nedro that is letting go the same way, and I think he should be held accountable to maintain this parking lot and get it up to standards because if we're bringing in this new grocery store, which they're trying to bring in some great equipment, make it friendly, they're trying to ask the neighbors what they would like to see there.

They're very concerned about this.

We are getting that drugstore, which we're the second one in the country to get one of these special drug stores that will be owned by somebody.

It's not a corporation, the corporation's setting them up and letting them be so that it can be there for the neighborhood.

I think he should have to put up port as well, but he hasn't.

But I definitely believe that the grocery store is needed there.

And the thing, I just wish that pothole coverings are not gonna cover it.

We do need planters there, we do need it, make it nice.

It is just because we're in a city doesn't mean that it shouldn't look nice and be represented of our city.

And right now the valley is one of the greenest parts of the city, and then you hit right there, and it doesn't make our valley look good at all, and to let it go down and those potholes, they're lakes at this point.

You can't go walking through there in the summertime, even we get there's still water, and he can patch them up all he wants, but it's got they're gonna break down.

And to say that they're gonna wait two years to do this until it's paid for by someone else.

That's the sad part.

I think they should he should put some more effort in himself to make it nicer for this grocery store and for all the work that the neighborhood has put into this place to try to save the valley plaza because it is needed for our community, and we deserve it for putting up with it for this many years.

Thank you.

Are there other individuals who wish to speak in favor of this application?

If so, come to the podium, please.

Provide your name, address, and your comments.

Is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the application?

If so, please come to the podium and share your comments.

We don't seem to have any additional speakers beyond those who have already spoken, so we'll close public comment on this and uh turn our attention to the seeker review.

Before we do that, can I ask the applicant a couple more questions?

So, based on what we've heard tonight, is are you uh interested in having a conversation that would require a faster?

I'll bring those on the parking lot.

I'll bring it up with the ownership group and we'll see what we can do.

We don't plan on waiting for just the Metro Rapid Trail.

We plan on doing it in uh well before that.

And I believe code requires the islands.

It does.

So um certainly, as is, you know, they could uh paint it, stripe it, patch holes, fix current lighting that's there.

Uh if they're gonna rip this whole thing out and redesign it, it's gonna have to meet new code, which will require everything that's in the island lighting and sidewalks.

Uh we understand that, and we we'll help hire our civil engineer and we will be doing uh deep dive into code review.

If we have any questions, we'll reach out to the city.

But we plan on making it a nice new parking lot that's code compliant.

So the timeline for the grocery store is I'm hearing approximately October, November of this year.

Is that right?

Yes, we we plan on fast-tracking that as much as we can, but we plan uh approximately let's say end of the year.

And what's the pharmacy timeline?

It'll be right before that.

We both plan on starting the build out by hand.

Yeah, the pharmacy is a lot uh shorter of build out, a lot simpler.

It's a small, much smaller space, so they should be open in the summertime.

So a one-year condition to have a plan after completion of the pharmacy and the grocery store within one year back to the planning commission.

Obviously, you can come back completed your case if that doesn't work, but it would at least give us an opportunity and the neighborhood, I believe, an opportunity to have a time frame rather than an open-ended conversation.

Yeah, we're acceptable to that condition.

Okay, thank you.

So can we think we need to clarify that to put it in a form of a condition that makes sense and is enforceable?

So for now in the parking lot, we're talking about the potholes need to be filled and it needs to be restriped before the supermarket opens.

The lighting needs to be repaired in parking lot before the supermarket opens, but the other repairs to the parking lot you will be coming back to the planning commission in a year.

The redesign for approval redesign of the whole parking lot.

Is that making sense?

Yeah, from the timeline, it sounds like you're saying uh grocery store and pharmacy by end of fall.

Obviously, a full year from them would be a fall the year after.

All right.

I mean, I can't really do anything after that anyway.

Right, you can't do it in the winter anyway.

But I just want and I want to be clear, I'm not opposed obviously to the grocery store or the pharmacy.

So that is not the goal at all.

It's to put more time on the redesign, the revamp of the parking lot, which would include snow storage as well.

It includes all of the new conditions, all of the stuff that you do with if you were gonna build a new parking lot that you guys know better than I, sure.

Okay, thank you.

Yep.

Okay, think good clarification uh our seeker review for this.

Has everyone had an opportunity to review the EF part one prepared by the applicant and containing your packet?

Yes.

Yes.

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

Yes, yes.

Does anyone believe that the proposed action will have a moderate large impact under CECRA?

No.

Having determined that the proposed action will not have a moderate large impact.

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

Thank you.

Is there a motion to that effect for seeker?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Second.

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

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Seeker motion carries.

And we now turn our attention to the major site plan review action for this.

This is MASPR 2026-13.

Is there a motion for action on this?

In consideration of the application staff analysis and the discussion during this hearing, I make a motion to approve application MASPR-2026-13 as presented with six conditions.

Those conditions are as follows.

One, the applicant shall comply with the general conditions for approval of the site plan application.

General conditions are included within the material for the application for the night's meeting.

Two, the parking lot and the lighting system shall be fixed and maintained, including parking lot striping and light maintenance before the grocery store commences operation.

The following improvements to the parking lot will be uh uh required uh approval by the planning commission within one year of opening in the fall of 2026 for the uh supermarket and the pharmacy.

Uh the third condition is the snow stories shall be maintained on the site in a designated area and shall not encroach into the public right of way or the adjacent property or city line brook.

Uh four, all one site alcoholic tobacco lottery services shall be properly licensed prior to being sold.

Five, the proposed businesses shall follow the operational hours established by the planning commission.

Those hours are 9 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

Monday through Saturday and 9 a.m.

to 5 p.m.

on Sunday.

If uh there is an interest in operating this the uh business beyond those hours, the applicant will have to come back to the planning commission for approval.

And six, all loading and unloading activities shall take place only between the hours of 7 a.m.

and 10 p.m.

For clarity and just for the record and the minutes.

So um you're recommending uh the six conditions in the staff report, but in addition, adding a condition that within one year uh the applicant come back to this governing body for the parking lot redesign um and including getting a building permit and completing it within one year of opening.

Is that correct?

Right, yes.

I I was doing that as an extension of item two, but we can put it as a second.

I just want to make sure that it's clear on the record that it's probably split that up and call it seven uh okay, sure seven.

So because it's two different things.

We want them to do the parking lot repair and lighting before they open, but then within the first year, redo the whole thing.

Right, right.

That works, yeah.

So the one year clock will start after at opening.

Right.

Okay.

So whenever that happens to be October, November, December, that's when the clock will be turning.

Right, right.

So yeah, I just wanted it to be clear for the record on what was being more clear.

Added and what the expectation will be for that condition.

Is that clear to the applicant?

Is that clarification clear to the applicant?

Thank you.

Is there a second second?

Thank you.

And discussion on this motion.

If there is no discussion, all in favor of it, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

M ASPR 2026 13 is approved.

Thank you.

Uh, we move to what I think is our final application tonight.

Can you believe it?

Brian, we're putting you in the spotlight here.

Um we went until about 1015 three weeks ago.

Oh, okay.

So uh, you know, we'll show you.

We'll pressure we've got a lot of time set aside.

We get a lot of time.

Um next up is uh 411 and 413 university for the university Av apartment project.

Uh it's got two companion pieces of resubdivision and major site plan review.

Uh this was before the council uh before or the commission, excuse me, not council.

Um, with a little bit different design.

So um I'll let Brian kind of review that.

Yes, I will.

Um good evening, Brian Bouchard with CHA Consulting.

I'm the project engineer working on behalf of the owner uh for this companion piece.

So does two separate applications, and I'll give you an overall project review at one time, understanding that you have to act separately.

Um this is two existing parcels, so 411 and 413 University Ave.

It's located between Madison Street, which is directly south of this page, and then East Genesee Street, which is to the north of this page.

Two existing residential apartments that currently have 10 total units in them.

And as Jake mentioned, um back about 18 months ago, the owner went through the site plan approval process, which was granted.

If you could zoom out a little bit, I'll talk about it.

By the planning commission for a new apartment building.

So what you can see here was the previously approved project.

This was a nine-story mixed-use building, had a slightly larger footprint and also included uh limited subsurface parking uh within the building.

This had 47 dwelling units and also contained that mixed-use element of the office and retail space on the ground floor.

Um obviously following the approvals in the middle of 2024.

Um there was threat of tariffs, and then he worked through the actual tariffs, building materials increase, the type of construction of a nine-story building is significantly different.

Um, and then the equity markets and interest rates for this size project became difficult as well.

Um so, in light of construction costs, the owner has chosen to revisit.

Um, you could sort of see some of the perspectives of what was approved and asked of that nine-story building before.

Um, and in light of this, we worked with the owner to come up with a smaller scale project.

If you could go to the site plan, uh, which has a slightly smaller footprint and would have surface parking.

So this is still gonna obviously provide the much needed redevelopment, right, of a parcel.

There's a lot of redevelopment along the East Genesee Street corridor and the connective corridor that this directly abuts.

Um it's still very much in line with the MX-4 um zoning district in terms of meeting all the expectations of rezone Syracuse, providing high quality multifamily um apartments and still also committing to that um affordability component for 10% um of the dwelling units within the project.

So you can see this is a slightly smaller building.

It's only three stories instead of nine stories.

It has a smaller footprint and it will have driveway access to the parking lot to the surface parking lot, so it's not contained in the garage.

It still will be a mixed-use building, so you can see we positioned the residential lobby access on the southwest corner of the building there, and then adjacent to that would be a commercial or retail tenant.

Um obviously the tenants unknown at this time, but having that storefront visible to the connective corridor as well was um part of the intent of the redesign here.

In terms of the building elevations and some of the changes there, you can see the floor plan again, calling out the residential lobby, commercial tenant facing the street frontage, um having a small residential amenity area and package room.

Uh and then these are all one bedroom units.

So they're not studios, they are full one bedroom units, and there will be 30 total dwelling units within the three stories of the project.

All one bedrooms, all one bedrooms, yeah.

So they're full, they're full one bedrooms.

You open up to a full um suite, so there's the kitchen net and the living room, and then there's a door for your bedroom and bathroom area.

So they're full one bedroom suites.

Interesting because going from nine floors to three floors, you only lose 15 units because you're doing one bedroom now instead of some of the other larger.

Correct.

Yeah, so that's definitely like the mathematical equation, right?

If you had a larger building, you may be into some of the two bedrooms and three bedrooms.

So the dwelling unit count was only 47, but there was obviously significantly more beds in that project.

Yeah.

Um, building elevations in terms of the view.

Uh, we did just meet with the Syracuse Landmark Preservation Board.

So what um I believe Z Tung's controlling the screen here has up on the screen is what we presented to the landmark preservation board, and then I think we added a slide just today based on some recommendations.

Um two very small changes, but we're talking with the architectural board, so they're very important.

Um, one was the cornice line on the roof facing University Ave was a consistent corn, and we have this vertical element that kind of comes up and breaks the building into two essentially, kind of a nod to the two existing houses that were there.

And they did ask us to break that cornice so that that vertical element carried through and kind of accentuated the two different sides of the building here.

And then number two, um historic preservation was a recommendation which came back positive as we worked through these, but they did ask us to look at adding a more durable material along the sidewalk elevation facing the connective corridor.

And the architect worked over the weekend to not only fix the the cornice break, but to provide a stone water table with a similar stone that you see visible on the um Grace Church that's across the street.

Did send these to Kate, she responded to the affirmative that she was happy with.

Um the changes uh to this.

So those are the two architectural changes that came about from the Syracuse Landmark Preservation Board.

You can also see the perspective that we talked about in terms of reducing the height of the building.

Again, a nine-story building was allowed, right?

So it's something that is feasible and desired in the district.

It's just the construction costs on a smaller parcel is the reason why we're changing it.

So Brian, on the water table that's going to be now stone.

So it's still going to be board and bat in between uh the stone and the second story.

Yes, correct.

Um point of clarification, because I don't know what's in your staff report, but when we originally submitted the building material was labeled as vinyl, so there's vinyl siding horizontal and then board and batten.

We had that changed because this size building in MX4 does not allow for vinyl siding.

Um so this is now a pre-engineered, uh it's called LP Smart Side, so it's an engineered wood siding, exactly the same look as you would get with a final siding, it's just a more durable material for the larger building.

So you can see the horizontal siding on floors two and um three, and then what you're noticing is the LP smart side in a vertical orientation for the board and batten that kind of frames out the storefront, and the stone water table was requested to be added to that um front facing side of that.

Okay, great.

So that takes care of two of the comments from the landmark preservation board.

But the third one we have for consideration is that they were concerned about the proliferation of the black and white motifs in the university area and suggested you might want to consider something else.

Yeah, um, I didn't take it away as that strong of a comment.

We did talk about it.

It was more, you know, one of the board members mentioning Jack Memey is a developer here, and he's the one that has for the last 10 years put a lot of money and effort into the walnut um, you know, apartments that you've seen redeveloped there.

In some ways, it's color, it's like you know, um very subjective.

So I mean, this is this is a white building, it kind of is like you know, he wanted to paint his kitchen white, and you know, um this is it's not I don't want to call it branding, but it's a very clean look that he's desirable for.

So it it wasn't really a negative comment from the Syracuse Landmark Preservation Board, it was more of a question.

Um, and I think part of helping that was to add the um the stone element so that it kind of broke up at least the front facade because on the on the front you have the the black kind of storefront windows, now you have some of the stone, two different building materials, and then the vertical element.

Um we already have some of the broken facade along the long side that you see where there's some cantilevered um extensions of the room on the second and third levels.

So, you know, we talked about it, but we didn't want to change.

I think it's more of a personal opinion, and it didn't really come across as a requirement, so we didn't um choose to tackle that, and we would like to still maintain the the color palette that was chosen.

Yeah, I mean that kind of design work is not necessarily the purview of the planning commission, but they did make the comment, so brought up for discussion.

Understood.

Uh I think that's the last slide, unless we gave you an aerial perspective, and I might as well show it because they put it together.

Um this was just clarifying the change to the building materials.

I think it's the last page that maybe had some of the elevations that you can see was our presentation of um SLPB in terms of like the mass and scale and some of the surrounding buildings.

Um the two other changes that we did make that maybe in your staff report, um, transportation called out that we didn't have a bike rack, so we've added the the bike rack to the lawn area directly adjacent to the sidewalk.

And then there was also some clarification on the driveway dimensions and transition curbs as we are crossing the median island for the connective corridor there to make sure that um the width of the driveway is dimensioned per DOT standards as well.

Both of those were sent back to Neil's office um last week.

So with that help answer any other questions.

I know we've been hitting them on the fly here, but go ahead.

Brian, we're averaging about 400 square feet a unit.

Correct.

Um on the north side of the building, they're about 400 or a little over 400, and then we did have some space to cantilever sort of over the sidewalk on the south.

So those are a little bit um bigger toward the the back of the building, but generally between four and five hundred square feet for a single bed.

Okay.

Yep.

And um is there a tenant land for the storefront space?

No, um, you know, even with the previous approved project, he didn't get far enough along to fill that space.

Um, you know, I would picture it with the space that we have.

I think it's similar, it's four or five hundred square feet.

It's something like a small office or hopefully some type of um convenience thing or maybe a coffee shop or something like that that would be um a place for people to stop as they're either walking to East Genesee Street or from the university or wherever along the corridor.

So no known tenant yet.

Um, but obviously, if if that comes up when we need to supply a floor plan, that tenant plan would come by way of um you know, after the construction is done, and hopefully by securing financing and starting construction.

If all goes well tonight, we're instructed to start our permitting plans as of tomorrow, because I'm actually not to plead the fifth year and self-incriminate, but we're one meeting sequence behind because of the time that I had submitted it.

Um, but trying to get permits done.

Hopefully, once he gets through that cadence that there would be a more real project that a tenant would commit to.

Sure.

So the the two units that are there right now, they're occupied, they're rented.

Yes.

So how do how does this work?

What's the plan for construction?

How do they they're gonna have to be it's a really good question?

And as an engineer, I tend not to worry about those things.

I figured that except for so Jack does own these personally.

So um they're his tenants, right?

And this came about when obviously 10 days prior to this meeting.

I have to go put a sign up, right?

Um, and I want to make sure that the client's aware of that procedure so that as I'm putting that sign up that he has an opportunity to to talk with his tenants.

He told me as I called him, he said I've already talked to them.

So they're aware that not only was a project previously approved and he extended leases temporarily, but he has told me that the tenants are aware um that there is a new project coming and that he's working with them once he gets into the permitting and construction schedule to make sure that the lease agreements are handled accordingly.

Right, good.

And the original the resubdivision that we did in 2024 was never filed.

That's my understanding.

That's why we submitted it.

Um obviously it's the same two lot subdivision, but it was not filed, so it may not have expired, but it seemed cleaner to uh because I didn't work on that.

It wasn't filed within 62 days, that's correct.

Yeah.

So um hopefully with this approval we'll capture that 62 days.

And obviously, it was work that we performed so I can carry that forward with the the filing process with our surveyor instead of going backwards.

So good point.

Additional questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

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

If so, please come forward.

MP Jacket.

He'll be back.

Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to the application?

Please come forward.

Uh we apparently have no additional speakers, so 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 by the applicant and contained in your packet?

Yes.

Yes.

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

Yes.

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

No.

Having determined that the proposed action will not have a moderate large impact.

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

Thank you.

Is there a motion to that effect for seeker?

Make a motion to issue a negative seeker declaration.

Thank you.

Second?

Second.

Thanks.

Discussion on the seeker motion.

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

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Seeker motion carries.

And now if we turn our attention to the resubdivision, R26, 2020, 26, 21, excuse me.

That's R 2026-21.

Is there a motion for action on this?

In due consideration of the application staff analysis and discussion during this hearing, I make a motion to approve application R 2026-11.

I mean dash 21 as presented with one condition, and one condition being the applicant shall successfully file the resubdivision map with the county clerk's office within 62 days of this evening's approval.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion.

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

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Is there a motion for action on the major site plan review?

MASPR 2026-11.

Uh in consideration of the application staff analysis in the discussion during this hearing, I make a motion to approve application MASPR-2026-11 as presented with seven conditions.

The seven conditions are as follows.

The first condition is the applicant shall comply with the general conditions for approval of the site plan application, which are included in the application packet material.

Uh two, the application shall designate at least 10% of the 30 apartments units as affordable dwelling units.

Three, affordable dwelling units must comply with the city income and rent restriction uh requirements, regardless of a change in building or property ownership.

The affordable requirement shall be effective within effective for 30 years years from the date of the certificate of occupancy is issued.

And seven, any land use type occupying the ground floor commercial tenant space shall obtain appropriate uh approvals before commencing operation.

Thank you.

Is there a second to that motion?

Second.

Thank you.

Discussion on the motion before us.

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

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions?

Uh the major site plan review is approved for MASPR 2026-11.

Thank you.

Um thank you to staff.

These guys are very helpful and making sure everything's shepherded.

I know people don't say it enough, and you guys sit over there and don't get a lot of credit, but thank you to staff.

Great to hear.

Thank you.

Um cover a couple of other business items.

Um inquiry about one would be the So I think we're gonna we're gonna discuss this.

Um there are motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Is there a second discussion?

All in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, please say nay.

Any abstentions were adjourned.

We meet on the 27th of April.