All right, it's shortly after one o'clock.

I think we can call this meeting to order.

This is the Syracuse Board of Zoning Appeals meeting for June fourth, twenty twenty-six is now in session.

Our first order of business is to approve the minutes from the May 14th meeting.

Has everybody had a chance to review those?

Would anybody like to make a motion to approve the minutes?

Motion to approve.

Second.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Okay.

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

First, the applicant or 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 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 hearing this afternoon, the board may make a decision on each application heard.

If the hearing is closed, no additional information will be allowed into the record, except for information that the board may request.

I'm uh Tim Geyer with uh Passero Associates Architect.

Thank you.

Is there an address for Pizero?

With pass Row, yes.

The address.

Oh, address 242 West Main Street, Rochester, New York.

Thank you.

Before we get beginning um, do you guys want project information too?

Just the background of the whole concept of the project before we get into our request, or sure some brief context might be helpful.

Okay.

So housing visions, so Housing Visions owns East Side Business Center.

So right now, East Side Business Center is a off commercial office building where Housing Visions home headquarters are there along with other commercial spaces.

We're proposing to demo the current structure because it's deteriorated at this point, dilapidated.

Um costs us more money to kind of put some new infrastructure in it.

So we've decided to go this route instead.

So what we're proposing on the side is two buildings.

One is a residential building with 144 units on there.

All of them will be 80% of area media and below, so it's all workforce housing.

We would apply to New York State Home Uh Housing Finance Agency for tax 4% tax press and tax bonds along with their soft subsidy financing on the project.

There is also a small commercial commercial component in the building that will house our connect um service provider.

We have our own arm now.

We provide support services, so they would have an office there to provide services to the general public in the community.

Um we are also um proposing in this project geothermal to be able to be more energy efficient and to stay off the grid with all the current uh with all the rise and electrical costs lately.

So we're just trying to offset all the costs on this project between the residential portion and our office building as well on there.

That's and we're looking to get all our approvals this year and then apply to the agency next year, in which if it all goes a plan, we're looking probably to break run on this in like 28.

I noticed you guys were at the planning commission the other night.

Was that for the resubdivision, or what was the what was being discussed at the planning commission?

Uh it was to do it was to do seeker primarily to introduce the project.

Um following this, we'll be back to complete that, hopefully.

I was just wondering if site plan approval had already happened or anything like that.

Uh just seeker for it.

Um so pending the results of of today's uh meeting.

Um it will be back before the planning commission to for completion.

Okay.

So that's just the basic project information on what we're planning on um doing at the site.

And in this MX4 zoning district, there's a minimum of three stories, so we're looking for a variance for the two-story building today.

Um staff has done a pretty good job of going through the factors that we're supposed to consider.

Um did you guys take a look at these as well?

Yes.

Because this is an area variance, they don't have to pass every test.

It's a balancing test, so they need to meet the majority of these criteria.

Um does anybody have any questions for the applicant?

Is there what was the decision between the two-story versus the three-story, just cost or are there other people?

It was more cost because the state lately has been really honing in on developers to look at different cost alternatives because of the rising construction costs.

So when we were looking at the construction cost between a two and a three, we were able to achieve what we needed in a two building without going up to the third story to avoid additional costs with foundation structure, MEPs, another elevator stop.

So we're just trying to be very cost conscious doing this because we know from our other project deals with the state of what they come back to.

And with the HFA process, it's more of a give or take.

So you might present something, they might say you need to go back and reevaluate what your costs are.

So then you're at that point, you're going back and trying to figure out different designs.

Can you knock off a floor and different things to be able to meet their objectives as well?

If I can editorialize, uh, even though this doesn't quite meet the minimum of three stories, it's a huge step in the right direction from the one-story building that's there right now.

Go ahead, John.

Yeah, I had a question about the MX4 um criteria.

Did they say anything about uh parking?

I was just curious about the parking lot at the corner of Washington and long that could go to the site plan.

I didn't see anything in it about you thinking the parking needs to be screened, or what are you thinking?

Well, yeah, I was just wondering about placing the parking right at the corner, whether that's something that allowed under MX4.

Yeah.

I was just confirming confirming with Nate from our staff.

Um when you have a full block development like this, one is chosen as the primary, and that would be Nate.

Is that Fayette?

Do I have that right?

To the bottom.

Yeah.

So this would be compliant.

Um I can find the section and we can we can show you it if you'd like.

I'll start to look for it now on what page it's on.

Just curious, yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Anyone inclined to make a motion.

Sure, I'll make a motion that we approve this area variance.

Second it.

So that's fine, but um please go through the criteria.

Um, just for the findings uh and for the record, we just need to show that there was some deliberation, some discussion that you walk through the criteria, identified what's met and or not met, and if they meet the balancing test, then somebody can make a motion based on on that deliberation, just so we have it for the record, which will be recognized not only from the video uh live footage on YouTube, but it'll be uh noted and documented in the resolution.

Gotcha.

I'll go ahead and walk us through the five points unless you want to.

Go ahead, you can do it, then I'll jump on.

Neighborhood.

One more note, we do not have to do seeker because that was already performed by the planning commission, so we we do not have to do that before you make a decision.

And just a note uh that there are two staff recommendations that are specific on page nine of your packet, and uh you know staff would urge you to consider those in your motion.

Right, yes.

I was going to okay.

The first uh question is about neighborhood character, and uh this change I would think would enhance the neighborhood character significantly compared to the existing conditions and bring it much more in line with what's called for in the city's adopted land use plan by making it into a mixed use property with multi-story buildings, which it is currently a single use property with one story.

Uh feasibility of alternatives, we've heard about um for budgetary reasons why two stories is necessary in this case uh for substantiality.

Uh it is a substantial deviation uh in that it's a 33% reduction, uh, but again, they don't have to pass every single test.

Um for adverse effect, I don't see this having any adverse effect on the surrounding neighborhood at all.

Um self-created difficulty, yes, it is self-created as they uh were fully informed of the regs before they started this project, but again, they don't have to pass every single test.

Anyone have any questions or comments on the I compare with all those statements?

Okay do you want to amend your motion to include the two staff recommendations?

Yes, uh based on uh what was stated and based on the balance test the proposal satisfies the majority of the statutory approval criteria specally excuse me specifically in the neighborhood character feasibility of alternatives and adverse effect, and if this motion is carried, uh I recommend the conditions of approved that we uh carry on uh steps one and two I need to have anything for the said just clarify that it's um state each each of them that it includes the general conditions for approval for an error variance and then two specific conditions and uh read them into the record, please for those recommendations if you choose to be able to do that.

Yeah, okay, yes.

Uh in addition to general conditions, staff recommend the following specific conditions, any decrease in the building story beyond the approved plans shall require prior approval from the board of zoning appeals, and two the attached site floor plan shall be updated to be uh consistent with the approval approved major site plan review MA SPR dash 2026- 14 prior to issuance of any permits and this major site plan review has not yet been approved, but will be is okay, gotcha.

All right, so we have a motion to approve the area variance with the general conditions required for all area variances and the two specific conditions recommended by staff.

Liam is seconded.

Uh all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Motion carries.

Thank you very much.

We appreciate it.